| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Halogen Lamp Regulation (Motor Vehicles)
Mr. Jim Dobbin, supported by Mrs. Ann Winterton, Rev. Martin Smyth and Mr. Clive Efford, presented a Bill to regulate the intensity of motor vehicle lights; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 12 May, and to be printed [Bill 37].
Mr. Clive Efford, supported by Mr. Keith Darvill,Mr. Matthew Taylor, Mr. David Chaytor, Ms Bridget Prentice and Mr. Cynog Dafis, presented a Bill to make further provision for energy efficiency: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 10 March, and to be printed [Bill 38].
Mr. Clive Efford, supported by Mr. Keith Darvill,Mr. Matthew Taylor, Mr. David Chaytor, Ms Bridget Prentice and Mr. Cynog Dafis, presented a Bill to make further provision for energy conservation related to housing; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 10 March, and to be printed [Bill 39].
Mr. Archy Kirkwood presented a Bill to amend the Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order 1999 in so far as it relates to the East coast border between England and Scotland; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 28 January, and to be printed [Bill 40].
Madam Speaker:
I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified Her Royal Assent to the following Act:
Consolidated Fund (No.2) Act 1999
Mr. Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. It is being announced on the electronic news media that the Solicitor-General said half an hour ago that there is to be no prosecution of Melita Norwood, the exposed spy, or of any other people connected with the matter. Have you received any request from any Minister to make a statement in this House. Surely a statement should have been made here before there was an announcement to the electronic news media--especially on an important matter that was the cause of much controversy and previously dealt with by Government statement--
Madam Speaker:
Order. I have not heard from any Minister seeking to make a statement at this time.
Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey):
Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker:
I have answered the point of order; I have not been told by any Minister that he wants to make a statement. I cannot take the matter any further.
Mr. Hughes:
On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker:
Is it a different point of order?
Mr. Hughes:
Yes, it is separate.
Madam Speaker:
Will the hon. Member please resume his seat?
I answered the point of order put to me: I know of no Minister who is seeking to make a statement in the House. I have been in the Chair since 2.30 pm, and can take the matter no further until I leave the Chamber, when I might find a Minister who is willing to make a statement. At the moment, I have the business to get on with and know of no Minister wanting to make a statement. I shall take a different point of order.
Mr. Hughes:
There is a written question on today's Order Paper, which was tabled on Friday, on the subject just raised. Will you confirm your previous advice that it is the practice of the House that written questions should be answered at 3.30 pm, after Question Time, and that statements to the press before answers are made available to hon. Members should be made only after that time?
Madam Speaker:
That is quite true. Questions are not to be answered before 3.30 pm; the hon. Member is perfectly correct and I am grateful to him.
[Relevant documents from the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee: Third Report of Session 1997-98, on The Proposed Strategic Rail Authority and Railway Regulation (HC 286-I); Fourth Report of Session 1997-98, on Air Traffic Control (HC 360-I), and the Government's response thereto (HC 843); Third Report of Session 1998-99, on The Future of National Air Traffic Services (HC 122), and the Government's response thereto (HC 794); Ninth Report of Session 1998-99, on the Integrated Transport White Paper (HC 32-I), and the Government's response thereto (HC 708); Minutes of Evidence taken before the Transport Sub-Committee, Session 1998-99, on Railway Regulation (HC 585-i); and Twenty-first Report of Session 1998-99, on the Railways Bill (HC 827), and the Government's response thereto (Cm 4538).]
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Speaker:
I must inform Back Benchers that I am afraid that speeches must be limited to 15 minutes. I have selected the amendment in the name of the right hon. Member for Edinburgh, East and Musselburgh (Dr. Strang).
The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. John Prescott):
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
This is a proud moment for me, as Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions. This Transport Bill is the first major Bill on the subject in more than 30 years. For me, improving transport goes to the heart of my politics. All issues for change in transport have been controversial but, in time, have been accepted.
I was a seaman, and I became a Member of Parliament at the end of the 1960s as one of the politically motivated few because I realised that only through Parliament could one reform and modernise the 19th century merchant shipping laws, reverse the decline of shipping and make life at sea safer. That has now been achieved.
In the 1970s, as a member of the former nationalised industries Select Committee, I recognised that public sector transport was in decline because it was restricted by silly Treasury rules and therefore unable to raise the necessary capital investment. In the 1980s, as an Opposition Front-Bench transport spokesman, I warned about the environmental consequences of just building roads to solve congestion and of ignoring the importance of public transport networks. That issue is now centre stage.
I was also an early advocate of public-private partnerships, when the major political parties--including my own--were opposed to them. Indeed, in 1991, I advocated the leasing through private finance of an order for Network SouthEast Trains. The Tory Government at that time eventually adopted the idea during the election campaign. The option not only provided new trains for the south-east through private financing, but saved the York works from closure. Unfortunately, within a very short period, we were back to old public sector financing arrangements, under which
money was denied and the plant--which we desperately need today to enable expansion of the railways--was closed. In the 1990s, I warned of the effects of letting, privatisation, deregulation and uncontrolled markets, which ruined the bus and rail networks.
I do not intend to waste time on the Tory record. The other week, during the debate on the so-called confidence motion proposed by the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood), whom we welcome back to the Opposition Front Bench, I said that I was happy to compare the Tory 18 years to Labour's two and a half. I think the House gave its judgment that night, as did the press the following day. In a depressing speech, the right hon. Gentleman failed to offer any alternatives. The Times had been right earlier, when it summed up his plans as:
Mr. John Redwood (Wokingham):
The right hon. Gentleman is wrong even about that, but we shall leave that aside. Will he explain why, three days after claiming victory and assuring us that he was now safe in his job, he was stripped of most of his transport responsibilities? Will he tell us whether or not there has been a U-turn toward motoring and the car?
Mr. Prescott:
I am the Secretary of State for transport, the environment, and the regions. I have transport Ministers who are responsible to me for the implementation of the strategic policy outlined in our White Paper. In addition, I reported to the House almost 12 months ago on my intentions in respect of local transport plans, which have recently been produced and which contain some of the road and bypass plans. Nothing has changed: we are carrying out our policies to reduce congestion, create a better public transport system and improve the environment, all of which objectives are opposed by the right hon. Gentleman.
3.33 pm
3.37 pm
"cheap populism, muddled thinking and a breath of stale air".
I trust that his response today will be different, but his articles in the weekend press about the rail industry did not make encouraging reading--especially from a man who is a Fellow of All Souls.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |