---

Mr. Tony McWalter (Hemel Hempstead) (Lab/Co-op): Is my right hon. Friend aware that today is the tercentenary of the death of England's greatest ever philosopher, John Locke, who was the author, among other things, of a devastating attack on the idea that the divine should form the foundation of governmental authority? He was the originator of the idea of the separation of powers and his ideas were hugely important to both the French revolution and the American revolution. Will my right hon. Friend arrange a debate on why almost nobody in this country understands their debt to that great thinker and on how our culture is so ignorant of its roots?

Mr. Hain: I understand my hon. Friend's point. The other day, The Guardian carried an article by its leading journalist and assistant editor, Martin Kettle, who made a similar point. John Locke's contribution as one of the founders of our parliamentary democracy should be better recognised by everybody.

Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire) (Con): May I ask the Leader of the House a less philosophical question? He announced a debate on Wednesday on the Sessional Orders; that is nearly a year after the Procedure Committee produced its report. He may have seen reports that the Home Secretary is already minded to introduce primary legislation to deal with long-term demonstrations in Parliament square. Will he confirm that that is indeed the case?

Mr. Hain: I will give the right hon. Gentleman and the House a fuller explanation next Wednesday—I know that you, too, are concerned about the matter, Mr. Speaker—but the Home Secretary is actively considering legislation. To that extent, I can answer yes to the right hon. Gentleman's question.

Mr. Win Griffiths (Bridgend) (Lab): My right hon. Friend knows that I am deeply opposed to the continuing Government policy of allowing parents and other adults to beat children. I am deeply disappointed that the Government are allowing a free vote on Tuesday on the determination of reasonable chastisement, but are insisting that Government policy prevents us from allowing children equal protection to adults when it comes to being beaten. The Government say that the police fear that our courts will be inundated with cases, but I understand that the police are finding it more difficult to implement reasonable chastisement than equal protection. Will my right hon. Friend announce that we will have a free vote on Tuesday on equal protection?

Mr. Hain: My hon. Friend has long taken a close interest in such matters, and we all share his horror at the beating or abuse of children. Indeed, children's legislation is designed to give children extra protection, which I know that he welcomes. We will not offer a free vote on any amendment that aims to ban smacking
 
28 Oct 2004 : Column 1593
 
outright, because that is against Government policy, but, as he says, a free vote will take place on the so-called Lester amendment, if it becomes an option.

Sir Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) (Con): The Leader of the House knows that I am grateful that the debate on the Procedure Committee's report on Sessional Orders and resolutions will happen next week. May I press him on the matter raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir George Young), because it is time further to regulate what happens in Parliament square? The noise nuisance, which would not be permitted anywhere else in the country, has been allowed to continue to the disadvantage not only of members of staff, but of other people who work in close proximity to Parliament square. Will the Leader of the House direct his attention to that issue in his speech next week?

I thank the Leader of the House for indicating that the motions relating to the Senior Salaries Review Body will be tabled today. Are the motions already available, because some of us want to table amendments to them in the interests of work carried out by hon. Members?

Mr. Hain: On the latter point, I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern; indeed, hon. Members on both sides of the House are concerned by a number of the SSRB's recommendations. He has made representations to me on at least one of those recommendations and I have engaged in cross-party discussions to try to find a way forward. The motions will enable hon. Members to table amendments, which I will consider carefully.

On the Sessional Orders debates, the hon. Gentleman will be encouraged by what we have to say next Wednesday; along with the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir George Young), he has pressed me energetically on that matter. We have not been able to address the issue of Parliament square before; it is a complex matter, given the history, but I agree with him about the noise and general nuisance.

Anne Picking (East Lothian) (Lab): May I ask my right hon. Friend when a Bill making corporate manslaughter an offence is likely to be introduced in this House?

Mr. Hain: My hon. Friend will understand that it is not possible for me to anticipate the Queen's Speech. However, I emphasise that the Government are committed to introducing legislation on corporate manslaughter. Despite newspaper reports in the past week or so, the Government's commitment to that principle remains firm and I believe that my hon. Friend will be encouraged about the direction that we intend to take.

Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South) (UUP): The Leader of the House may have had his attention drawn to NIPSA's call for the resignation of the Minister with responsibility for education in Northern Ireland. May we have a statement about what is happening with the education boards' finances? It is alleged that the Belfast education board has overspent by between £4 million and £20 million and that there is therefore no money. May we have a statement on the matter next week?
 
28 Oct 2004 : Column 1594
 

Mr. Hain: The Minister responsible for education in Northern Ireland will note the hon. Gentleman's point but I want to place on record the fact that the Minister has a good reputation for taking forward education policy in Northern Ireland.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): The Leader of the House and other hon. Members will be pleased to hear that the campaign for the long-awaited opening of the rail station in Llanharan in my constituency is about to succeed as the station nears completion, thanks to a Labour Administration. However, as we approach the Queen's Speech, I urge my right hon. Friend to consider the measures that may be necessary to ensure that our devolved Administration in Wales has a greater say in local rail and other transport issues, so that my campaign to bring a station to Llangynwyd in the Llynfi valley will be equally successful.

Mr. Hain: I once spent a happy evening at a bed-and-breakfast in Llangynwyd. There is a nice pub in the village at which I ate and I am therefore sure that Llangynwyd deserves my hon. Friend's attention. He will be encouraged by the introduction of the draft Transport (Wales) Bill, to which the Welsh Affairs Committee has given pre-legislative scrutiny. The Committee's members made many constructive points. I am sure that he will be encouraged by the direction that we intend to follow. We intend to give more powers to the National Assembly for Wales to take forward a properly integrated transport policy—for rail and bus—for the whole of Wales.

Mr. Jonathan Sayeed (Mid-Bedfordshire) (Con): Bedfordshire police authority is one of the most efficient authorities in the country. More than 83 per cent. of its spending goes on pay and it has made greater efficiency savings than any other force. Yet next year, its funding shortfall is likely to mean the loss of 75 front-line officers. That is not unique to Bedfordshire; it applies to police authorities throughout the country. May I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to early-day motion 1830?

[That this House notes the funding shortfall projected for police authority budgets next year; further notes that Bedfordshire Police Authority will need a funding increase of £2.2 million just to maintain existing services whilst implementing the Government's police reform agenda and meeting the rising costs of police pensions; recognises that Bedfordshire faces particular difficulties as its budget is over 83 per cent, pay related and the authority has achieved the highest level of cashable efficiency savings of any police authority in England and Wales over the last five years with the highest proportion of officers undertaking front line policing duties; calls on the Government to recognise the scale of the potential cuts, which in Bedfordshire alone would remove the equivalent of 75 police officers from front line policing; and urges the Government to make sure that the funding settlement is adequate in 2005–06 and beyond.]

Will the Government provide time for a proper and thoughtful debate on funding police authorities?

---