| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, clearly, when we have those discussions on protecting the UK position, regional assistance is an important objective.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, did the Minister notice the article in the Times on 17 January in which Monsieur Delors is reported as praising
Britain for staying out of the failing euro? If he believes that we are sensible to stay out, surely we would not want to go in under those circumstances.
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I had hoped that the House would resist the temptation to use this rather small Question about the accounting systems of small businesses to raise the whole question of the pros and cons of the euro. One thing that is absolutely clear is that a five-minute debate on the pros and cons of the euro will do nothing for large or small businesses.
Baroness Miller of Hendon: My Lords, under new Labour business regulation has grown by 53 per cent since 1997 costing, together with increased taxation, some £15 billion every year. How are these horrendous barriers to be overcome by small businesses trying to compete in the single European market? Could the Minister tell the House what the Government are going to do about those two specific problems and when they are going to do it? I know he said that this is a small Question, but it is a very important one, particularly to small businesses.
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, to answer a question based on such a contentious assumption, which is totally in dispute, about the scale or amount of regulation would be quite improper. We can have a debate about the amount of regulation, how it is defined and its costs in taxation, but I cannot accept that that is a correct assumption on which to have this debate.
BBC Charter
2.58 p.m.
Lord Barnett asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What plans they have concerning the renewal of the BBC's charter.
Lord Barnett: My Lords, I am obliged for that Answer. Does my noble friend accept that during the debate on the Hutton report, whatever differing views there were, there was a strong view across all sectors of your Lordships' House that the BBC should be a strong and independent organisation in the future? Is there not a great danger that the review could become a party political football if, for example, it is mixed up with a possible general election next year? In the circumstances, would my noble friend be prepared to
consider, or at least ask the Prime Minister and the Cabinet to consider, bringing forward the completion of the review to early next year so that it remains outside any discussion on a possible general election, thus retaining a strong and independent BBC, a broadcasting corporation which has earned the admiration of the world?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I know no more than my noble friend Lord Barnett about the date of the next general election, but I do know that for a number of decades it has been considered proper to review the charter of the BBC every 10 years. That has not always been the case, but more recently it has been so. The BBC is given a degree of security and knowledge that its position will be re-examined, which is worth doing. To change that timetable for a putative date for the general election seems a poor bargain.
Lord McNally: My Lords, does the Minister recall that during the passage of the Communications Bill, much comment was made about the undue influence of Mr Ed Richards, a special adviser at No. 10, on the outcome of that legislation? Now we are told that there is another blue-sky thinker ensconced in No. 10 who is seeking to influence the outcome of the BBC charter review. If the Minister does not know, I am talking about the noble Lord, Lord Birt. Can he assure the House that the DCMS will play its proper role in the charter review to protect it from influences from other Whitehall departments, including Downing Street?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I had to look around because I was slightly taken aback by the assertion that the noble Lord, Lord Birt, has a role in the charter review. I turned around because, of course, the noble Lord, Lord Burns, has a special role to play in that review, and we are very grateful to him and to the colleagues who will be appointed to join him in bringing forward an independent view, confirming the independence of the charter review procedure.
Lord Barnett: My Lords, perhaps I may try again with my noble friend. I hope he does not mind if I say that I found his previous response wholly inadequate. He said that we should not change the approximate 10-year review system that has lasted for so long, but I was not asking him to do so. Does he agree that if this House and Parliament were formally to complete the review by early next year, it need not be implemented until 2006, which is the date in question?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I did not say that there are no circumstances in which we should not change the 10-year review interval; I said that we should not do it for a bad reason. Changing the interval for a reason such as proposed by my noble friend, which would be in unjustified knowledge and anticipation of the date of the next general election, would be a bad one.
Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords, is the Minister aware that his answer to my noble friend
about the involvement of the noble Lord, Lord Birt, left confusion more confounded since he made no clear statement about whether the noble Lord, Lord Birt, is informally or formally—as a private citizen or as an occupant of No. 10 Downing Street—playing an acknowledged, deliberate part in the process?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I said nothing about the noble Lord, Lord Birt. I expressed my gratitude to the noble Lord, Lord Burns, for agreeing to participate in the charter review process, bringing to it independence, intellectual probity and strength. I said nothing about the noble Lord, Lord Birt, who is perfectly entitled to participate, as the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan, said, as a private citizen.
Lord Roberts of Conwy: My Lords, would the noble Lord define what he means by the "independence of the BBC"? Is that purely independence from government?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the words I used in my first Answer were, "a strong BBC, independent of government".
Illegal Workers: Morecambe Bay Tragedy
3.4 p.m.
Lord Dholakia asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether, in the light of events in Morecambe Bay, they will consider allowing asylum seekers whose applications are pending to take up lawful employment.
Lord Dholakia: My Lords, first, I congratulate the noble Baroness on becoming Peer of the Year.
Our hearts go out to the families of those who lost their lives in Morecambe Bay, in particular those who lost their only source of income. I know that the Minister shares our concern about human trafficking, which now seems to be more profitable than trafficking drugs. Does the Minister agree that the ugly side of this equation is that countless people have lost their lives when being trafficked across frontiers? Those who survive then become victims of exploitation in sweatshops, in cheap labour and in prostitution. Can she explain what is being done to
deal with those who mastermind such operations? How many prosecutions have been brought and is there a Europe-wide strategy to deal with this issue?Would it not be appropriate to allow asylum seekers to work so that there is some dignity while their applications are being considered?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his congratulations. I do not believe that it was deserved, but I am very grateful to all noble Lords.
I share the concerns expressed by the noble Lord about human trafficking because what happened in Morecambe Bay was, of course, a human tragedy first and foremost. The Government are absolutely committed to reducing the numbers engaged in illegal working and the Immigration Service regularly disrupts illegal working activity. Between April and June 2003 the Immigration Service reported carrying out 79 illegal working operations of which 27 were aimed at detecting five or more illegal workers. Between October and November last year the number of reported operations increased by over 75 per cent on the second quarter to 141, while the operations aimed at detecting five or more illegal workers rose by over 175 per cent to 75.
I turn to the point made by the noble Lord about allowing people to work. Noble Lords will know that we have significantly reduced the time it takes to determine applications, which is of the greatest assistance. We want people to come here by legal means and we are seeking to take out the illegality in the system because it brings tragedies of this kind. We shall eradicate it if it is humanly possible so to do.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page