Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Q7. [188838] Mr. Graham Allen
(Nottingham, North) (Lab): If he will make a statement on the impact of cross-departmental working on the Government since 1997.
15 Sept 2004 : Column 1269
The Prime Minister: All Departments work closely together to ensure the co-ordination of policy. Cross-departmental working and its impact is most noticeable in areas such as crime and asylum and in relation to public health, where we need to bring a whole series of Departments together to work in a constructive and co-operative way.
Mr. Allen: The Prime Minister will know that Nottingham, North, especially its outer estates, is one of the poorest UK constituencies, but excellent cross-departmental working has helped to tackle some of the problemsthe new deal, Sure Start and the building schools for the future programme. However, there are now 36 funding streams coming into Nottingham, North and 20 organisations involved in regeneration. Will the Prime Minister take a personal interest in trying to cut through and clarify the plethora of bodies and initials, which confuse local people, so that regeneration can be done not to, but with, the people who are its subject?
The Prime Minister: The point my hon. Friend raises is correct. Indeed, I am already taking an interest in, and have held several meetings on, the subject. Most people recognise that the money going into communities through the new deal, Sure Start and elsewhere is making a real difference to some of the poorest communities in our country, but it is true that there is a plethora of funding streams, which causes unnecessary difficulty and bureaucracy. The new local area agreements, which merge various funding streams locally to support the delivery of agreed outcomes, will be taken forward. I hope that in that area, too, we can learn from experience to ensure that people are accountable for the money we spend while also ensuring that they get it more effectively and quickly than they do at the moment. I would say one final thing to my hon. Friend: the other day, when I was in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Sir Stuart Bell), I saw the work that inner-city regeneration is doing with not just the support of local people but their active involvement, and that is a programme of which we can be very proud.
Q8. [188839] Mr. Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury)
(Con): On the topic of urban regeneration, is the Prime Minister aware that in my constituency there are proposals to close three urban post offices? In two of those areas, the nearest post office is more than a mile away, and in one of the areas there are plans to build hundreds more houses, all of which will increase car
15 Sept 2004 : Column 1270
journeys, yet only yesterday the Prime Minister said that he was concerned about the emission of poisonous gases into the atmosphere. How does he square his policy of closing post offices with his alleged concern for the environment?
The Prime Minister: It is not that we have a policy of closing post offices. The hon. Gentleman will know that, under the previous Government, about 3,000 post offices closed. Post offices have continued to close under this Government, because their business and financial viability is being altered as a result of more people getting their benefit not through the post office but through their bank account. We have set aside several hundred million pounds to support rural post offices, but in the end we cannot support every post office, no matter what its financial viability is. That is why we have substantial investment going in, but there is no point in kidding people; unless we double or treble that investment we cannot keep every post office open.
Q9. [188840] Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab): May I inform my right hon. Friend that, this week, we will be celebrating the fact that the 1,000th home on the Middle Park estate in Eltham will be improved under the decent homes programme? Although we are justifiably proud of our investment in decent homes, there still remains a problem in my area with young families who cannot find affordable homes. Those people have grown up in houses that were built by Labour, and they look to Labour to provide for them and their families. May I appeal to my right hon. Friend to allow local authorities once again to build council houses using their investment allowance?
The Prime Minister: First, the point that my hon. Friend raises is correct. There is obviously a real issue to do particularly with younger people wanting to get their feet on the rungs of housing ownership and being unable to do so, and we hope that we can address that over the next few weeks. There is also a need for greater social housing, and we are putting additional resourcesbillions of poundsinto that. He is also right in saying that there has been a substantial reduction in the number of social homes that do not meet the decency minimum threshold, and we have reduced that by 1.6 million homes in this country over the past few years, but we will put more investment and resource into it. I agree that one part of that must be social housing, which can come from a variety of sources. Over the next few years, we are supporting housing for up to 12,000 key workers in London. That will make a substantial difference not just to housing but to the quality of people who can come into our public services.
Mr. William Cash, supported by Mr. Richard Shepherd, Sir Nicholas Winterton, Mrs. Angela Browning, Sir Peter Tapsell, Sir John Butterfill, Mr. David Amess and Mr. David Heathcoat-Amory, presented a Bill to require a Minister of the Crown, the National Assembly for Wales, a Northern Ireland Minister or a Scottish Minister in respect of any primary or subordinate legislation which gives effect to any European Community treaty, obligation or instrument to publish a memorandum specifying the relevant European Community treaty, obligation or instrument from which it is derived and identifying which provisions in the legislation are so derived: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 15 October, and to be printed [Bill 155].
Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton) (Con): I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to establish a criminal offence of desecrating national flags; to establish penalties in relation to the offence; and for connected purposes.
This Bill was promoted by the letters that I received from my constituency and elsewhere following scenes of the burning of our Union flag on the streets of London earlier this year. National flagsthe emblem of a nation statedo not belong to, or represent, a Government or a policy; they belong to all of us. Most people have a sense of possession and belonging whether they were born in a country or whether it becomes their adoptive home. They identify with their flags, often with pride, as we saw in Athens at the Olympic games.
Love of country and the symbols of nationhood are deemed by some today to be politically incorrect. I do not share that view. [Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."] I empathise with those who find it grossly offensive to see our flag desecrated, as defined by the dictionary as
"to violate the sacred character of an object".
Even more so, that inflames anger when there appears to be no redress. Such actions in a public place not only offend; in some instances, they incite racial hatred and can lead to violence.
In studying how other countries have approached the problem, I find that many other countries have enacted legislation to include penalties of both fines and imprisonment. Austria, Germany, France, Italy, Portugal and India have all enacted such legislation, and some countries, such as Norway and Japan, have legislated specifically in respect of foreign flags, knowing how offensive it is if those flags are destroyed in their countries.
The Bill does not seek to trivialise the use of the flag where it has been adapted, for example, in the design of garments. I have received a certain amount of correspondence about the use of the flag in underwear design, and I want to make it clear to the House that the Bill does not seek to prohibit that sort of fun. Nor would I oppose the Union flag being incorporated in advertising or projected on the front of Buckingham palace, as we have seen in the past.
The Bill is a direct response to the silent majority who expect action to be taken when acts of desecration take place. Last Sunday, the Sunday Express carried out a telephone poll to find out what its readers thought about the act of burning the Union flag and whether they thought that that should be made a criminal act. I was pleased that 1,096 people spent their own money to respond to that poll and that 98 per cent. said that there should be such legislation. Additionally, such a measure would have the support of the Victoria Cross Society.
I am only too well aware of the limitations of a ten-minute Bill, so although I hope that mine will proceed, I am perhaps more realistically addressing the Government Front Bench in the hope that time will be found to include such a provision in a Home Office Bill. If the Government fail to do that, I hope that my Front Bench, when we come to office after the next general election, will include the measure in an early Home Office Bill.
15 Sept 2004 : Column 1273
Next Section | Index | Home Page |