| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
5.45 pm
The Deputy Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Phil Woolas): I start by echoing the final remarks of the hon. Member for North-East Hertfordshire (Mr. Heald) and thanking, on behalf of all right hon. and hon. Members, the staff who work in this place in many different capacities. It is particularly worth mentioning, given the events that have taken place in the Palace and outside during the Session, the debt of gratitude that we all owe to the security and police forces. They put their lives on the line every day and we struggle to remember to wear our passes. We should put that in perspective.
I echo also the hon. Gentleman's remarks about the nature of these debates. They are extremely wide ranging and it is difficult comprehensively to respond to them. I apologise in advance if I do not do so. However, I undertake to bring to the attention of Ministers the points that have been made where Members have requested that I do so. I know that some of the issues that have been raised have been by letter as well as by parliamentary questions.
The debate has been amazingly wide ranging. I shall start with the important defeat of the Shrimpers. I think that it was 2–0. There was a contest over the first goal. For the sake of balance, I say on behalf of my hon. Friends the Members for Blackpool, South (Mr. Marsden) and for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble) that I think that it was not offside. Congratulations should be due to all those involved.
Mention was made of football teams in other Members' constituencies, or at least where many supporters of those teams live—namely, Liverpool and Manchester United. It is always a good idea to get in the names of football teams. It is always a good idea also to get in the name of the local newspaper. I congratulate those Members who have done that. I would not be so foolish as to criticise anyone for doing so.
I shall now try to respond to the debate. My hon. Friends the Members for Wrexham (Ian Lucas) and for Blaenau Gwent (Llew Smith) referred to the Richard commission, which reported today. I agree in every aspect with my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House on the report. It is a report to the National Assembly for Wales and, in the first instance, it is for the Assembly to consider it. The Government will be responding appropriately to the report in future.
My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House has gone on record as saying that he supports the alternative vote system and not the single transferable vote system. The hon. Member for Hornchurch (John Cryer) and others raised points about proportional representation, and I can agree with them in that context.
The hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) talked about some important points that he has taken up with the Ministry of Defence. I know from previous
debates and from seeing correspondence that the MOD is aware of his concerns. They will note the points that he has raised during the debate.The right hon. Member for South-West Surrey (Virginia Bottomley) apologised to the House for being unable to remain in her place. She was kind enough to inform me that the hon. Member for Worthing, West (Peter Bottomley) would take her place, as it were. I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her courtesy. She raised a number of matters, including some policy issues, and made some requests. She asked me to encourage a reply from the Department for Education and Skills on the next steps on the Farnham castle issue. I shall certainly draw that to the attention of the Department. The right hon. Lady referred to the Surrey Institute of Art and Design students, who had lobbied her. She said that she thought that they would be lobbying her on behalf of student debt. Ironically, I remember 20 years ago lobbying the right hon. Lady when she was the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the then Minister of State, Chris Patten, on the issue of student debt. Perhaps things have come full circle. However, students now are immeasurably better off due to the generosity of Government support. I could go into the figures.
The right hon. Lady said that she was lobbied on behalf of the British Toilet Association. She was pleased, but surprised, to discover that there was such an association. Indeed, there is an all-party group on public toilets, and a valuable service it does. I believe that my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North (Julie Morgan) is the chairperson—at least, she was when I went to the meetings. Toilets are an important part of public services, and the House will be relieved to hear that I was sorry to learn that the students fear that 50 per cent. of the toilets will be lost as a result of the Disability Discrimination Act. It that is true, it is an example of the law of unintended consequences. I know that my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for disabled people, who is doing a fantastic job improving the rights of disabled people, will want to note those points. If that is happening in the constituency of the right hon. Member for South-West Surrey, it could well be happening elsewhere.
The right hon. Lady asked me to raise the matter of Abbeyfield homes with the relevant Minister at the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, and I am happy to do that. She also raised concerns about the primary care trust. To be fair to her, she acknowledged that her constituents have a growing confidence in the NHS—I believe I quote accurately—and I am glad to hear of her support. She drew attention to difficulties that I assume are local difficulties to do with decisions being taken locally. I shall draw the matter to the attention of the Department of Health.
My hon. Friend the Member for Braintree (Mr. Hurst) made one of those interesting speeches that bring a little philosophy, reflection and wisdom to Adjournment debates. I sign up to the idea that what goes around comes around. It is amazing how similar these Adjournment debates are over the many years that they have taken place, if one takes the trouble to read them. I should respond to my hon. Friend's worries about the decline in the powers of local authorities by saying that the examples he gave show that the tide is turning. It is not coming up the beach as quickly as he
would like, but the Greater London council has been replaced by the Greater London authority, thanks to the Government's programme. It does not have as many powers as he would like, but I hope he acknowledges that the tide is turning.The hon. Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) raised four issues on behalf of his constituents. I shall begin with the most important—the case of Major Richard Perkins, his constituent. I am advised that the Ministry of Defence is trying to resolve the tax status, following the decision by the Veterans Agency to award him his war disablement pension. I am also advised that the case is not straightforward. The MOD is preparing a submission to the Inland Revenue, which is responsible for the final decision. The MOD acknowledges that it has taken some time to resolve the matter and apologises for the inconvenience that that has caused. I ask the hon. Gentleman to pass that on to his constituent, whom all of us would want to help. An 86-year-old ex-soldier deserves our support.
The hon. Gentleman spoke of livestock farmers in north Yorkshire and the CAP reform. I do not know whether he was present for the statement by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on CAP reform, when she described the process that we would be going through. The definition of severely disadvantaged areas is obviously important. The issue arises in my constituency as well.
Mr. Greenway: Since I made my speech and was supported by my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning), I have discovered that an announcement by the Minister was expected today, but no announcement has been made.
Mr. Woolas: I thank the hon. Gentleman for drawing that to our attention. His remarks will be noted.
The hon. Gentleman also raised the issue of flooding. He asked me to pass on the special case of Pickering. Anyone who knows his part of the world will be familiar with the problems. He asked for an extension of the scheme or another device to allow the scheme to be put in place. Again, his remarks will be noted.
Mr. Heald: Would the Minister take this as a representation, which I did not make at business questions? It is necessary for the Secretary of State to make a statement to the House about the changes that she is making to her response to reform of the common agricultural policy. Could we have that statement in the first week back?
Mr. Woolas: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree that the Secretary of State's statement on 12 February was open and transparent. She rightly committed herself to consultations, and that was accepted by both sides of the House, as was the fact that the reform of the subsidies programmes and the definition of the areas require balanced decisions. I can only pass on the hon. Gentleman's request, although I can see his point. I commend the Secretary of State's policy on this important issue. Many have called for the reform of the common agricultural policy for many years. We are delivering on that, and that is important for our farming industry and countryside.
The hon. Member for Ryedale also referred to insurance and terrorism. I believe that I am right in saying that he is a former insurance broker, and obviously the lack of insurance in respect of terrorist activities must be tackled. I believe that the Treasury will be looking at that. He asked for a shot in the arm on that point.
My hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch (John Cryer) raised a number of local points, as well as a general point about the Richard commission. If I was in a position to sign early-day motions, I would certainly sign early-day motion 930, tabled by him and my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Mrs. Cryer). I think that his 40th birthday is due during the Easter recess, so I wish him a happy birthday from all of us.
My hon. Friend rightly criticised his Conservative-controlled council's cavalier and irresponsible attitude to his primary schools and showed how it was not taking into account the needs of the children in his constituency. He raised, as he has done before, the issue of mobile phone masts, and he raised the issue of the docklands light railway, asking for it to be extended to Rainham. That was a successful private finance initiative that came in on time and on budget, and I will be happy to pass on his request to the Secretary of State for Transport. My hon. Friend made a general point about the Richard commission and proportional representation, to which I have referred, and I think that he knows the views of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House on that matter.
The hon. Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning) took us to the beautiful villages of Devon, where she wants to encourage us to go for our holidays, and I hope that hon. Members will be able to do so. She talked about the vital villages programme. I know that she is aware that the reorganisation of the budget has led to a curtailment of future budgets for that programme
and she may like to take that matter up in more detail. I understand the point that she makes. She referred to Gittisham, which I think appeared in the national press recently, and if what happened there occurred in any of our constituencies we would take a similar attitude. She referred to petrol pumps and called for a little common sense, which we hope can be achieved. She talked about horse safety, as she often does, and the need to protect our horses. She is aware that the schemes that have been put in place are intended to do that, but I know that the equine lobby has concerns about their implementation.The hon. Lady made probably the longest request ever, which was originally intended for the Prime Minister, at what I could perhaps describe as a virtual Prime Minister's Question Time. I would not dare to presume to answer on behalf of the Prime Minister, except to say that I am always amused that the question regarding the EU constitution referendum is never defined. If one were to say that the constitution was a fundamental change from the treaties of Europe, I could see the case for a referendum. But if one reads the proposed constitution, and I have, it does not fundamentally change the treaties, so it is a bit of a bogus argument.
My hon. and learned Friend the Member for Dudley, North (Ross Cranston) made some interesting points. I am sorry that I am not able to respond to all hon. Members. I was going to give a positive response on the Croxley rail link. We are waiting for the results of the comprehensive spending review before re-examining that. I answered some of the points made by hon. Members from Essex who have had a huge and record increase in the number of police officers, and everyone knows that crime is falling. I am sorry that I cannot go into further details about the success of the economy under the Government, which I would be more than happy to do, but I end by wishing all hon. Members and you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, a very happy Easter.
It being Six o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |