| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Peter Hain): The business for next week is as follows:
Monday 14 March—Second Reading of the Education Bill [Lords].
Tuesday 15 March—Second Reading of the Inquiries Bill [Lords].
Wednesday 16 March—My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will open his Budget statement, followed by, if necessary, consideration of Lords amendments.
Thursday 17 March—Continuation of the Budget debate.
Friday 18 March—Private Members' Bills.
The provisional business for the following week will be:
Monday 21 March—Continuation of the Budget debate.
Tuesday 22 March—Conclusion of the Budget debate.
Wednesday 23 March—Second Reading of the Disability Discrimination Bill [Lords].
Thursday 24 March—Motion on the Easter recess Adjournment.
Friday 25 March—The House will not be sitting.
I should like to inform the House that business in Westminster Hall for 17 and 24 March will be—
Thursday 17 March—A debate on the report from the Science and Technology Committee on the use of science in UK international development policy.
Thursday 24 March—A debate on the UK and Africa.
The House may also wish to be reminded that, subject to the progress of business, we will rise for Easter on Thursday 24 March and return on Monday 4 April.
Mr. Heald: I thank the Leader of the House for giving us the business. He will be aware of the public concern over the Deputy Prime Minister's latest guidance on unauthorised Traveller sites, which makes it even more difficult for councils to uphold planning law. There is the prospect of even more unrestricted development. Can we have an early statement or a debate so that the Deputy Prime Minister can be challenged on this new initiative?
Two weeks ago, I asked the Leader of the House about the St. David's day debate. He replied that
"it will have to come later . . . But there will certainly be a Welsh affairs debate."—[Official Report, 24 February 2005; Vol. 431, c. 477.]
Members in all parts of the House want to raise issues such as the unfair treatment of the Welsh regiments and the rising hospital waiting lists in Wales, where it has been reported that the Leader of the House, in his other job, has told the Welsh Assembly to pull its socks up. We
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1686
know that Wales was recently missed off the European Union map; now it seems to have been missed off the Order Paper. When will the debate take place?
In the light of the Chief Secretary's comments earlier today, which suggested that Labour is considering capital gains tax on people's homes, will the Leader of the House give an assurance that there will be an opportunity to discuss this further during the Budget debate? I would like an assurance that there will be a real opportunity to do so.
What is the last moment at which motion 13 on page 1099 of the Order Paper needs to be passed to be effective in continuing the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001?
Finally, the last Modernisation Committee report recommended that there should be a system for tabling questions in September, even though we are not sitting in September this year. Can we expect to see a motion from the Leader of the House on the Order Paper soon or will it be left for me to table after our general election victory?
Mr. Hain: Dream on. I do not intend to table a motion to that effect.
On the question of Gypsy sites, the truth is that the ability to deal with the situation lapsed in 1984 when the Tory Government abolished the 1968 duty to provide sites. The Deputy Prime Minister is trying to ensure that there are proper controls on where such sites are put so that local residents are protected and the rights of Travellers are respected. The absence of the measures that the Conservatives repealed in 1984 has caused the current situation.
There will be a Welsh affairs debate on 4 April—as soon as we get back from the Easter recess. I can give the hon. Gentleman that absolute assurance, as I indicated would be the case. He asked what might be discussed in that debate and mentioned national health service waiting times in Wales. There is no way in which the Secretary of State for Wales can order the National Assembly for Wales to do anything within its responsibilities, and the health service and waiting times are included in that. It is true that waiting times have not come down in Wales as quickly as in England, and the First Minister intends to make a statement about that matter in the coming weeks. However, it is also true that the real choice on health services in Wales is between a Labour Government, who are investing more and recruiting more nurses and doctors, and a Conservative Government, who would slash health service provision in Wales, which would lead to rocketing waiting times again.
I did not hear the comments about capital gains tax to which the hon. Gentleman referred, but I think that there must have been some misinterpretation of what was said. I have announced four days of debate on the Budget, so there will be plenty of time for him and his colleagues to raise any matters that they like.
On the terrorism legislation, a clear choice now faces the House of Commons and Parliament. Tomorrow is the anniversary of the Madrid bombing, which was an attack on the people of Spain by terrorists who could mount exactly the same kind of attack on London or anywhere else in Britain. That is why, on the clear advice of the security services and the police, we need new
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1687
legislation. We have gone the extra mile to find consensus within the House on extra judicial protection, but the Government will not allow the fact that the Conservatives are playing politics with people's security to put us in a position of neglecting the safety and security of our citizens. The House of Lords is inviting the House of Commons to put its and the Conservative party's interests ahead of those of our constituents, but we will not do that. [Hon. Members: "Answer the question."] That is answering the question directly. We will pursue the legislation because we believe that it is absolutely essential. We have made concessions to build consent in the House. The Bill will provide proper safety and security for our citizens and voters, but it is quite clear that the Conservatives are playing politics.
Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall) (LD): Will the Leader of the House give urgent consideration—perhaps he will make a statement on the matter next week—to the way in which his ministerial colleagues make statements that are directly relevant to the constituency work of hon. Members on both sides of the House without informing those Members? Let me give him an example. A written statement is being made today by the Ministry of Defence. Although the subject that it covers is not immediately apparent, I understand from my local media that they are to be briefed in just a few minutes about its implications for RAF St. Mawgan, which is in my constituency. I had to be briefed by the media to ring the office of the Minister of State, Ministry of Defence, the right hon. Member for East Kilbride (Mr. Ingram), to find out what was going on. In the past he has been meticulous in telling me what was happening, but surely it should be the responsibility of Ministers to inform constituency Members of such a matter before informing the local media.
I understand that the statement will demonstrate that RAF St. Mawgan will be eligible for the stationing of the joint combat aircraft from 2012—that is fine. However, apparently the statement shows that the airfield will effectively be mothballed from 2007 to 2012. That would have a huge impact on my constituency, and the statement may also affect other hon. Members. Why should the local media be informed before constituency Members? Is that not a discourtesy to the House and to Members, and what will the Leader of the House do about it?
When does the Leader of the House expect the Identity Cards Bill to complete its passage through Parliament? Apparently, it will not come before the House before the Easter recess? Does he expect it to receive Royal Assent before Monday 11 April? Does he accept that it is not urgent, and that there are much more pressing matters that need to be dealt with? Has he had an opportunity to read the extremely important report by the Home Affairs Committee, chaired by his right hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham), a former Home Office Minister? In particular, has he seen the recommendation about the present practice of including paperwork in police frontline activities? The report says:
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1688
"These tasks may be essential, but they are not what most people would consider street policing. Their inclusion skews the statistics and gives an exaggerated impression of the Government's success in returning police officers to street duties".
Is that not a more pressing, urgent and important issue in the fight against crime than the Identity Cards Bill?
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |