---

Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire) (Lab): As a Bill to implement a version of the Tobin tax has been accepted by the commission on finance and budgets in Belgium and is due to be voted on by its Parliament in a fortnight's time, can we have a debate on the sensible proposals that the Belgians are currently examining? Those proposals involve a low, normal tax on currency speculation, but when matters get out of hand and the currency is being battered about by massive speculation, there should be a high rate of tax to interfere with that and dampen it down, because many of the world's economies in poorer nations are destroyed by currency speculation.

Mr. Hain: I acknowledge that my hon. Friend has long been an advocate of the Tobin tax. The Chancellor and the previous Secretary of State for International Development, who addressed these matters some years ago, have explained the Government's point of view, but I am sure that the Treasury will want to note the points that my hon. Friend makes.

Dr. Julian Lewis (New Forest, East) (Con): I was tempted to ask for a debate on just how badly a Labour Government have to lose a European election before they will realise that they should not sign up to a European constitution, but as I know that I would not get that, may I ask instead for a statement or debate on the law of trespass? I was involved in a case whereby a burglary took place and the police identified the fact
 
17 Jun 2004 : Column 927
 
that people had been present but were not able to charge them because their alibi was that they had gone into the house with the intention of occupying it and setting up a squat. Is there not something extremely strange about a situation where if people steal and take away another's property, they commit a criminal offence, but when they enter another's property, change the locks and sit there, they cannot be touched by the police and the owner has to go to enormous expense and trouble to reoccupy his or her own property?

Mr. Hain: That is a rather strange situation, I must concede. I am sure that Ministers in the Department for Constitutional Affairs, one of whom is sitting to my left, will have noted very carefully what the hon. Gentleman has said.

On the Europeans elections, the blunt truth is that everyone lost them: the Conservatives lost them, Labour lost them, the Liberal Democrats lost them and the United Kingdom Independence party lost them, as did every other minor party. That is the picture that resulted from last Thursday's vote.

 
17 Jun 2004 : Column 928
 

Point of Order

1.22 pm

Mr. George Osborne (Tatton) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is a point of order that relates to Treasury questions, which we have just had, and the answer that the Financial Secretary gave to Question 10, on Equitable Life, which was asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Mr. Mackay). The Financial Secretary used her answer to make a major announcement about the future of the savings industry and to launch a Government consultation document, which is now available in the Library. Is it right that the Government can use a very narrowly worded question on Equitable Life to make an announcement about what is really a very different area of Treasury business, and to do so in such a way that gives the House very little opportunity—indeed, no opportunity whatsoever—to question the Government? When the Government first made such an announcement, they did so by oral statement. There was a statement on Sandler products at the time. Is it right for the House that that announcement has been slipped out in response to an oral question on another issue?

Mr. Speaker: Of course, I am not responsible for the replies from Ministers. The hon. Gentleman will have noticed that those on both Front Benches get some elbow room from the Speaker, so it cuts both ways. My understanding was that the Minister was drawing attention to a written statement that was put on the Order Paper today. Therefore, I gave the hon. Lady some elbow room. I would not expect that to happen all the time, but it did today, so we will leave it at that.

BILL PRESENTED

Mental Capacity

Mr. David Lammy, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Secretary Prescott, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Blunkett, Mr. Secretary Reid, Ms Rosie Winterton and Mr. Christopher Leslie, presented a Bill to make new provision relating to persons who lack capacity; to establish a superior court of record called the Court of Protection in place of the office of the Supreme Court called by that name; to make provision in connection with the Convention on the International Protection of Adults signed at The Hague on 13th January 2000; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed. Explanatory notes to be printed. [Bill 120].

 
17 Jun 2004 : Column 929
 

Orders of the Day

Public Audit (Wales) Bill [Lords]

[Relevant documents: The Fifth Report from the Welsh Affairs Committee, Session 2002–03, on the draft Public Audit (Wales) Bill, HC 763, and the Government's response thereto, HC 87, Session 2003–04.]

Order for Second Reading read.

1.24 pm

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Don Touhig): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

The Public Audit (Wales) Bill is intended to create a unitary public audit framework for Wales, with overall responsibility for public audit vested in one person—the Auditor General for Wales. The Bill will extend the Auditor General's powers to include most, although not all, of the current functions of the Audit Commission in Wales. Together, the Auditor General and his staff will be known as the Wales Audit Office or Swyddfa Archwilio Cymru. It builds on the creation, under the Government of Wales Act 1998, of the Office of the Auditor General for Wales and the National Assembly's Audit Committee to scrutinise the National Assembly's expenditure and the value for money obtained from it.

Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab): The Minister says that the new audit office will have the ability to scrutinise the funding of the National Assembly for Wales. Will it be able to look, for example, into the commitment made at the time of the referendum? We were told, as he well knows, that if we voted for the National Assembly, we would have a bonfire of the quangos. We were promised not only such a bonfire, but that the savings that would come from it—we were told that they would be £20 million—would be more than enough to run the National Assembly for Wales. We now know that the National Assembly costs an additional £100 million or so a year to run, so would it be possible for the new audit office to consider the original claim and, indeed, the funding since then of that institution?

Mr. Touhig: Of course, it will be a matter for the Auditor General to decide what he and his staff will examine. As for the point that my hon. Friend makes about a bonfire of the quangos, I am not sure whether there has been one, but there have certainly been a few sparks.

Devolution has resulted in a far greater degree of scrutiny and accountability in respect of public spending in Wales, and the Bill will advance that cause further. Under the Bill, the Auditor General will retain responsibility for financial and value-for-money auditing of the Assembly, its bodies and its funds. The Bill will extend the Auditor General's remit, so that he or she will have sole responsibility for the financial audit and value-for-money studies of NHS bodies in Wales. He or she will appoint auditors to local government
 
17 Jun 2004 : Column 930
 
bodies in Wales and take on inspection functions under the Wales programme for improvement, best value review under the Local Government Act 1999.

Mr. Greg Knight (East Yorkshire) (Con): Does the Minister not think that there is a case for the Public Accounts Committee also to have the power to scrutinise the Welsh Assembly's spending decisions?

Mr. Touhig: Of course, the Public Accounts Committee can broadly examine such matters because the House votes the budget for the Welsh Assembly to the Secretary of State for Wales, who then hands it to the Welsh Assembly. That is a matter for the PAC, but the right hon. Gentleman will accept that the Assembly has its own very effective Audit Committee.

Mr. Alan Williams (Swansea, West) (Lab): In fact, the Public Accounts Committee, as my hon. Friend knows, only investigates reports from the National Audit Office, under Sir John Bourn, in so far as they affect England. Sir John Bourn, with a different hat on, reports directly to Wales. So we in the PAC have no locus to hear matters that relate specifically to Wales.

---