---

Mr. Hain: To deal with the hon. Gentleman's last point first, I am grateful—as I am sure all members of the Commission will be—for his acknowledgement that the annual report is an excellent one. It is indeed; it contains very useful information and it is very important. Right hon. and hon. Members often ask questions whose answers are to be found in it. I take his point that it would be an advantage if there were an opportunity—apart from putting questions to the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Sir Archy Kirkwood), his colleague who answers for the Commission—to debate the Commission's annual report. I shall certainly look at his suggestion, in concert with the Commission, because it seems a little odd that, because of our rules and procedures, we cannot address the important work that the Commission does in representing all of us.

I welcome the hon. Gentleman's point about the Prime Minister and Iraq, unlike the rather grubby attacks from the Conservatives. He said that this was not a matter of the Prime Minister's integrity but of his judgment. One issue of judgment that I would have thought that the hon. Gentleman would have taken into account is what the impact would have been if Saddam had been allowed to remain in power. We have seen in this morning's newspapers the most graphic description of the sickening legacy of Saddam's regime, in the form of a mass grave at Hatra containing at least 300 victims of his tyranny. There were pictures of the bodies of women, some pregnant, some with babies in their arms, who had been blindfolded and shot in the head. That is
 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 430
 
the kind of occurrence that could well have continued, had Saddam stayed in power under Liberal Democrat policy. When we talk about judgment, we need to take account of the consequences of allowing him to stay in power.

On the freedom of information disclosure of Members' expenses, I very much welcome the all-party agreement. It affects everyone equally. I also take account of the hon. Gentleman's point that the media might not act responsibly in this regard, but I hope that they will. All the categories of expenses that will be available for inspection by our constituents are to do with our work here as MPs, and the work that we pay our staff to do to help us to serve our constituents properly. The House is now providing a level of service that is historically unprecedented compared with what was happening 10, 20 or 30 years ago, let alone before that. The expenses also provide for the operation of constituency offices and enable Members to live in their constituencies and, as we necessarily must, in London. Those are all properly accounted-for expenses that are claimed under the rules and should be treated accordingly.

I apologise to the hon. Member for North-East Hertfordshire (Mr. Heald) for not picking up on his point about September. He raised many issues and I am afraid that I missed that one. The hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) echoed his point about whether the absence of September sittings next year—on the advice of the House authorities about the need to proceed with security arrangements for the Chamber and the construction works involved—would be a pilot for the future. I know that Members have strong feelings about the conditions in which we came back in September—feelings that you share, Mr. Speaker. In the end, it is a matter for the House. There will be a vote on whether to retain September sittings—[Hon. Members: "On a free vote?] Of course it will be on a free vote, as it was before, because it was on House business. We will also have a vote on the sitting hours early next year, following the report of the Modernisation Committee, which is currently concluding its evidence taking and will shortly consider its recommendations.

Mr. Paul Truswell (Pudsey) (Lab): Is my right hon. Friend aware that, last year, several police authorities, including West Yorkshire, which serves my constituents, did not receive a full and fair share of the resources to which they were entitled under the revised funding formula? Can he arrange for Ministers to come to the House at the earliest opportunity so that we may press them on whether that situation is likely to be repeated this year or whether authorities such as West Yorkshire will get the resources that they need to continue to combat crime in our communities?

Mr. Hain: My hon. Friend raises an important local matter and I know that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will want to look into it. My hon. Friend will of course have the chance to question my right hon. Friend on Monday at Home Office questions. However, my hon. Friend will also acknowledge that crime has fallen rapidly under this Government and that some 10,000 extra police officers have been recruited, alongside more community wardens and community
 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 431
 
support officers, all of whom are helping to defeat crime in his constituency and police authority area, as well as through the length and breadth of the United Kingdom.

Sir Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) (Con): I thank the Leader of the House for finally arranging a debate on important House issues, not least programming and allied matters. I hope that, as a result, the House will give you, Mr. Speaker, additional discretion in respect of the time limits on speeches by Select Committee Chairmen when important reports by their Committees are discussed by the House. Will the Leader of the House print in the Order Paper in plenty of time the motion that will be debated? It is very important for the Procedure Committee to know whether he intends to accept all or at least a majority of its recommendations in respect of programming, which is vital to the House if it is to scrutinise Government legislation adequately.

Mr. Hain: I welcome the hon. Gentleman's question on that matter, especially given his role as Chairman of the Procedure Committee, a job that he does very well and with great diligence. I am happy to answer his points. The debate on Tuesday week will cover programming matters, deferred Divisions, short speeches, the carry-over provisions and the Strangers motion that arose out of the last report by the Modernisation Committee. I assure him that he will have plenty of time to consider the motions that I intend to table and I have been clearing the detail of them this week. I take his point about allowing Select Committee Chairmen greater scope than the current rules prescribe.

The hon. Gentleman did not ask me about the other Procedure Committee report, but he has properly done so in the past—

Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire) (Con): I shall.

Mr. Hain: The right hon. Gentleman says that he will do so if he catches your eye, Mr. Speaker. The Procedure Committee report on Sessional Orders will be a matter for debate in the House in the very near future. I hope to provide early information of the date.

David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op): This time last week, I was in Dublin with my hon. Friends the Members for Glasgow, Anniesland (John Robertson) and for Cardiff, North (Julie Morgan) and three peers. We were looking at the impact of the smoking ban in the workplace that the Irish Government have introduced. Has my right hon. Friend seen early-day motion 1738?

[That this House notes that the medical and scientific evidence of the dangers of exposure to secondhand smoke in the workplace is now overwhelming; further notes that exposure to secondhand smoke in the workplace may cause more than 700 premature deaths a year, three times the number killed in industrial accidents; further notes that the Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health has concluded that exposure to secondhand smoke may increase non-smokers' risk of both lung cancer and ischaemic heart disease by about one quarter; further notes that the voluntary approach to smoking restrictions
 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 432
 
has left at least two million people still working in places where smoking is allowed throughout and at least another 10 million in places where smoking is allowed somewhere on the premises; further notes that the legislation in Ireland ending smoking in workplaces has been a medical and political success, resulting in a 97 per cent, observance rate, large falls in cigarette sales and a large rise in the number of smokers seeking to quit; believes that an end to smoking in the workplace would be a major advance towards a healthier population; and calls on the Government to commit itself to legislation ending smoking in all workplaces in the forthcoming White Paper on public health.]

Has my right hon. Friend had any intimation of the likely publication date of the White Paper that has been imminent, according to the Government, for some time? This issue is more important than most to many people and it is time that we got to grips with those in the food, drink and tobacco industry who cause—sometimes inadvertently, but sometimes recklessly—such serious ill-health and premature death for many people.

Mr. Hain: I agree with my hon. Friend that both passive and active smoking are serious health issues. The Irish experience will be very interesting, as has been the experience in New York and other parts of the world. We have some catching up to do and my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Health and the Prime Minister are both seized of that. My hon. Friend will be encouraged to note that the White Paper on public health will be published later in the year. Since there is not much left of the year, that will be reasonably soon.

---