Business of the House

The hon. Gentleman raised the defeat in one of the votes yesterday. That was because the vote was on House business and was therefore on a free vote. That is the way of the world. When there is a whipped vote, we expect to win but do not always do so; when there is an unwhipped vote, we hope to win but do not always succeed. That is the way of things. It is rather odd that the hon. Gentleman is complaining that our position was defeated on an unwhipped vote. That should prove to him that there was a free vote. Indeed, I would have expected him to complain more vociferously if we had won all the votes, which last night we most assuredly didn’t, thank you very much—says she with great good grace. If something is controversial, that does not mean we should not bring it to the House and offer hon. Members the decision. Just because the proposal for regional Committees was controversial, it does not mean that we should not have the right to put it forward. So we put forward the proposal, and it was controversial, and strong arguments were advanced on all sides. We are proceeding, but let me remind all those who voted against proceeding—and who did not succeed in that vote—that we will be reviewing the proposal, which will run only for an experimental period. I hope that in that period even those who voted against the proposal will put themselves forward to join the Committees and make them work. Then we will see whether they are successful in holding to account big organisations that are important to their regions, but which are currently not properly accountable. The hon. Gentleman mentioned topical debates and said that worklessness and the economy were more topical than the obesity report that we have chosen for today. However, I remind him that on 23 October we had a topical debate on work and skills; on Thursday 30 October we had a topical debate on business in the regions, much of which was about employment; and on Wednesday 5 November we had a general debate, chosen by the Government, on work and welfare, so there have been a number of such debates. The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the issue of employment and unemployment, however, and we want to ensure that the House can continue to give it the priority that we all know it deserves. The hon. Gentleman made what I regard as a slightly novel proposal—that we should have a pre pre-Budget report. The problem with having an economic debate immediately before the pre-Budget report is that if it is just a few days before the Monday of the pre-Budget report, the Chancellor will not be able to say a great deal in that debate. The reason the Government introduced the pre-Budget report was that previously we had just the Budget in March—the announcement was made and that was it. This Government introduced the pre-Budget report, which was an innovation, so that the Chancellor could announce what would be in the Budget and make any necessary interim announcements. However, I hear the hon. Gentleman’s suggestion for a topical debate on the economy. Bearing in mind what other hon. Members have said, let me assure him that we always keep our mind open to whether there should be a topical debate on the economy, irrespective of the upcoming pre-Budget report.