Business of the House

– in the House of Commons at 12:31 pm on 27 January 2005.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

The business for next week will be as follows:

Monday 31 January—Consideration in Committee of the Constitutional Reform Bill [Lords].

Tuesday 1 February—Continuation of consideration in Committee of the Constitutional Reform Bill [Lords].

Wednesday 2 February—Motion on the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2005–06, followed by motions on the Local Government Finance Report (England) 2005–06 and the Local Government Finance Report (England) 2003–04: Amending Report 2005.

Thursday 3 February—Remaining stages of the Child Benefit Bill.

Friday 4 February—Private Members' Bills.

The provisional business for the following week will be:

Monday 7 February—Remaining stages of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill.

Tuesday 8 FebruaryOpposition Day [4th Allotted Day]. There will be a debate on a motion in the name of the Liberal Democrats. Subject to be announced.

Wednesday 9 FebruarySecond Reading of the European Union Bill.

Thursday 10 February—Remaining stages of the Identity Cards Bill.

Friday 11 February—The House will not be sitting.

I should also like to inform the House that the business in Westminster Hall for February will be:

Thursday 3 February— A debate on rehabilitation and healthier workplaces.

Thursday 10 February—A debate on the report from the Health Committee on obesity.

Thursday 24 February—A debate on the report from the International Development Committee on migration and development.

The House will also wish to be reminded that, subject to the progress of business, we will rise for the half-term week on Thursday 10 February and return on Monday 21 February.

Photo of Oliver Heald Oliver Heald Shadow Secretary of State (Justice), Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Will the Leader of the House join me in remembering the suffering of the victims of the holocaust on holocaust memorial day, 60 years after the first camp was liberated, and will he pay tribute to the survivors and their families? The Prime Minister and my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition are, of course, attending today's remembrance service in Westminster Hall.

Following the publication of the European Union Bill, and the announcement of a Bill to impose house arrest on terrorists, will the leader of the House give us the full timetable for those Bills? Is it his intention that they will be debated on the Floor of the House?

The lottery distributor the Big Lottery Fund has closed funding after 31 May, because it is awaiting the National Lottery Bill. Will the right hon. Gentleman say when we can expect to debate it?

The Management of Offenders and Sentencing Bill seems to have become stalled in the other place, with the Government having postponed Second Reading twice now. Is there a problem, or can we expect to debate the Bill here soon, as thousands of prison and probation officers are waiting to know what will happen to their jobs?

May we have an urgent statement about programming of legislation, in the light of what has happened in the Committee considering the Identity Cards Bill? There has been no debate on five of its most important clauses because of the draconian guillotine, and half the Bill remains undiscussed despite an extra hour's consideration today. Only one sitting remains.

The Leader of the House will know that the Treasury Committee has said that two months' notice of the date of the Budget should be given. If he will not give us the date, can he at least explain why not? If we cannot have the date, may we at least have an urgent debate on the Committee's report, published today, and on the green budget from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the highly regarded independent think-tank, which confirmed the existence of an £11million black hole in the Chancellor's sums and also confirms the practicality of Conservative plans to cut taxes. We all remember that the Chancellor's first act in his first Budget after the previous election was to raise taxes by hiking national insurance. Is it not the case that he would have to raise taxes by £11 billion if Labour scraped back into government? Can we not debate in Government time the stark choice for Britain—more taxes under Labour or tax cuts under the Conservatives?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I will deal with that nonsense in due course. First, I join the hon. Gentleman in acknowledging—as I know the whole House will wish to do—the importance of holocaust day. The message must be, "Never, ever again." I also hope that we will all work together to confront neo-Nazi forces still in British politics. We did that with the National Front, including through the campaigns of the Anti-Nazi League some years ago, and we must do the same with the British National party today. I also wish to thank Mr. Speaker for allowing the use of Westminster Hall for the special ceremony, attended by Her Majesty the Queen, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, to commemorate holocaust day.

Discussions will be held through the usual channels on the European Union Bill, and we will table a programme motion in due course. However, it has been the case in the past that EU treaty amendment Bills were heard on the Floor of the House, and I see no reason to change that.

I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman when the National Lottery Bill will come to the House, nor can I give him information at this stage on the Management of Offenders and Sentencing Bill. However, his allegation about that Bill is wrong.

On the Identity Cards Bill, the truth is that the issues have been debated for many years. The draft Bill was subject to detailed scrutiny before being introduced—

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

Yes, it was. It was subject to detailed scrutiny and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary took that into account in drawing up the Bill that was eventually introduced. It is very interesting to note that an unusual amount of filibustering took place in Committee on this Bill. I do not know whether that was deliberate, to allow questions such as the hon. Gentleman has just put claiming that the Bill had insufficient time: I merely note what happened. The time that we have provided for the Identity Cards Bill is fully adequate for its remaining stages and we do not intend to make any changes.

I am not able to give the hon. Gentleman a date for the Budget and I do not think that he seriously expects me to do so. He mentioned a black hole, but the real black hole is in Tory finances. They propose £35 billion-worth of cuts, which is inconceivable and completely unrealistic, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has repeatedly made clear. They also propose £4 billion in tax cuts, but nobody—except Conservative Front Benchers—believes that they could have tax cuts, massive savings and cuts in spending on that scale. They simply could not do everything at the same time.

It is very interesting to note that the Leader of the Opposition's own policy document on taxes says that the options discussed in that paper represent a menu from which a Conservative Government may draw when formulating their Budgets. It goes on to say that the presence of a particular option in that paper or in its successors in the consultation series does not constitute any guarantee or promise that the particular option in question will form part of any Conservative Budget. So, we cannot even believe the £4 billion tax cuts that they say they will introduce. The contrast is between a Labour Government, who have introduced economic stability of a kind that we have not known for generations—high employment, low mortgage rates, low interest rates, low inflation and economic growth year by year—and the mess and the black hole created by the last Conservative economic plan.

Photo of Ronnie Campbell Ronnie Campbell Labour, Blyth Valley

My right hon. Friend will be aware that in south-east Northumberland we have had a black Wednesday, with the announcement that 500 jobs at a pharmaceutical factory are to go, and of course the loss of Ellington colliery, with 300-odd jobs—nearly 900 jobs altogether. Will my right hon. Friend arrange a debate, not on the narrow subject of south-east Northumberland but on the north-east as a whole, so that at least the Members for that region could point out the disadvantages that they are getting from the Government?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I know that, especially to my hon. Friend, the issue of collieries such as Ellington is very important, and I share and identify with him on that matter, representing as I do a similar constituency, where coal mining is an indelible part of its tradition—indeed, in its case, its present. Obviously we are very sad about the closure of Ellington colliery and we will fight to preserve all jobs wherever and whenever we can. However, a balance needs to be struck. The difference between the situation now and under the Conservatives, when mines and pits were closed by the hundred, is that then there was nowhere else for the miners to go. There were no alternative jobs. When my hon. Friend says that he and his constituency have been let down by this Government, the truth is that, as I believe he is on the record as saying, unemployment has been cut massively in his constituency. There are job prospects in the region because the north-east is doing better than it has done for generations. We must recognise that there will be a process of switch in jobs and a process of churning, but at least we are going to work with those involved to find them new job opportunities.

Photo of Mr Paul Tyler Mr Paul Tyler Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

May the Liberal Democrats entirely endorse what the Leader of the House has just said about holocaust memorial day? I am sure that colleagues in all parts of the House will do so.

I am sure we all hope that the elections in Iraq this weekend will produce the maximum turnout and suffer the minimum disruption from terrorists. When will the Prime Minister be in a position to make a statement on the outcome of those elections, and the implications for the presence of British forces in Iraq? In particular, when will there be a timetable for the reduction in those forces and their replacement by troops from Iraq or from other Islamic countries, as the security situation permits? This morning, No. 10 Downing street has indicated that that prospect is under review. When can we be given a firm exit strategy, and does the Leader of the House accept that the mere presence of British and American troops in Iraq may feed that insurgency and disruption?

On the European Union Bill, the Leader of the House was very coy last week when I asked him about the timetable. Bearing in mind the timetable not only in this House but in the other place, can he now give us a firm indication of whether he intends and hopes that Royal Assent will be achieved before the end of April?

Can the Leader of the House give an undertaking that the Home Secretary will be prepared to give us a statement on the important issue of deaths caused by police drivers? The Leader of the House may have seen an important analysis in the Daily Express today, which reveals that 55 crashes a day take place involving police vehicles, leading to 30 deaths every year. I have raised this subject on numerous occasions, not least because, as the Leader of the House may recall, I was a member of a police authority for many years. Successive Home Secretaries have said that the situation is improving, but it is clearly deteriorating; may we have a statement?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's comments about holocaust day, which reflect a common position throughout the House. I will bear in mind what he said about Iraq. Sunday will be a historic day for Iraq, and the extent of Iraqi participation in the election is enormous, with 8,000 candidates, 150,000 officials and thousands of polling stations. Whatever we felt about the war—I respect the different view that he took about military action—our common objective is for democracy to triumph over terrorism, bloodshed and attempts to bomb Iraq back into Islamic fundamentalism and tyranny of Saddam Hussein's kind. That must be the choice, so we all want the elections to succeed.

The hon. Gentleman asks when British forces might withdraw and mentions the exit strategy. I understand those points, but our motto is, "We're not quitters". We will not turn our back on the Iraqi people or the Iraqi Interim Government. We will ensure that we finish the job and support the transition of Iraq from tyranny into democracy because that is the clear strategy on which we have embarked. Of course we will want to withdraw British forces as soon as possible, but we will not do that except at the request of the Iraqi Government. If they want us to go, we will of course go, but meanwhile we are stabilising and reinforcing their security forces and providing those forces with the opportunity to take over.

I cannot provide the hon. Gentleman with a timetable for the European Union Bill at this stage. However, it might depend on Opposition co-operation. If the Conservatives, especially, want the Bill to go through quickly, they can provide us with a ready-made plan through the usual channels. It might, however, suit them for it not to go through quickly, so it is their choice.

We fully accept the seriousness of the issue of deaths on the road caused by police drivers. The Association of Chief Police Officers is well aware of the criticisms that have been levelled. It launched new guidance last year and there is considerable investment in driver training in the police service. Management controls are constantly reviewed to ensure that robust risk assessments are in place and that the maintenance of safety is the priority at all times. However, there is no question but that the numbers are too high.

Photo of Mr Harry Barnes Mr Harry Barnes Labour, North East Derbyshire

Is my right hon. Friend aware that two thirds of a massive problem in my constituency has been cracked; first, by the provision of £104 million by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to clear up Avenue cokeworks, and secondly with £4 million from the Department of Trade and Industry to clear the neighbouring Grassmoor lagoons? However, the third aspect of the problem is the health of the workers at the Avenue site and that of the surrounding community. Responses about the situation from the Department of Health have not been helpful. May we have a statement from a Health Minister to show that the Department is on to the issue and taking up information from the other two Departments about the serious contamination that occurred on the sites?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I am sure that the whole House will support me in paying tribute to my hon. Friend, who has been an assiduous and effective parliamentarian during his time here, and wishing him all the best for his future retirement.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

It is tremendous investment, as my hon. Friend says, and I pay tribute to him for campaigning tirelessly for it. If I may say so, the investment is typical of the Labour Government, who invest in local communities, unlike the situation under our predecessors when we experienced savage cuts. The health of the workers concerned is uppermost in our minds and I am sure that my hon. Friend will continue to be vigilant on the matter.

Photo of Julian Lewis Julian Lewis Shadow Minister (Cabinet Office)

May we have a statement from the Foreign Secretary, after he has had a chance to investigate the matter, on the information contained in early-day motion 591, which was tabled by my hon. Friend Mr. Rosindell?

[That this House notes with great concern the recent admission, following the discovery of documents in the Lithuanian Special Archive, that both the country's Foreign Minister, Antanas Valionis, and, even more importantly, the Director-General of the State Security Department, Arvydas Pocius, were Reserve Officers in the Soviet KGB; deplores the dismissal of the Director of the Lithuanian Special Archive; believes that there are implications for the security of NATO, notwithstanding the welcome improvement in relations between Russia and the West; and calls upon the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to make a statement about these disturbing revelations.]

The early-day motion relates to the recent admissions that not only the Foreign Minister of Lithuania, which is now a NATO country, but the head of Lithuania's principal intelligence service were reserve officers in the Soviet KGB. It also notes the worrying fact that it appears that the head of documentation archive in which the information was discovered has been sacked. This is a very disturbing matter. We are remembering the Nazi holocaust today, but there was a Soviet holocaust as well. In addition, there are implications for NATO security. I should be grateful if the Leader of the House conveyed to the Foreign Secretary the need to look into this serious matter.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I shall certainly convey the hon. Gentleman's request to the Foreign Secretary, because he is right about the seriousness of the matter. I understand that there is particular sensitivity in the international Jewish community about the implications of the discovery and that the Lithuanian Parliament has established a commission to investigate allegations of links between senior public figures of the KGB. It held its first meeting yesterday and I cannot prejudge its findings.

I am absolutely bowled over that the hon. Gentleman did not ask about the diary of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. I can only assume that he is giving my right hon. Friend the day off because it is his birthday.

Photo of Tom Clarke Tom Clarke Labour, Coatbridge and Chryston

In view of the ongoing human rights abuses, death and destruction in Darfur, does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be appropriate to have a debate on the Floor of the House so that we can consider, for example, the remarkable revelations in The Independent yesterday, the excellent job that the Department for International Development is trying to do despite the obstruction, and, perhaps above all, the Government's view of the role of the United Nations Security Council in a humanitarian crisis made all the worse by the fact that it is man-made and continuing?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I completely agree that the crisis is a stain on Africa. Everybody, including leaders throughout the continent of Africa, is working with us to try to solve it. My right hon. Friend will have the opportunity to press the matter further at DFID questions next week. I acknowledge the way in which he has continually brought it to the attention of the House.

Photo of George Young George Young Chair, Standards and Privileges Committee, Chair, Standards and Privileges Committee

May we have an early debate on the Government's proposals for the House of Lords? Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that, at the Labour party conference, the Lord Chancellor said:

"We need between now and the preparation of our manifesto to identify a solution which makes for a representative chamber, and then commit ourselves to it, in the manifesto."?

Did the Leader of the House read The Daily Telegraph on Monday, which reports that when asked whether there would be proposals ready for the manifesto, the Leader of the House of Lords said no? May we have a debate, so that we can find out precisely what is going on?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I invite the right hon. Gentleman to read the interview that I gave to the New Statesman today. I thought that he was going to quote me—it would have added a bit of spice to his question. We are committed to reform of the House of Lords. The issue now is not only its composition and reaching a consensus on it, but the powers of the second Chamber—how to stop it vetoing House of Commons-initiated legislation and make it perform its proper function, which is scrutinising, revising and improving House of Commons-initiated legislation. That is where the debate lies and we intend to make progress on it.

Photo of Ms Lorna Fitzsimons Ms Lorna Fitzsimons Labour, Rochdale

Has my right hon. Friend had time to glance at The Guardian this morning? If he has, he has seen a story headed "Manchester may face congestion charging". Will he confirm that at Transport questions on 21 December, in response to a question asked by my hon. Friend Mr. Stringer, the Secretary of State for Transport stated categorically that, in its pursuit of light rail and an integrated transport system, Greater Manchester would not be forced to have a congestion charge?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I can confirm that my right hon. Friend made it perfectly clear that there would be no draconian pressure put on Manchester to introducing congestion charging. The matter is one for Manchester, in discussion with the Government, to decide. Progress on the tram system is a parallel, but entirely separate, matter.

Photo of Peter Viggers Peter Viggers Conservative, Gosport

May we have an early debate on Government industrial policy, perhaps linked with the subject of the integrity of Government? I think that they should be linked because, earlier this month, I received information from a reliable source that tens of millions of pounds were to be given to Swan Hunter shipyard, but in response to questions I put to the Ministry of Defence and the Department for Trade and Industry, the MOD replied:

"The Ministry of Defence does not provide financial support to the defence industry and the DTI replied that it

"has awarded just one grant of £1.2 million in September 2000". —[Hansard, 11 January 2005; Vol. 429, c. 381W, 148W.]

Yet in today's newspaper, I read that an agreement was reached on 10 December that the MOD would give £84 million to Swan Hunter. If the Government are giving a pre-election bung, we need to know why. Although, of course, Ministers never lie in reply to questions, is it not worth a debate if an answer is so inconsistent with the truth that it is impossible to reconcile the two?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I do not accept that there is inconsistency with the truth or that there has been any attempt to mislead the hon. Gentleman. The Secretaries of State concerned will note his points and will want to clarify the matter to his satisfaction.

Photo of Dennis Skinner Dennis Skinner Member, Labour Party National Executive Committee

Following the request made by my hon. Friend Mr. Campbell regarding the north-east, but in relation to coal generally, will the Leader of the House arrange for a debate or a statement by the appropriate Minister on UK Coal's activities, which should be investigated? With 49,000 acres of land, some of which will be exploited after the closure of Ellington, UK Coal is more of a property company than a coal company. The Government intervened to replace some of the privatised rail companies that succeeded British Rail, and it is high time that we got rid of UK Coal, which is practising the art of shutting pits; otherwise, there will soon be no pits left. UK Coal is continuing the tradition of Thatcher and Heseltine because it wants to make a lot of money out of the land.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

My hon. Friend is a powerful advocate for the miners and always has been, and I pay tribute to him for that. The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry will take heed of what he has said, particularly the charge that he has made.

I find the present situation puzzling. World demand for coal and therefore the price of coal are higher than they have been for a long time, and mine managers in my constituency say their collieries are now in a much better position now than they were years ago. It seems contradictory to be closing pits.

Photo of David Burnside David Burnside UUP, South Antrim

Today—not next week—the Prime Minister is meeting the leader of Sinn Fein-IRA, Gerry Adams, at Chequers. It is the first meeting since the Chief Constable expressed his opinion that IRA was responsible for the biggest bank robbery in British history at the Northern bank. Will the Leader of the House ask his right hon. Friend to come to the House and make a statement to inform the House what sanctions will be imposed on Sinn Fein-IRA? It is not operating as a normal democratic party and its members do not deserve the facilities for democrats who sit in this House.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I know that that is the hon. Gentleman's view: to his credit, he has expressed it consistently over a number of weeks. However, as I am sure all our constituents understand, it is the Prime Minister's responsibility to try to get the peace settlement and the devolution settlement in Northern Ireland back on track, reinforced and locked in. I know that the hon. Gentleman supports that objective and I am sure that he agrees that Sinn Fein is an important part of the democratically elected political landscape in Northern Ireland. The recent criminality involving the IRA is extremely serious; it is why the process has stalled after seeming to reach a promising point. My right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland will note the hon. Gentleman's comments.

Photo of George Mudie George Mudie Labour, Leeds East

The Leader of the House must be aware of the deep concern and genuine unease of staff in the health service, local government and the civil service about Government-proposed policy changes to their pensions, which the House has not had a specific opportunity to discuss. Given that the consultation period ends in March, can my right hon. Friend confirm that the House will be able to discuss the policy changes before the Government take the final decisions?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

Regulations have been laid, but they have not been debated yet, as my hon. Friend said. Of course, there will be an opportunity to scrutinise them. My hon. Friend will understand that there is a difficult choice of the kind that we have to make in government from time to time.

Everyone, including the trade unions and my hon. Friend, accepts that public sector pensions must be reformed to cope with the problem of an ageing society. Despite the high levels of employment, there are proportionately fewer people in employment to help to fund pensions. The public sector must be reformed, just as we reformed our own salaries. I rebut the charge that Members of Parliament have not reformed their own pensions. We have done so, and we are phasing out early retirement privileges in line with other parts of the public sector. The regulations were introduced to help to create greater funding stability in local government and keep the council tax down. That is one of the difficult balances that the Deputy Prime Minister had to strike.

Photo of Nicholas Winterton Nicholas Winterton Conservative, Macclesfield

Will the Leader of the House look again at the way in which programming operates? Could he look at some of the sound proposals which, sadly, he did not accept, made by the Procedure Committee, in light of the unfortunate situation concerning the Identity Cards Bill? It is very sad that such a critical Bill should leave Standing Committee with many provisions inadequately debated or not debated at all. I should be grateful if the right hon. Gentleman would give me such an assurance.

On a matter related to what the Prime Minister said in Davos about climate change, could we have a debate or statement on nuclear energy, one of the few clean sources of mass energy generation, in the near future? That is important, given that world temperatures could rise dramatically by 11 per cent. before the end of the century.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

Climate change is, indeed, a threat to the very existence of the planet. The hon. Gentleman is right, and he shares a common agenda with the Government and the Prime Minister, which is why my right hon. Friend is taking a lead on the issue during our presidency of the G8 countries. Indeed, he promoted a much more effective and radical policy only last night. On the question of the nuclear industry, I do not agree that nuclear power is the only alternative. Renewable sources of energy offer a far more attractive future, both for this country and the world, than continuing to build expensive nuclear plants, which have huge waste legacies and huge liabilities for the Exchequer.

On the question of programming—of course we will keep it under review. The House made a decision on the matter only a few months ago, but I accept that the hon. Gentleman was robust in holding a different view. However, we will look at the issue. He will concede that whatever difficulties have arisen in relation to the Identity Cards Bill, programming works well and consensually in most cases. However, that appears not to be the case with that Bill.

Photo of John Cryer John Cryer Labour, Hornchurch

This is not the question that I was originally going to ask, but following the questions from my hon. Friends the Members for Blyth Valley (Mr. Campbell) and for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) about the UK coal industry, coal has become such a pressing national issue that it has to be examined. The deep-mine industry has fallen into the clutches of a bunch of asset-strippers who, even when offered money by the Government, have pressed ahead with pit closures, using Government money for redundancy payments. Given that background, there is only one answer—public intervention and public ownership. Otherwise, within a decade, we will not have any deep mines left in Britain, so we need a debate or at least a statement.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

If my hon. Friend's pessimistic forecast—I am not suggesting that it is unrealistic in the circumstances—were true, the worldwide demand for clean coal, particularly from China and India, should mean that Britain is a position to contribute by exporting technology and expertise. The end of coal would therefore be a counter-productive strategy. Indeed, given the high demand for coal, it is difficult to envisage such a strategy being employed, but the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry is well aware of the difficulties, and will have noted his powerful point.

Photo of Hywel Williams Hywel Williams Shadow PC Spokesperson (Work and Pensions), Shadow PC Spokesperson (Health), Shadow PC Spokesperson (International Development)

Could we have a statement from the Home Secretary on standards for answering correspondence to the Home Office? I contacted the previous Home Secretary, Mr. Blunkett, on 15 September about threats to some of my constituents and organised harassment of a local company. As I did not receive a reply, I wrote again on 2 November, and again on 15 November, marking my letter "urgent". I accept that the right hon. Gentleman had other concerns at the time, but on 16 December, I wrote to the new Home Secretary congratulating him on his appointment and asking him for a reply. Here we are on 27 January, and I still have not heard anything. That is either gross discourtesy or gross incompetence, and I should like the Home Secretary to come to the House to answer for himself.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

The hon. Gentleman makes a serious allegation. He is entitled to early replies on important constituency matters. There are Home Office questions on Monday, so he can remind the Home Secretary of that. I am sure, however, that my right hon. Friend will have noted the point that he made, and that the problem will be resolved.

Photo of Michael Lord Michael Lord Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Order. I remind the House that hon. Members should ask one question, which should be brief and about next week's business.

Photo of Wayne David Wayne David Labour, Caerphilly

Given that we now have a fair question before us on a forthcoming EU constitutional referendum, can we have a debate at the earliest opportunity on the importance of strong EU external border controls?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

Indeed, I strongly agree with my hon. Friend. The Government are committed to strong EU border and immigration controls, and we are prepared to continue spending the money and investing it to ensure that our border controls and security are tightened up against illegal migration. By contrast, alternative proposals from the Conservatives would result in savage cuts in immigration and border control budgets, as well as the adoption of systems that are far too expensive. The Australian system, for example, would cost £50,000 per head, which does not square with existing spending patterns or fiscal probity.

Photo of Andrew MacKay Andrew MacKay Conservative, Bracknell

I hesitate to be harsh with the poor Leader of the House after his humiliation at the hands of the Government Whips yesterday, when all his motions were defeated on the Floor of the House. However, I take issue with his reply to my hon. Friend Mr. Heald, and his suggestion that filibustering had taken place during the Committee stage of the Identity Cards Bill. That is a direct attack on the senior and distinguished Chairman of that Committee, my hon. Friend Derek Conway. The Leader of the House will recall that Mr. Blunkett had to come to the House and apologised for making allegations of filibustering, which are an attack on the Chair. Would the Leader of the House like to apologise to my hon. Friend?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I am advised that the Chairman repeatedly intervened in Committee, and tried to call Conservative Back Benchers to order. The Conservative Front Bench is all over the place in its policy on identity cards, as there is complete disagreement between the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Home Secretary. That may well be reflected in the chaos among Tory Back Benchers and the filibustering in Committee.

On the question of sitting hours, I am grateful that the right hon. Gentleman voted in the same Lobby as me. [Interruption.] No, it is not a question of humiliation. I put a motion before the House with a clear choice, and it was carried. I voted against the amendment and, like the right hon. Gentleman, I would have preferred to keep the 7 o'clock conclusion. My job as Leader of the House is to try to enable the House to come to consensus. We did so last night, as there was a clear decision, unlike the last time this was decided, and that is that.

Photo of Richard Shepherd Richard Shepherd Conservative, Aldridge-Brownhills

Now that the Home Secretary has announced his intention to seek urgently powers of house arrest over British citizens—and, incidentally, put us on a par with Burma and Zimbabwe—will the Leader of the House make sure that he makes a statement next week confirming that there will be no guillotines or timetables on such an important matter, and furthermore that the Joint Committee on Human Rights will have enough time between First and Second Reading to report to both Houses of Parliament, so that when the matter is discussed on the Floor of the House we are in a position to examine the matter in hand properly?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

Of course that is an important matter. The exact handling of any legislation will be discussed and agreed through the usual channels. It is an agonisingly difficult choice for anyone involved in Government and for the whole House to strike a balance between what the Home Secretary is proposing and any better solution to the problem. It is important that those who have been involved in terrorist activity, or of whom we have intelligence that they are involved in terrorist activity and could, for all I know, be plotting to blow up the House of Commons, are dealt with properly, and at the same time that the rule of law applies and civil liberties are protected as far as possible.

The Home Secretary set out his proposals in a statement to the House, quite properly, and he was questioned about them, but he made it clear that those proposals were part of a debate in order to strike the right balance. I note that the Muslim Council of Britain, for example, has welcomed the proposals, pointing out that they end the discrimination between foreign and British citizens. The council wants to see a situation where civil liberties are protected but we are properly guarded against the threat of suicide bombers and the like. I am sure that is what everybody wants, including the hon. Gentleman.

Photo of Martin Salter Martin Salter Labour, Reading West

Following the comments of my hon. Friend Mr. Mudie, the Leader of the House will be aware of early-day motion 579.

[That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Local Government Pension Scheme (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2004 (S.I., 2004, No. 3372), dated 17th December 2004, a copy of which was laid before this House on 22nd December, be annulled.]

It seeks, in the form of a prayer, to annul statutory instrument 3372. That would have the effect of reducing the pension rights of hundreds of thousands of local government workers, and it was laid by the Government, rather disgracefully, on the last day before Christmas. How many signatures do we need to get on early-day motion 579 before the House is granted a debate and a vote on such a vital issue, which will affect the terms and conditions of many of our constituents?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I have dealt with the substance of the matter, but on my hon. Friend's question about how it will proceed, the Government are aware, as is the Deputy Prime Minister, of the strength of feeling reflected in the early-day motion, which my hon. Friend expressed, quite properly, and which was also expressed earlier. We will bear that in mind as we take the statutory instrument through and deal with it, as we must, before the House.

Photo of Graham Stringer Graham Stringer Labour, Manchester, Blackley

I, together with other right hon. and hon. Members representing constituencies in north Manchester, received a very unwelcome fax this morning from Phil Davidson of BAE Systems. The fax announced the end of defence repairs and maintenance at the Chaderton factory. That will mean the complete end of manufacturing at that plant, which has manufactured aeroplanes for more than 70 years, and it will mean the loss of 335 jobs. Can my right hon. Friend arrange for a debate next week in order that we can discuss whether the Nimrod mark 4 programme can be restarted, as that is probably the only chance that workers at the plant will have of remaining in employment at another manufacturing base in south Manchester?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I will draw the attention of the Secretary of State for Defence and the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to my hon. Friend's important question on behalf of his constituents. The plant was a flagship local company which, I think I am right in saying, built the Lancaster bomber. It is disappointing that the situation has arisen, although there are huge changes in defence procurement and priorities. I know my right hon. Friends will take careful note and look at the situation in the light of what he said and the campaign that he has led so ably to defend the future of the company.

Photo of Douglas Hogg Douglas Hogg Conservative, Sleaford and North Hykeham

Can the Leader of the House provide an early debate on the selection of Committees—Select, Standing and other? That is particularly important as, after the election, we will be setting up Select Committees. Does he agree that it is undesirable that those on the Front Benches should have the influence that they now have on the selection of Committees? It would be better by far if membership of a Committee were decided by ballot, with the Selection Committee filling up only the residue.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I understand the point that the right hon. and learned Gentleman makes, but the House voted on the matter a couple of years ago and decided against the course that he advocates.

Photo of Desmond Turner Desmond Turner Labour, Brighton, Kemptown

Climate change has reached the top of the political agenda. It is one of the two prime topics set out by the Prime Minister for our presidency of the G8 and of the European Union. Does my right hon. Friend agree, especially in the light of the fact that the Government are currently consulting on a review of climate change policy, that whether nuclear power, renewable energy, both or other measures are important, it is time—a very apposite time—to have a full debate on climate change policy on the Floor of the House?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I understand the impetus behind my hon. Friend's request. Climate change is one of the most critical issues facing the world and therefore the House. That is why the Prime Minister is leading the international drive towards effective global action to deal with climate change. When there are opportunities to debate it, we will take them.

Photo of Alistair Carmichael Alistair Carmichael Shadow Spokesperson (Energy and Climate Change), Liberal Democrat Spokesperson (Energy and Climate Change)

Can a small amount of time be made available for the appropriate Minister from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to explain to us what representations will be made with regard to the British citizen Kenny Richey, who has been on death row in Ohio for the past 18 years but who this week had his appeal upheld? The court there made an order for his release or retrial within 90 days. That takes this from being a matter relating to the judiciary to a matter that is political. For the Ohio authorities to retry after 18 years a man to whom they gave a plea bargain offering him a sentence of 11 years would be nothing short of outrageous.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I understand the point that the hon. Gentleman makes. As he knows, Her Majesty's consul general has lobbied persistently on the case and may well have had some influence on the outcome. We will monitor it carefully and continue to work on it to see that it is suitably progressed.

Photo of Dan Norris Dan Norris Labour, Wansdyke

The ill fated Bath spa project is four years overdue and still not open, with no opening date in sight. It is £20 million over budget and it is costing every one of my constituents—every man, woman and child—the equivalent of £116 each in waste. May we please have an urgent debate on local authority spending and some of the madcap councils—the one in question happens to be run by the Liberal Democrats and the Tories—so that we can address the waste? As a Government we provide millions to local authorities. The Opposition parties talk about getting rid of waste, but this example clearly shows that they are off-beam and out of touch.

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

My hon. Friend paints a horrifying picture of Conservative-Liberal Democrat incompetence and failure to take forward important projects, as the Bath spa project undoubtedly is, in an effective and cost-efficient manner. I hope that the voters of Bath and all the voters in the next general election will bear in mind the prospect of a Labour Government on the one hand, and on the other—who knows?—perhaps a Conservative/Liberal Democrat-supported alternative, which would plunge the country into the boom and bust from which we recently escaped under Labour.

Photo of Jacqui Lait Jacqui Lait Shadow Minister, Home Affairs

May I press the right hon. Gentleman on the issue of the National Lottery Bill? Many charities will have been devastated by the announcement from the Big Lottery Fund that it will not give grants after the end of May. If he cannot promise any early progress on the Bill so that we can see it through this Parliament before the end of May, will he please ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport or the charities Minister to make a statement to the House about what the Government plan to do to help the charities that find themselves in such a terrible pickle?

Photo of David Taylor David Taylor Labour/Co-operative, North West Leicestershire

Has the Leader of the House seen early-day motion 593, which was tabled by my hon. Friend Mr. Reed, myself and others?

[That this House notes the decision of England World Cup winning captain Martin Johnson to announce his retirement from rugby at the end of this season; congratulates him on his outstanding contribution to Leicester Tigers, England and the British Lions over the last 15 years, culminating in England's Rugby World Cup victory in Sydney in November 2003, after success at club, international and Lions level; praises him for the respect in which he is held throughout the world of sport; and wishes him every success in his retirement.]

The motion marks this week's announcement of the retirement of one of the towering figures of global rugby, Martin Johnson, whose 15 years in the game culminated in the English world cup victory in Sydney. My right hon. Friend will no doubt agree that those achievements are well worth the knighthood that has been accorded to leading figures in other sports, but can he find time in next week's programme for a debate on the importance of international sport in promoting both individual well-being and the international standing, and indeed the economy, of the United Kingdom?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I very much agree with my hon. Friend. As Secretary of State for Wales, may I say how much I praise Martin Johnson, particularly as he ferociously led the England pack against Wales on far too many occasions? I know that the England team's performance since the heroic victory that he led in the world cup in Sydney has not been as good without his leadership. From Wales's point of view, that is a very good thing, especially since Wales is going to hammer England on Saturday week in the Millennium stadium.

Photo of David Cameron David Cameron Conservative, Witney

The Leader of the House can keep dreaming.

May we have an urgent debate on the implementation of the new railway timetable that was introduced in December? Now we have had the timetable for more than a month, it is quite clear in Oxfordshire that it is neither being delivered nor is it deliverable. Some services have almost never run on time. There is suspicion that the timetable benefits cities and harms rural areas, and genuine anger is building up. Can we have a debate early next week so that Ministers can hear in public just how bad things are on our rural railways?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

It is always difficult to get a timetable that satisfies absolutely everybody, but I am sure that there was no intention—the Secretary of State for Transport would not have agreed to it either—that rural services would be discriminated against in favour of cities or towns. Equally, I am sure that the Secretary of State will want to respond to the point that the hon. Gentleman has made on behalf of his constituency.

Photo of Michael Weir Michael Weir Scottish National Party, Angus

Is the Leader of the House aware of the concerns in Scotland about the proposal concerning aggravated trespass on royal or Crown lands in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill? Can he confirm whether the UK Government will press ahead and legislate on this matter for Scotland even if the majority of Members of the Scottish Parliament decide that it is properly an issue for the Scottish Parliament and decide to uphold the legislative decisions that they made on this very issue just last year in their landmark Land Reform Act? If he cannot tell the House the position, can the Home Secretary come to the House, preferably today, to address the important question of who calls the shots in making law in a devolved area for Scotland?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I understand the point that the hon. Gentleman makes, but I point out that the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill will have its remaining stages on Monday 7 February, as I announced just now. He will have an opportunity to put his point of view on that occasion. Meanwhile, I know that Home Office Ministers will have noted what he said.

Photo of Hugh Robertson Hugh Robertson Shadow Spokesperson (Culture, Media and Sport)

The report of the Iraq survey group and the initial report of the Volker inquiry both highlighted the extent of corruption at the United Nations during the oil-for-food scandal. Given that we now know that Saddam Hussein and his personal entourage benefited to the tune of $10 billion from that corruption and that the Secretary of State for Defence in this House has made a link between that money and the funding of the insurgency that is currently threatening the lives of British troops and civilians in Iraq, may we have a debate in Government time on the oil-for-food scandal, particularly so that we can find out whether the Government believe that the fault lies inside the UN itself or with the Security Council, which was constantly warned but took no action?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

As a Minister between 1999 and 2001, when the policy was enforced, I was concerned about the amount of oil being smuggled on Saddam's behalf and about the way in which the oil-for-food programme had been working. I am sure that there was no deliberate attempt on behalf of the Security Council or the United Nations Secretary-General or his officials to do that. The hon. Gentleman has made a very serious charge, and I know that the Foreign Secretary will want to consider it very carefully.

I make one other brief point: of course, what we knew was that Saddam was propping up his tyranny by the illegal raking off of oil-for-food money and oil revenues. That would still be going on if he were still in power. When we look at the balance on whether the military action was right or wrong, we have to decide whether, with all the difficulties that exist at the moment—I know that the hon. Gentleman agrees with me on this—an Iraq moving into democracy provides a better future for the Iraqi people than an Iraq trapped under Saddam's murderous and corrupt tyranny.

Photo of Robert Smith Robert Smith Opposition Deputy Chief Whip (Commons)

Earlier, in answer to questions on the scrutiny of the Identity Cards Bill, the Leader of the House said that there was division in the Conservative party on the Bill, and I think he will recognise that there is also division in his own party. Is it not precisely the time when Parliament should give maximum time to scrutiny of legislation when those on the Back Benches and Front Benches are not speaking with one voice? That is when Parliament can fulfil its greatest function in ensuring maximum scrutiny of legislation. Was it not only yesterday that, in speaking to his own report to the House, the Leader of the House recognised that there are currently at least two hours less time for debate on Thursdays than on any other day of business? Why has he scheduled this measure, which is controversial and divisive in the House, for debate on a day when there is less time for scrutiny, and when the Bill itself has not had proper scrutiny in its Standing Committee?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

I simply do not accept the charge as made. I have dealt with the point already, but let me look at the progress of the Identity Cards Bill a few days ago on 25 January. At column 228 of the Committee proceedings, the Chairman said:

"I am sure that the hon. Member for Cotswold will not be tempted to debate how many people live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, because that is not relevant to the amendment".

A few minutes later, he said:

"This is not a stand part debate", and he went on to say:

"Order. I am sorry, but the intervention is long and it is not relevant to the amendment."—[Official Report, Standing Committee B, 25 January 2005; c. 228–29.]

I could go on and on for pages upon pages of the Official Report. The truth is that I can only assume that a deliberate attempt has been made by those who are opposed to the Bill—I do not really know whether the Conservatives are opposed to it, but the Liberal Democrats certainly are, and we will remind the electors of that at the next general election—to filibuster the Bill and then say that it has not been debated properly.

Photo of Oliver Heald Oliver Heald Shadow Secretary of State (Justice), Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The Leader of the House has shamefully described the proceedings in the Identity Cards Bill Committee as involving a filibuster. When Mr. Salter made that point to the Chairman of the Committee, however, he said:

"If the hon. Member for Woking", who was speaking in this particular instance,

"had been filibustering, I would have called him to order by now."— [Official Report, Standing Committee B, 20 January 2005; c. 202.]

Although it is correct that, from the time to time, the Chairmen, as they always do, have made particular points, there has been no single occasion in the whole of the passage of the Bill on which anybody has been successfully accused of filibustering. In fact, no Chairman would allow it. In those circumstances, should not the Leader of the House withdraw, as the Home Secretary had to do in November 2003, and apologise to the House and to the Chair for the way in which he has gone on?

Photo of Peter Hain Peter Hain Chair, Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, The Secretary of State for Wales, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal

Further to that point of order, when one looks at just one sitting of the Committee, the fifth sitting on Tuesday morning, and sees the string of interventions from the Chair calling the Committee to order, one sees that it is way beyond the normal practice of chairing a Committee. If what happened was not filibustering in the precise meaning of the term, it was pretty close to it.

Photo of Michael Lord Michael Lord Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Filibustering is a term that means different things to different people on different occasions. I am quite sure that the Chairman of the Committee would have called any Member to order if they were deliberately filibustering. I think that we ought now to leave the matter where it is.