---

Mr. Hain: I am sympathetic to the hon. Gentleman's points, as he will understand. On the question of progress on the Modernisation Committee's report "Connecting Parliament with the Public", I receive monthly reports from the Clerk's Department on the progress that is being made in all these important areas. We want to make sure that Westminster and this House are user-friendly. I know that the hon. Gentleman is an enthusiastic supporter of that. We also have a progress meeting next week on the proposals for a visitors centre, which is different from the reception facility, to which the House has already agreed.

I am a fan of Select Committees. It is important that they hold Ministers to account. Ministers in this Government have appeared before Select Committees more than Ministers in any other Government since Select Committees were first established. That is part of the Government's greater accountability to the House of Commons. For example, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has made more statements to the House than Mr. Major or Mrs. Thatcher made in the equivalent periods. He also appears before the Liaison Committee, which never happened before.

Of course there will be a free vote on the Procedure Committee issues and the question of programming. We need to keep it in perspective. We have an honest difference of opinion, and we might as well just accept it. The hon. Gentleman, along with members of the official Opposition, seems to be saying that he wants to go back to the old days of all-night sittings and filibustering. We have introduced a sensible approach to programming, which was called for before we came to power and was broadly endorsed by Conservative Members under the previous Administration. When programming works well, it is in the interests of the House because both in Committee and on the Floor of the House it allows hon. Members to focus on the issues that they want to focus on rather than listening to filibusters. Where programming does not work well—there are instances of that—it is usually the responsibility of those involved
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 1025
 
in drawing up and agreeing the timetable through the usual channels. We must bear it in mind that, by and large, programming is in the interests of the House.

Mr. Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Lab): My right hon. Friend may have seen a photograph in The Times today of some of our colleagues promoting breast cancer awareness. That underlines the importance of the scientific research that goes unpromoted in this country and of the superb work in our hospitals. Will he find time for an early debate on such an important subject—not only breast cancer but the work that is going on in all cancer services—so that the people whom we represent have a truer picture of what is happening?

Mr. Hain: I did indeed see the photograph—it was an excellent way for women Members of Parliament to raise the profile of an important subject. In the past decade, British women have experienced the biggest decrease in the world of deaths from breast cancer, and that is welcome. Under the Government, 99.6 per cent. of women whom GPs refer urgently with suspected breast cancer to a consultant are seen within two weeks. We are making rapid progress but a serious problem remains and my hon. Friend is right to raise it.

Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con): May we have an early debate on the proposed security arrangements for this place? Many of us are worried that primary responsibility could be transferred from the existing authorities to the police, bearing it in mind that most of the most recent security upsets, for example, at Buckingham palace and Windsor castle, have been on premises for which the police were primarily responsible.

Mr. Hain: Mr. Speaker has ruled on whether security matters should be debated on the Floor of the House and we must bear that in mind. As a member of the House of Commons Commission, I can say that some of the press speculation and spin in the past week could not be further from the truth. The Government have no proposal to trample over the sovereign independence of the House of Commons or the House of Lords.

The Joint Committee on Security and the House of Commons Commission agree that they want to establish a proper security co-ordinator for the Palace, which is one building for the purposes of security. We need a proper, professional modern approach, with the police and the security service having constant operational lines to whoever fills the new position. However, ultimately the holder of the new post should be answerable and accountable to Mr. Speaker in the Commons and the Chairman of Committees in the Lords. That is the right way in which to proceed.

John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Lab): On 7 October, under the authority of the mutual legal assistance treaty and, we believe, at the instigation of the FBI, agents visited the offices of Indymedia and removed its computer servers. Indymedia is an international news agency that has extensively covered investigations into the war and the Bush and Berlusconi regimes. May we have a statement next week to explain
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 1026
 
on what authority the action was taken, what representations foreign Governments made and the justification for the action?

Mr. Hain: I am not aware of the details of the matter but the Home Secretary will have noted my hon. Friend's points.

Alistair Burt (North-East Bedfordshire) (Con): May I ask for an urgent debate in Government time about reports that the successful British food fortnight event is under threat because of lack of Government support? The event has boosted the regional food and drink industry by approximately £10 million in the past three years. It reinforces the connection between farmers, local sourcing and customers. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the organiser, Alexia Robinson, that we are running a nationwide enterprise like a cottage industry?

Mr. Hain: Food fortnight week is an important initiative—[Interruption.] I am glad that the hon. Gentleman has the opportunity to raise food fortnight; I understand that he could not do that in DEFRA questions. In giving more resources to the Food Standards Agency and focusing on improved standards throughout the country and on diet, the Government are with the hon. Gentleman. It is also important to get increased markets for British food closer to home and to try to persuade the supermarkets to co-operate with that objective.

Julie Morgan (Cardiff, North) (Lab): What plans has my right hon. Friend to give time for legislation to enable Wales to become smoke-free in public places? The Welsh Assembly has voted for that and requested legislation. New research has been published this week and Liverpool is moving forward on the issue. What about Wales? What can we do to ensure that Wales becomes smoke-free in public places?

Mr. Hain: I am very sympathetic to the cause, which my hon. Friend has always prosecuted vigorously, and I note her point about Liverpool. The Secretary of State for Health will publish a White Paper on public health within a matter of weeks, and this issue will be addressed. My hon. Friend will be encouraged by the fact that there is now a serious debate about how we strike a balance between individual rights and public health in respect of both smoking and passive smoking.

Mr. Andrew Mackay (Bracknell) (Con): Returning to the serious issue of the future of the British grand prix, may I emphasise to the Leader of the House how important it is that the Minister for Sport and Tourism comes sooner rather than later to make a statement on the Floor of the House? Will the Leader of the House assure us that the Government will be robust with Mr. Ecclestone, despite the fact that he is a very generous donor to the Labour party?

Mr. Hain: I think that he was an "un-donor" in the end—the party never got the money. This is very difficult and complicated, and we are all in the same position. I know that the right hon. Gentleman is keen from the point of view of not just motor racing sports
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 1027
 
fans such as us both, but Britain's pre-eminence in high-performance engineering. We are world leaders in that field, and we must ensure that we protect our position against severe competition, and it is absolutely crucial that we keep the British grand prix at Silverstone and on the Formula 1 calendar. The Minister for Sport and Tourism has been closely engaged in the negotiations; ultimately, however, Formula 1 and the FIA must agree which grand prix, from China to Britain, appear on the calendar. I hope that, even at this late stage, an agreement will be reached between the British Racing Drivers Club and Mr. Ecclestone, in the interests not just of Britain but of world sport because Silverstone is known throughout the world as the home of motor sport.

Geraint Davies (Croydon, Central) (Lab): I have previously raised the issue of the Forestdale Forum community centre in Croydon, whose trustees fear the forfeiture of their lease by Warborough Investments, which has not acted illegally but whose activities led local trustees to ask to be given legal support. Is my right hon. Friend aware that, following my campaign, Croydon council has now agreed to become a joint trustee to provide that support? Will he welcome that and find time to debate a review of land legislation to protect such community centres, which provide valuable family and social support, more comprehensively across London and Britain in future?

---