I thank the Leader of the House for assisting in ensuring that we have a statement today from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on the Post Office card account and that it will be made to the House first. That is welcome and appreciated.
As the Leader of the House plans future business, will she reflect on a matter that the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs. May) raised but that is of widespread concern? Yesterday, the Government were defeated once, withdrew twice and came within three votes of being defeated a second time. They managed to impose their will about the structure of Committees in England by using their majorities in Scotland and Wales—they have the majority of the popular vote in neither place. Will the Leader of the House reflect on whether she is serious about the sort of discussion that she hinted she is willing to offer on those controversial matters?
Yesterday’s business was controversial and I am sure that more time could have been given for debating it. Today we have a topical debate on combating obesity, which is important but not topical, given that there are such issues as the safety of young children, youth unemployment, general employment and the state of the economy to discuss. Those are huge matters, which are much more topical, by any definition, than combating obesity. May we please have a structure for discussing the subjects for topical debates before they are announced? Even if the Deputy Leader of the House, using false constitutional arguments, claims that the House should not have a general business Committee, will the Leader of the House consider whether we can have a business Committee that is representative of the parties of the House to examine topical debates? At least we could then learn whether that was a good precedent that could be applied more widely.
Again, it is welcome that the Chancellor will come to the House to make a statement on the pre-Budget report on Monday week. However, it is nonsensical not to have a general debate about what the statement should contain, but simply to respond to it. I hazard a guess that the Chancellor will make some announcements that are intended to have effect before the Budget. I am sure that the Chancellor is not just going to tell us what his thoughts are for next year without wanting to do something now. Colleagues in the House ought to have an opportunity to debate that before Monday week. There is plenty of time next week, but if the Leader of the House can find no other way, may I ask that the topical debate next week, ahead of the pre-Budget report, be on the economy and be extended to the whole of Thursday?
Lastly, the Public Accounts Committee has today published an important report on energy prices, which has made it clear, among other things, that a large number of people pay higher bills when they change energy supplier. Please may we have an opportunity before the winter to discuss the urgent matter of energy prices, on the basis of the Public Accounts Committee report and the many other reports that show that we pay higher energy prices than almost any other country in Europe?
Business of the House
Business question from
Simon Hughes
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 13 November 2008.
It occurred during Business statement on Business of the House.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
482 c952-4 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:18:31 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1367599/-question
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1367599/-question
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1367599/-question