Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Simon Hughes (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 10 January 2008. It occurred during Business statement and Oral statement on Business of the House.


Business of the House

Madam Deputy Speaker—[Laughter.] You may not have been very helpful by making that point then, rather than later. [Interruption.] I am standing my ground. We had an energy statement, which was important; it may or may not have been welcome. Following the questions put to the Prime Minister yesterday by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Clegg), our new party leader, and my hon. Friend the Member for Northavon (Steve Webb), our new energy spokesman, on fuel costs and fuel poverty, will the Leader of House provide time in the near future for a debate on the effects of rising international fuel costs on people in this country and their fuel bills? Throughout the country, many people are finding the increased costs a difficult burden, and we would all benefit from a discussion about where we are, and where we can go to reduce the gap between rich and poor. We have just had the end of the consultation period on the Government's proposed local government settlement for the next three years. The right hon. and learned Lady will know, from our constituencies, that there is much unhappiness about the proposed tight settlement among all parties, and in relation to all councils and types of councils in England. Before we have the ““big bang”” debate later this month where we vote on whether we accept the settlement, could she find time for a debate that gives colleagues the chance to explore the impact of the proposals of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for their type of council? On Members' pay, pensions and allowances, may I help the right hon. and learned Lady by suggesting that, next Wednesday, when the Government propose to publish the report from the independent body, she comes to the House after Prime Minister's questions and makes a statement, which we can explore, on the Government's position, so that the House is well informed in the week before we debate the issues? That is sensible and will facilitate the most managed method of dealing with the amendments that will inevitably be tabled. The right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs. May) made an early bid for a Welsh debate around St. David's day. We have had a terrible time in parts of the Commonwealth—Pakistan and Kenya—over Christmas and the new year. Commonwealth day is 10 March. May we have an annual Commonwealth day debate so that those of us who believe that the Commonwealth should and can be effective can try to persuade the Government to use their influence to ensure that democracy is supported more effectively throughout the Commonwealth? Lastly, following the big issue of yesterday, the Leader of the House has been helpful. We had a seven-and-a-half-hour Report stage on the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill. More than four fifths of that time—more than six hours—was spent on Government new clauses, new schedules and amendments. There were 120 of them, all on matters that should not take time away from Government Back Benchers and Opposition Members. There were nine debates to be had on issues as important as blasphemy, prostitution, sex offences, pornography and personal data; yet we had only one out of nine. May I suggest that, in future, we negotiate the time for Report stage, which is the time for Back-Bench and Opposition contributions, and that if the Government want to do their own thing, they do it in extra time that they add to the agreed time? Only by doing that can we avoid the nonsense of the House of Commons considering one of the major Bills of the year but debating only what the Government wish to discuss, as happened yesterday.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
470 c540-1 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk