James Gray: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Government amendment 20. That schedule 7 be the Seventh schedule to the Bill. Clause 133 stand part. That schedule 8 be the Seventh schedule to the Bill. Clauses 134 and 135 stand part. Government amendment 19.
James Gray: It is a pleasure to see you.
James Gray: I call Alan Brown, if he wishes to wind up.
James Gray: The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point, but he is of course not correct.
James Gray: Well, I am answering the question in that case. The answer is that I will put the Question on clause 271 now and, depending on what the majority decides, it will either remain in the Bill or be removed. At the end of consideration, we will come to new clause 52. If there is a majority for it, it will be added to the Bill. If there is not, it will not. The two are not conditional on each...
James Gray: I remind the Committee that with this we are considering: Clauses 271 to 273 stand part.
James Gray: Order. Before we allow ourselves to get into what might be an amusing, if controversial, area, I remind the Committee that we are dealing specifically with clause 270, which prohibits new coalmines in the six months after the Bill is passed. Perhaps we could restrict ourselves to that, rather than getting into more exciting rabbit holes.
James Gray: Order. This has become a bit chatty. I think perhaps we should restore a bit of order.
James Gray: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: That schedule 19 be the Nineteenth schedule to the Bill. Clause 255 stand part.
James Gray: With this it will be convenient to discuss clause 252 stand part.
James Gray: Technically, the Minister does not actually move clause stand part. I move clause stand part; the Minister merely speaks to the debate. However, I am being a bit picky, just for the sake of it. Does the shadow Minister wish to take part?
James Gray: Order. I am reluctant to interrupt the hon. Gentleman because he is a great expert on these matters and I greatly enjoy his expositions. However, marine conservation zones do not come into this part of the Bill. If he could tether his remarks to the question of offshore wind, they might be more within scope.
James Gray: Yes, be tethered.
James Gray: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Amendment 164, in clause 245, page 206, line 18, at end insert— “(c) any development listed in Section 66 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 that is connected to the construction, operation, maintenance or decommissioning of a generating station within paragraph (a).” This amendment would extend the fast-track consenting...
James Gray: That is not quite actually what the Minister should be moving. The Minister is moving amendment 135, proposed to clause 245, as on the amendment paper; the question is that the amendment be made. The Minister does not move clause stand part. I move stand part; the Minister doesn’t.
James Gray: I welcome the sharp and cleansing light that the report will shine into the shambolic Ajax programme and, by extension, into the whole of the defence procurement programme, which has been a problem—we have been saying so for years. The report shines a light into it. I very much welcome the Minister’s commitment to listening to the lessons learned from the report and to change things...
James Gray: I am interested to hear the right hon. Gentleman’s vision of the future. He believes that there will be a Labour Government in a year’s time—although I personally do not agree with him—so when there is, what commitment will he make to defence spending under a Labour Government?
James Gray: I am most grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving way, and I am so sorry to intervene twice. The figure was indeed slightly more than 2%, if not quite 2.5%, but of course, GDP was very much smaller. The amount that the Labour Government were spending when they lost power in 2010 was significantly less—billions of pounds less—than we are spending today.
James Gray: I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for the cautious note that he has sounded. Maybe later in his remarks he will agree with what I am about to propose. If we were to have a victory—if, for example, this offensive were to remove the Russians from Donetsk or even Crimea; who knows—that would not be the end of it. They are not going to turn around and say, “Okay, fine, never mind. Sorry...
James Gray: indicated dissent.