---

Home Affairs

When the Leader of the House reads her speech on this matter, I think that she will find it rather distressing. It contained a number of contentions, some of which seemed straightforwardly contradictory. I do not wish to beat her around the head with a broom, but one of her propositions was that it was inappropriate to have a Cabinet Minister on a Select Committee, yet she herself is now going to be nominated by a member of the Executive to sit on a Select Committee. The sheer inconsistency of that is remarkable. It leaps out at us: Home Affairs, Ms. Harriet Harman, the Leader of the House. A member of the Executive—a member of the Cabinet—is directing to the House’s attention a particular Member whom they wish to become a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee. Indeed, most of us suppose that it is the intention that the nominee should become Chairman of that Committee. I do not think for one moment that the matter was allowed to go to the Committee of Selection. We have heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir George Young) and we have also heard and read out the Standing Orders. No one in the House can be unaware of the Standing Orders; they are quite clear. Yet the proper process by which we arrive at these decisions has been bypassed and neutered. I know that there is often a guiding hand behind what we do, but this is not a guiding hand out of sight. This has been brought right into the Chamber and it amounts to an assertion of Executive power over us. In fact, it means setting aside the very position of the Committee of Selection. This has been exhaustively argued and pointed out by a member of that Committee. Indeed, the Chairman of the Committee of Selection is in his place. Like many others, I am puzzled about the ““urgent work”” that requires the right hon. Member for Leicester, East (Keith Vaz) to be appointed in this way on this day. It is simply an assertion. There is no evidence of a programme in position; the Committee is functioning properly; a report is demonstrably coming up. Let me give a cheer for my neighbour, the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick). I have noted the work that he has done over many years. His assiduity and commitment to the Home Affairs Committee is phenomenal. He is probably the most regular attender of Home Affairs questions in the whole House—dismissed by the Executive. That is not good enough. If the Committee of Selection were to override all the Whips sitting on it and choose another Member, that would also be inappropriate. That is why we are fighting the inclusion of this name on the Order Paper. It is not right; we all know it is not right. The absurdity of placing the Leader of the House in the position of arguing an unarguable case with contradictory reasoning actually diminishes her in carrying out her vital role. We who believe in the House of Commons know full well that the role of Leader of the House is a difficult one. The occupier of the position is not only the representative of the Government, but the representative of the House of Commons to the Government. That is the classical definition and we shall return to this issue later today when we debate another motion on the Floor of the House. That will also be contested. What I am saying is that we all know that this is wrong. It will not do. Furthermore, the arguments adduced for this proposition are demonstrably contradictory. I think that this House should confidently ask—and expect to be heard by the Leader of the House—for this motion to be withdrawn. That is what I ask of the Leader of the House. The credibility of our system of managing this House is at stake. There is a balance between ordinary Members and the Executive, but this is a manifestation of total Executive dominance. That is what sticks in the craw of many of us.