---

Mr. Hain: I understand that the Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale primary care trust is currently seeking advice about the contractual relationships in that matter. It is also discussing alternative methods of ensuring the continued provision of NHS dentistry in Barnoldswick. The PCT will continue to ensure the provision of emergency dental treatment. My hon.
 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 436
 
Friend will understand that we have invested more resources in recruiting and training NHS dentists and we shall continue to take that work forward.

Sir Michael Spicer (West Worcestershire) (Con): Will the Leader of the House make sure that the parliamentary authorities allow Members to use the parliamentary computer system for casework during a general election period?

Mr. Hain: We are looking into that matter, because obviously those of us who are tied into our constituency offices through the use of Commons equipment, as many are, cannot be in the situation where a constituent comes to our local constituency office and we are unable to provide them with a proper level of service. On the other hand, however, the normal purdah rules affect us, because we cease to be Members of Parliament after Prorogation and are simply candidates. The issue is being looked into at present and I gladly sympathise with the point the hon. Gentleman raised.

Julie Morgan (Cardiff, North) (Lab): Will my right hon. Friend arrange for an urgent debate on women in prison? I am sure that he is aware of the tragic suicide of yet another woman prisoner, last Monday, which brings the number of women suicides in prison to 12 this year. Many of those women have mental health problems and prison is not the right place for them. Will my right hon. Friend arrange an urgent debate on policy for women offenders?

Mr. Hain: I am sure that the whole House will want to praise my hon. Friend for the consistency of her campaign on the troubling rise in suicide among women prisoners. The incidence of youth suicides in prison is also troubling. There will be an opportunity to raise the matter at Home Office questions on Monday and I am sure that my hon. Friend will continue to press the Home Secretary and will raise the issue to see whether we can make an improvement in that troubling situation.

Sue Doughty (Guildford) (LD): The Government are bringing forward the draft Gambling Bill, which changes the emphasis from out of town gambling to town centre gambling and could bring three casinos to the centre of Guildford—none of which are wanted. Will the Government take into account international research into the harm done when children are allowed to play slot machines and the link between that and the problems of adult gambling?

Mr. Hain: As the hon. Lady will be aware, the Bill has been subject to extensive pre-legislative scrutiny and the Government have taken account of many of the important points made during that process. The Bill is about properly regulating gambling. Whether any casino—let alone three—comes to Guildford is a matter for the local authority, not for the Leader of the House or even for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. The hon. Lady should properly take her concerns to the local authority rather than raising them in this place. However, I emphasise
 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 437
 
the point that the Bill is welcome legislation for regularising and bringing up to date law and procedure that desperately need it.

Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab): The Leader of the House will be aware that Kofi Annan has declared that the war with Iraq was illegal and that the Iraq survey group has declared that the weapons of mass destruction did not exist. Does he accept that we owe it to the tens of thousands of people who have been—and are being—slaughtered in this worthless war to revisit and debate the issue? As a result of the debate, we would hopefully hear not only an apology, but an apology without qualifications. Although an apology would not be enough, at least it would be a start.

Mr. Hain: My hon. Friend and I have an honest difference of opinion on the matter. I respect his point of view, but I am entitled to expect him to respect mine and that of the Government. He mentions the deaths that have occurred since the action took place last year, but I would like him to remind the House of the nearly 1 million deaths that occurred under Saddam's murderous tyranny.

Llew Smith: I demonstrated against that.

Mr. Hain: Indeed my hon. Friend did, as did I, so we are in the same situation.

It is important for us to bear in mind what Saddam did. I do not know of any ruler in history other than Saddam Hussein who has murdered up to a million Muslims. If he had continued in office, we would have seen further examples such as those uncovered by the new Iraqi Administration. They have identified 40 mass graves throughout the country. We do not yet have all the evidence of the full horror of Saddam Hussein, but he would still be in power if my hon. Friend's views had been taken into account when we took the decision last year.

Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk) (Con): The Leader of the House and hon. Members will be aware that over the summer period and the early autumn when we had our problems with security, there was a lot of press coverage in which disparaging remarks were made about the Speaker and the so-called men in tights. There was an inference that some of that briefing had come directly from either the Leader of the House or his staff. Will he take the opportunity, as I am sure that he will want to, to deny that either he or his staff were involved in that?

Mr. Hain: I am happy to deny that, and since the hon. Gentleman has given me the opportunity, I put it on record. If he had been in the Chamber during previous
 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 438
 
business questions, he would have known that I expressly praised the role of the Doorkeepers in the invasion by the huntsmen and on the previous occasion. They perform a fantastic job for us. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman should have lowered the tone of the consideration of such a serious matter by making that kind of accusation.

Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire) (Lab): May I press for that debate on Iraq? There are people with different perspectives on the matter, ranging from my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent (Llew Smith), who asked for the debate, to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. There are some of us who believe in a third way—I thought that the Government might be interested in third ways. We say that the invasion itself was wrong and that some of its consequences were predictable, but that everything must now be done to assist democratic forces in Iraq to build a proper, decent society. Although there might still be big differences between both sides, there might be an area on which we could get agreement, so let us have the debate.

Mr. Hain: I am very sympathetic to my hon. Friend's point of view. Whatever opinions are passionately held about the merits, or otherwise, of going to war in Iraq, the truth is that we are where we are. The objective now, as he says, is to ensure that we have a democratic Iraq that includes a strong and independent trade union movement. We must support that enterprise and use all our efforts and resources to ensure that the Iraqi people have the chance to run their own country for the first time in at least a generation, if not ever.

Mr. John Taylor (Solihull) (Con): When the House came back in September, apparently to debate fox hunting, certain parts of the motoring industry in the west midlands—Rover, Jaguar and, in my constituency, Land Rover—were in a state of dire anxiety. May we even now have a debate on the motor industry in the west midlands, and will the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry reply to it?

Mr. Hain: We have Transport questions on Tuesday and the hon. Gentleman can put his point to the Secretary of State. I do not accept that we came back in September only to debate fox hunting because we debated several important pieces of legislation during those two weeks. Job losses in manufacturing, including those in the midlands, are important, but the fact is that under the Tories, nearly a million manufacturing jobs were massacred by the early 1990s alone.

Several hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker: Order. We must move on.
 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 437
 

 
14 Oct 2004 : Column 439
 

Points of Order

1.15 pm

Dr. Julian Lewis (New Forest, East) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It was in January this year that I first raised a question that was alluded to today regarding the incessant noise of the protest in Parliament square. We have heard that matter linked today to the Procedure Committee report. I have spoken on numerous occasions to the head of the police in the Palace of Westminster who tells me that he has made many representations to the police outside the Palace to take action about the noise, but that they do not do so. Is it not time that the Leader of the House picked up the telephone, spoke to the police and asked them why any demonstrator should be allowed to broadcast his rantings and ravings at a volume that is totally unacceptable to the general public?

---