Prepared: 14:50 on 19 November 2009
Ms Harman: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his suggestion that he will send me a list of the issues that are considered to require further legislation, but he does not need to do so, because that was in Sir Christopher Kelly’s report, to which, obviously, I have paid close attention. Perhaps it would assist the House if I went through some of those points and said which of them I do not believe will require legislation and which ones possibly will, in the next Session.
First, there is the proposal for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority to—[Interruption.] Okay, well, perhaps I will arrange a—
Mr. Hogg: A written statement.
Ms Harman: A written statement? [HON. MEMBERS: “Hear, hear!”] No, what I said had a question mark—“A written statement?” I am not sure—I think that what I will do is have a meeting. I think the position is perfectly clear, but it might help the House if I could go through—[Interruption.] I know hon. Members are resisting, but it might help the House if I could go through the proposals and say very briefly which ones might need legislation and which do not. Members are calling for information, but then they are resisting my giving it.
I do not believe that recommendation 4 of the report, for IPSA to
“commission a commercial agency to provide and maintain rented accommodation”
for MPs requires legislation, because IPSA already has the power to set up such an agency. I have already said that I do not believe the proposal to have no more employment of family members requires legislation, because it can be made a condition of paying a salary that an employee is not a family member.
As for ensuring that there is no dual mandate, Sir Christopher Kelly says that that is a matter for the next Parliament, not this. I do not believe that legislation is needed for a new statutory duty for IPSA to
“support MPs efficiently, cost-effectively and transparently”,
because it already has that duty. I do not believe that we need to legislate on the House retaining responsibility for the code of conduct and the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, but we can accept Christopher Kelly’s proposal and not bring into effect the change that would take responsibility for that code of conduct away from the House and give it to IPSA.
I do not want to trespass on hon. Members’ good nature by going through the other page and a half of my notes, but they will get the drift. The point is that we accept what Sir Christopher Kelly is suggesting and we want to get on with it, but we do not want to legislate if that is unnecessary because the power in question already exists under the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009.
Dr. Evan Harris (Oxford, West and Abingdon) (LD): The Equality Bill, as the Leader of the House will know, has 15 parts, 21 chapters, 207 clauses and 28 schedules. I raised with her the importance of full scrutiny of the Bill on Report on 11, 18 and 25 June, 2 July and 15 October, as well as on 16 July, when she said:
“we will want to ensure that we make the Bill an exemplar of how the House should scrutinise Bills on Report”.—[Official Report, 16 July 2009; Vol. 496, c. 456.]
As far as I know, there has been no consultation with my party or the Conservative party on the fact that only one day is being given for Report, and no consultation so far on how we are going to get through the 30 new clauses, even before Government new clauses are considered, and the 37 amendments that have already been tabled. Can she assure us that more days will be given for the scrutiny of the Bill?
Ms Harman: I will check back on whether there were discussions on that with the Opposition Front Benchers, and I will give the matter further consideration. The hon. Gentleman has been consistent in raising that point, and I will check out whether I have done what I promised him I would.
Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury) (Con): Will the Leader of the House encourage her colleague the Defence Secretary to come to the House and make a statement on the release yesterday of the second board of inquiry report into the tragic death of Captain James Philippson in Afghanistan in 2006? She may recall that the Defence Secretary made certain allegations about Major Bristow in connection with the death of Captain Philippson, which he will no doubt want to correct, particularly as the second board of inquiry and the coroner’s report suggested that equipment was implicated.
Ms Harman: The Defence Secretary will be at the Dispatch Box on Monday, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will have an opportunity to intervene to make that point and seek a response directly from him.
Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West) (Con): The questions that have been asked about the Kelly report and the answers that the Leader of the House has attempted to give are eloquent testimony to the fact that there is clearly a need for a debate on whether we need primary legislation. The fact that the exchanges have been so shambolic today indicates that the Government appear to have been caught napping.
Ms Harman: Our approach has been consistent. We recognise the public anger and concern, and we wanted to bring forward the Legg inquiry so that every claim could be looked through. We were also concerned that Sir Christopher Kelly should conduct an independent inquiry into a future framework for our allowances. The matter should not come back to the House, but should be dealt with independently. That is why we legislated to set up the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
It would be better if the whole House were able to reassure the public that the necessary work is under way. We are not out of the woods yet. We still have to do the final payback under the Legg report and to hear from IPSA what its new framework for allowances will be, and all that has to be set up before the general election. Nevertheless, I invite colleagues to recognise that we need to reassure the public that they can have confidence that the House of Commons has sorted out the abuse of expenses. That process is under way.
Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire) (Con): Is the Leader of the House aware that many of my constituents—and doubtless many of hers and yours, Mr. Speaker—are victims of Equitable Life, and are anxiously awaiting a definitive statement from the Government? We have had several interim statements and we still have the ombudsman’s report hanging over us. When will we hear what will happen to those unfortunate people?
Ms Harman: I cannot add to what I said last time that question was asked. In a recent debate, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury explained that Sir John Chadwick will produce a report on a framework for proceeding with ex gratia payments. The work of the ombudsman’s report on Equitable Life took four years, because it is an immensely complex matter going back many years. Obviously, we want the matter to be dealt with as expeditiously as possible, so that ex gratia payments can be made. However, it is not easy to work out who needs to be paid and how much. With public money, that has to be done properly, before payments to those who should be getting them can be made as quickly as possible.
Greg Mulholland (Leeds, North-West) (LD): I have twice debated the issue of land banking and the mis-selling of green-belt and other land on the basis of unrealistic suggestions about future development. There has been some success since then, but the Financial Services Authority refuses to intervene when the company involved is offshore, regardless of the fact that it is ripping off countless UK investors. Can we have a debate in Government time? Can we also raise the possibility of a cross-departmental taskforce, so that the Government can finally address this important and serious issue?
Ms Harman: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman can expand on those issues in the debate next Thursday, when the Treasury and business will be the subject of the debate on the Queen’s Speech.
Mr. Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): I congratulate the Leader of the House on becoming parliamentarian of the year. More importantly, however, in the annual review of Cabinet Ministers’ rankings she has shot up from No. 11 to No. 2. As the founder, and sad to say only, member of HOTS—Harriet’s Official Tory Supporters—may I ask her for a statement about whether her rise is likely to continue, and whether she can break through the glass ceiling and become No. 1?
Ms Harman: Sorry, but all the time that I have spoken with the hon. Gentleman from the Dispatch Box, I had not realised that he was hot. I thank him for pointing it out.
Mr. Rob Wilson (Reading, East) (Con): Can we have a debate in Government time on the higher education funding review? In particular, it is important for the current funding review to have democratic student representation and be scrutinised properly so that families do not see it simply as a justification for putting up student fees.
Ms Harman: There will be an opportunity for the hon. Gentleman to raise those points when a Minister from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills responds to the debate on the Queen’s Speech next Thursday.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr. Speaker: I call Mr. Andrew Robathan.
Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby) (Con): I am grateful—and surprised—to be called, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Order. May I say to the hon. Gentleman that I hope he is not becoming sensitive? He has no reason at all to be surprised.
Mr. Robathan: It is common currency that, regrettably, this Parliament is very discredited and has become irrelevant to too many of our constituents. We have the Select Committee on Reform of the House of Commons, IPSA and the flawed constitutional reform committee, and we are only a few months away from a general election, yet today only three Labour Back Benchers are bothering to ask the Leader of the House questions. Yesterday we had empty Benches behind the Prime Minister. Can we have a debate on the relevance of Parliament, so that we can bring everything together and make this place the bastion of parliamentary democracy and democracy for our people, instead of the flawed and damaged institution that it has become?
Ms Harman: When I was in opposition for many years, I never came to this House, elected by my constituents, to say from the Opposition Benches that I was irrelevant, or that the work I did was irrelevant. I put it back to the hon. Gentleman that he has been elected by his constituents. That is a massive honour and a massive privilege. He comes to the House of Commons and he can hold Ministers to account and add to the debate. Therefore, he should not talk himself into irrelevance. If he does, he will be doing his constituents a disservice.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex) (Con): Pursuant to that last question, may I remind the Leader of the House that the Reform of the House of Commons Committee was established precisely to address people’s perception that this House is not doing its job of scrutinising Government business properly? Given her answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope)—that she could give no guarantees about how the results of the Committee’s work would be dealt with—let me return to the point made by my right hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House that it would be appropriate to make a statement on the publication of the report next Tuesday. We will have time to read it before she stands up to make it, as the report is to be published in the middle of the night. We look forward to the Government responding to proposals about how Government business can be much better scrutinised, so could the Leader of the House tell us how she will respond to the Committee’s findings? I remind her that she had to withdraw her original motion.
Ms Harman: I would never argue for complacency. We can always improve the processes of this House and modernise the way in which it does its business. Of course we should keep the issues under active review and make changes where necessary. In the meantime, however, we should not declare our work to be irrelevant, because that would be wrong. Part of the purpose of being a Member of Parliament is to do our job and continue to improve this institution. I said when I was first elected that it is a great and important responsibility to be a Member of Parliament. I came into Parliament to change and improve it, but I certainly did not begin my work by declaring that because I was in opposition, I was irrelevant.
Mr. Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): Thirteen per cent. of our near record prison population in England and Wales is made up of foreign nationals who can be returned to secure detention in their own countries only with their voluntary agreement. Will the Leader of the House make time available for the Lord High Chancellor to make proposals to this House for the compulsory transfer of foreign national criminals back to their countries of origin?
Ms Harman: It is very important that there should be prompt deportation at the end of sentences and, where necessary, repatriation of prisoners during their sentences. That is necessary for a number of reasons, and I suggest that the hon. Gentleman raise those issues next Wednesday.
Mr. Alan Reid (Argyll and Bute) (LD): Can we have a debate on the responsibilities of banks in which the Government are the main shareholder to support small businesses? For example, the Bank of Scotland has withdrawn the post of business relationship manager from its branch on the island of Islay, causing widespread anger among businesses on the island. A manager based on the mainland will never understand the unique circumstances of an island economy. Surely the Chancellor, as the main shareholder in the bank, has a responsibility to ensure that it services businesses throughout the country, so will he intervene in that case?
Ms Harman: I suggest that the hon. Gentleman take the opportunity to raise this matter with the Treasury Minister who will be opening the debate on Thursday 26 November. Of course it is important that all our banks serve their communities, wherever they are.
John Mason (Glasgow, East) (SNP): Given the closeness of the date of the Copenhagen conference, and the success of the Scottish Government on the climate change agenda, is it still the Government’s intention to exclude Scottish Ministers from the UK delegation?
Ms Harman: The UK delegation is as it is, and just for the moment, I cannot remember how it is—[Interruption.]—but I am sure that it is perfectly formed. I would say, however, that if the Scottish Government want to contribute to tackling climate change, they need to change their attitude to nuclear power.
Sir Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) (Con): Last night I viewed the film “Mugabe and the White African”, which merits an Oscar. It displays the ghastly horrors that continue to take place in Zimbabwe despite the unity Government. This is a matter for which this country has a major responsibility. Will the Leader of the House find time for a debate on Zimbabwe and the horrors that continue to take place there against both black and white?
Ms Harman: We do not have a topical debate next week, but it is some time since we considered a number of the important issues that are arising in Africa, of which the hon. Gentleman has raised a very important example. I will keep that under review.
BILLS PRESENTED
Corporation Tax Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, supported by the Prime Minister, Secretary Yvette Cooper, Mr. Liam Byrne, Mr. Pat McFadden, Mr. Stephen Timms, Sarah McCarthy-Fry and Ian Pearson, presented a Bill to restate, with minor changes, certain enactments relating to company distributions; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 1) with explanatory notes (Bill 1-EN).
Taxation (International And Other Provisions) Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, supported by the Prime Minister, Secretary Yvette Cooper, Mr. Liam Byrne, Mr. Pat McFadden, Mr. Stephen Timms, Sarah McCarthy-Fry and Ian Pearson, presented a Bill to restate, with minor changes, certain enactments relating to tax; to make provision for purposes connected with the restatement of enactments by other tax law rewrite Acts; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 2) with explanatory notes (Bill 2-EN).
Crime And Security Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Secretary Alan Johnson, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary David Miliband, Mr. Secretary Straw and Mr. David Hanson, presented a Bill to make provision about police powers of stop and search; about the taking, retention, destruction and use of evidential material; for the protection of victims of domestic violence; about injunctions in respect of gang-related violence; about anti-social behaviour orders; about the private security industry; about possession of mobile telephones in prison; about air weapons; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 3) with explanatory notes (Bill 3-EN).
Constitutional Reform And Governance Bill
Presentation and resumption of proceedings (Standing Order No. 80A)
Mr. Secretary Straw, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary David Miliband, Secretary Alan Johnson, Tessa Jowell, Mr. Michael Wills and Mr. Wayne David, presented a Bill to make provision relating to the civil service of the State; to make provision relating to the ratification of treaties; to amend section 2 of the House of Lords Act 1999 and make provision relating to the removal, suspension and resignation of members of the House of Lords; to repeal sections 132 to 138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 and to amend Part 2 of the Public Order Act 1986; to make provision relating to time limits for human rights claims against devolved administrations; to make provision relating to judges and similar office holders; to make provision relating to the Comptroller and Auditor General and to establish a body corporate called the National Audit Office; to amend the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 and to make corresponding provision in relation to Wales.
Bill read the First and Second time without Question put, and committed (Standing Order No. 80A and Order (20 October)); to be printed (Bill 4) with explanatory notes (Bill 4-EN).
Equality Bill
Presentation and resumption of proceedings (Standing Order No. 80A)
Ms Harriet Harman, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Straw, Secretary Alan Johnson, Mr. Secretary Denham, Secretary Ed Balls, Secretary Yvette Cooper, Mr. Sadiq Khan, Mr. Pat McFadden, the Solicitor-General and Michael Jabez Foster, presented a Bill to make provision to require Ministers of the Crown and others when making strategic decisions about the exercise of their functions to have regard to the desirability of reducing socio-economic inequalities; to reform and harmonise equality law and restate the greater part of the enactments relating to discrimination and harassment related to certain personal characteristics; to enable certain employers to be required to publish information about the differences in pay between male and female employees; to prohibit victimisation in certain circumstances; to require the exercise of certain functions to be with regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and other prohibited conduct; to enable duties to be imposed in relation to the exercise of public procurement functions; to increase equality of opportunity; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First and Second time without Question put (Standing Order No. 80A and Order (13 May)); to be considered on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 5) with explanatory notes (Bill 5-EN).
Financial Services Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, supported by the Prime Minister, Secretary David Miliband, Mr. Secretary Straw, Mr. Liam Byrne, Mr. Stephen Timms, Sarah McCarthy-Fry, Ian Pearson and Mr. Pat McFadden, presented a Bill to make provision amending the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, including provision about financial education, and other provision about financial services and markets; and to make provision for the administration of court funds by the Director of Savings.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 6) with explanatory notes (Bill 6-EN).
Energy Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Secretary Edward Miliband, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary David Miliband, Secretary Hilary Benn, Mr. Secretary Denham, Joan Ruddock and Mr. David Kidney, presented a Bill to make provision relating to the demonstration, assessment and use of carbon capture and storage technology; to make provision for requiring benefits to be provided by holders of gas or electricity supply licences; to make provision about functions of the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority; to make provision about general duties of the Secretary of State in relation to gas and electricity markets; to make provision about electricity generation licences; to make provision about persons authorised to supply gas or electricity; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 7) with explanatory notes (Bill 7-EN).
Children, Schools And Families Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Secretary Ed Balls, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Straw, Secretary Andy Burnham, Mr. Secretary Denham, Mr. Secretary Hain, Mr. Vernon Coaker, Bridget Prentice and Ms Diana R. Johnson, presented a Bill to make provision about pupil and parent guarantees, home-school agreements, parental satisfaction surveys, children with disabilities or special educational needs, school and other education, governing bodies’ powers and school teachers’ qualifications; to make provision amending the Education Acts; to make provision about local safeguarding children boards and youth justice; and to make provision about publication of information relating to family proceedings.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 8) with explanatory notes (Bill 8-EN).
Flood And Water Management Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Secretary Hilary Benn, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Denham, Mr. Secretary Hain and Huw Irranca-Davies, presented a Bill to make provision about water, including provision about the management of risks in connection with flooding and coastal erosion.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 November and to be printed (Bill 9) with explanatory notes (Bill 9-EN).
Child Poverty Bill
Presentation and resumption of proceedings (Standing Order No. 80A)
Mr. Stephen Timms, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Ed Balls, Secretary Yvette Cooper, Mr. Liam Byrne, Jim Knight, Dawn Primarolo and Helen Goodman, presented a Bill to set targets relating to the eradication of child poverty, and to make other provision about child poverty.
Bill read the First and Second time without Question put (Standing Order No. 80A and Order (20 July)); to be considered on Monday 23 November, and to be printed (Bill 10) with explanatory notes (Bill 10-EN).