In the House...Speeches and parliamentary questions in the
While speaking in the chamber of the House is a high profile activity for an MP, much other work is done elsewhere, in committee, as well as a large casework load for constituents.
|
|
17/10/02 Foot and Mouth Disease 23/07/02 Carlisle United 22/07/02 Foot and Mouth Inquiries 27/06/02 Network Rail 27/06/02 Foot and Mouth Inquiries 27/06/02 Foot and Mouth 16/05/02 Bovine TB 07/05/02 ITV Regional Broadcasters 23/04/02 Carlisle United 23/04/02 West Coast Main Line 18/03/02 Hunting Demonstrators 28/02/02 Hunting Bill 23/01/02 Army Attributable Pensions 22/01/02 Haskins Report 16/01/02 Railways 14/01/02 Rail Strategic Plan 12/11/01 Animal Health Bill |
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): Does my hon. Friend agree that the best way to ensure that we do not have to call out the armed forces again, that we do not have to kill hundreds of thousands of animals and that we do not have to pay £3 billion in compensation, is to develop a suitable foot and mouth vaccine and then routinely to vaccinate livestock throughout Europe?
Mr. Morley: I certainly agree that the vaccine will clearly have a greater role to play in the future control of epidemics. Indeed, vaccine technology has advanced from the date of the last outbreak to where we are now. Within the contingency plan we recognise that more work needs to be done on vaccine development. The Anderson report and the Royal Society report recommended that emergency vaccination should be moved up the options agenda. That is exactly what we will do in our future contingency planning.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): I rise to present a petition signed by 14,991 supporters of Carlisle United football club. The petition was drawn up because the owner of Carlisle United declared that he was to withdraw the club from the football league. Since that statement has been made, however, it appears that there could be a change of ownership of Carlisle United - and we hope for that.
The petition states:
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons make strong representations to the Football League to ensure that Carlisle has a club with a place in the League. If the Football League fail to do this, the Petitioners request the House of Commons to consider legislation to change the rules regarding ownership of football clubs to ensure that they recognise they are a community asset that cannot be extinguished by the wishes of an individual owner.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.
To lie upon the Table.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): Does my right hon. Friend agree that although the report is critical - coming from Cumbria, I cannot see how it could be anything else - the Government got it right by setting up three separate inquiries, as less than 12 months since the outbreak finished, we have the results? Does she also agree that the Anderson report is not a whitewash, as Opposition Members said that it would be?
Margaret Beckett: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He is entirely right. No doubt a great deal will be said today about how we should have listened to Opposition Members. If we had done so and waited to set up a public inquiry, experts with much more experience than I say that it would just about be setting up its secretariat. We should recognise not only the merits of having those three reports, each of which is demonstrably independent, but the importance of allowing each of them to concentrate on a specific sphere of the matters that needed to be considered. If we had set up one inquiry to examine all the issues, whatever its terms or structure, we would never have got so quickly the information that we need to enable us to make the improvements that have to follow.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): Is my right hon. Friend aware that there will be great enthusiasm on the west coast main line for the new rail company and that no tears will be shed for the demise of Railtrack? I have two questions. First, is my right hon. Friend convinced that money will be available to provide us with a fast, modern, reliable rail service on the west coast main line? This week, we have once again experienced tremendous disruption.
Secondly, Railtrack was negotiating with Virgin to buy up to 10 new railsets. As Railtrack failed to deliver the second phase of upgrading - PUG II - will Network Rail have to pick up that debt, too?
Mr. Darling: Perhaps I may repeat what I said earlier about the west coast main line and the upgrades: now that Railtrack's books have been opened by the administrator, it has become apparent that some of the assumptions that had been made do not hold good. During the past few months, the SRA has been talking to the train operators - other companies are involved as well as Virgin - and to Railtrack to decide how best the west coast main line can be upgraded to bring year-on-year improvements systematically. As my hon. Friend knows, urgent attention to many points on that line could bring substantial benefits, whereas other places could be dealt with at a later stage. That work is still under way. I am hopeful that it will be concluded in the autumn, as I have been told. At that time, I shall ensure that, in one way or another, my hon. Friend and the rest of the House are kept informed so that they know what is happening.
We are spending about £4.6 billion a year on average, which is three times as much as was spent during the 10 years prior to 1997. I am determined that, as that money goes in, we should try to ensure that people see improvements year on year. It may take a long time to reach the ultimate conclusion, but we need to make sure that each year brings changes that will make a difference, especially for passengers on the west coast main line. It is perhaps an indictment of successive Governments that the last substantial, large-scale investment in that line was in the 1960s when many of us were still at school.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): My right hon. Friend will remember that, this time last year, we were still in the middle of the foot and mouth outbreak. Following that period, the Prime Minister set up a number of inquiries. The Follett inquiry, which is chaired by Professor Brian Follett and deals with the scientific problems, and the Anderson inquiry, which deals with the lessons learned, are due to report in July. As the argument for those independent inquiries and against a public inquiry was that they would report and be debated quickly, can we have an assurance that the Government will find time to debate the reports before the summer recess?
Mr. Cook: I am sure that the House will want to examine the reports, hear about them and express its views. As Leader of the House, I fully understand that the House will want to ensure that these matters are adequately considered by it. Of course, neither I nor the Government can give an assurance on the date of the reports' publication, as that is in the hands of those who are carrying out the investigations, who will properly want to ensure that the reports are published at the time of their choosing rather than ours. None the less, we have made clear to them the great importance that we attach to their being published while the House is still sitting.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): As my hon. Friend knows, the village of Great Orton in my constituency contained the largest burial site in England. I want to ensure that there are no more such burial sites anywhere -
Mr. Speaker: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but the question is closed and relates to the constituency of the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Luff). However, there is a connection with the constituency of the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Sir Michael Spicer).
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): My right hon. Friend will be aware that, before the outbreak of foot and mouth disease, Cumbria was a bovine TB-free zone. Since we started to restock, however, there have been 20 reactor cases in the county, which is very worrying. I understand that the Ministry is carrying out major tests on the farms involved, but is being hampered by a shortage of at least 20 Ministry vets in the area. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is essential that we eradicate bovine TB from Cumbria, and that, to do that, we need money to employ more vets? The cases are a consequence of the restocking following the foot and mouth outbreak, so the cost should surely be borne by the Treasury. Let us do this quickly, before the disease gets into the badger population.
Margaret Beckett: My hon. Friend makes an important point, and I am grateful to him for raising it. He is quite right to say that there is a different set of concerns following the outbreak of foot and mouth disease, in which so many animals, sadly, had to be killed. I am grateful to him for giving me this chance to encourage farmers who are restocking to ensure that they buy from herds with known disease-free status and that they get their animals tested. As my hon. Friend said, there is a testing programme in place to try to detect any incidence of the disease. It had not been drawn to my attention that there might be a shortage of vets to carry out the tests in Cumbria, and I shall look into that.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): I want to take my right hon. Friend back to the consolidation of ITV. If we get a single company, will we have only one broadcaster or will we keep the regional broadcasters, such as Border television in my area? Does the Bill include plans to change the boundaries? To echo a point that has already been made, will the Bill contain an assurance that news programmes will not only be made in but broadcast from the regions?
Tessa Jowell: When my hon. Friend has a chance to study the Bill and the policy narrative, I think that he will be pleased to read assurances about both points. Clear quotas for regional and independent productions will be set for the ITV companies at tier two, which will make judgements about qualitative performance. As I said in answer to an earlier question, ITV's network system with its regional character will be able to continue.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way to a Labour Member for the first time. Perhaps the House could calm down.
This is a constituency issue regarding taxation, but it is very important. I totally agree with the Government's policy of raising taxation for the NHS, but I believe that it is as important to collect taxes as it is to raise them. Yesterday, the owner of Carlisle United announced that he was going to take the club out of the Football League. I understand that the club and Carlisle United Holdings owe in excess of £700,000 in taxation. Will my right hon. Friend look into the matter? Is not it a fact that if more people paid the tax that they owed, we would have a better health service?
Mr. Smith: I can well understand my hon. Friend's worries and the concern that the matter must be causing his constituents. He will understand that, consistent with long-standing practice, I cannot comment on the affairs of any individual taxpayer. I shall draw his remarks to the attention of the Inland Revenue and, if appropriate, to the Department of Trade and Industry.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): Does he agree that when the west coast main line is fully upgraded - hopefully with the trains running at 140 mph - there will still be a major capacity problem? Bearing that in mind, does he support the SRA plan for a brand new high-speed link from London to the north of England?
Mr. Spellar: My hon. Friend is a little in advance as regards the state of that process. That option is being examined and we shall obviously look at the outcome. Similarly, we shall consider the proposal for additional freight capacity made by Central Railway. The SRA is in intense negotiations and will be making its recommendation later this year.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Further to your statement about the demonstration, I was watching the demonstration, and there did not seem to be any force used by the police in dispersing demonstrators. An agreement seemed to be reached whereby they parted and let the traffic through.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I do not think that there is anything I can usefully add to what I have already said.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): On hunting, one must presume that a Bill will be introduced either in this Session or the next. My right hon. Friend told us that it will be decided on a free vote. Can he assure us that that will be the case and that Government Whips will not ask Ministers to go through the Lobbies?
Mr. Cook: I can unequivocally give my hon. Friend that assurance. Indeed, if he looks at the voting record in the last Parliament, he will observe that Ministers voted on two of the three options. I suspect that that will be the case this time.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): I also welcome the Minister's statement. It is a pity that it is 50 years too late, but that is not our fault. On the practical side, I was worried that at the end of his statement my hon. Friend said that people should write to an office in Glasgow. In reality, many of them will contact their Members of Parliament. The procedures that were put in place to compensate prisoners of war worked very well. I suggest to the Minister that we are given a parliamentary number that people can ring, so that we can put cases into the system. I do not want to be the arbiter of people's entitlement. If we do not get this procedure right, we will get more complaints about further delay.
Dr. Moonie: I fully accept my hon. Friend's point. Today, I am giving a holding answer so that anyone with immediate concerns can write to the appropriate address. People have also been phoning our hotline at the War Pensions Agency. Assuming that that continues, we shall ensure that it is capable of dealing with complaints. I shall also ensure that suitable advertisements are placed, and that hotlines are widely publicised, so that as many people as possible can take advantage of them.
Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): I will resist asking a question about the west coast main line, as my right hon. Friend has agreed to come to a meeting of the all-party group tomorrow. I wish to refer to the mention in the plan of the National Rail Academy, a proposal on which I have been working for two years with partners in north Cumbria. Is it not a fact that we have a skills shortage involving up to 60,000 people on the railways? If that academy is not set up quickly, all of the proposals in the document will fail because there will not be the skilled workers to do the job.
Mr. Byers: My hon. Friend is right to point out the importance of investing in skills and training for the railway industry. There is a chronic shortage of drivers; that is at the heart of some of the industrial disputes that we are seeing in parts of the country. There is a lack of skilled signallers, engineers and general support staff. We need investment across the board in the railway network, and the lack of skills is a direct consequence of the industry's short-term approach in the past. When people have had an opportunity to look at the strategic plan, they will see that our proposals are for the short and medium term, but they are also about long-term planning for the future. Part of that is investing in people and developing the skills base of the industry. The establishment of a National Rail Academy will play an important role in ensuring that we have the people with the right skills - drivers, signallers and engineers - to deliver the high-quality railway system that we want for the future.
Reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO
| On behalf of Eric Martlew, 3 Chatsworth Square Carlisle Cumbria CA1 1HB |