If she will make a statement on Government support for new business start-ups in Scotland. [73572]

If she will make a statement on Government support for new business start-ups in Scotland. [73575]

This Government have provided a stable economy with low inflation, low interest rates and, since 1997, cuts in the average corporation tax bill for small companies by 30 per cent., all of which are essential for new business start-ups; and the new 10p starting rate of tax is of great value to small firms, many of whom in Scotland are unincorporated.

The Secretary of State recently travelled all the way to Australia and New Zealand to promote the virtues of the private finance initiative. Does she think that PFI will help to arrest, and even reverse, the decline in small business start-ups in Scotland? Was she any more successful in promoting the virtues of PFI to the New Zealanders and Australians than she has been with her own Scottish Back Benchers?

The hon. Gentleman should do his homework before he asks questions. There were 10,769 new business start-ups in the first six months of 2002–22 per cent. up on what they were previously. Great use is, of course, made of public-private partnerships in Scotland. Indeed, the complete refreshment of the secondary sector in Glasgow has meant that there has been a considerable increase in procurement from small businesses, which helps the overall environment for small business start-ups.

What is the situation for business start-ups compared with that in 1997? Will the Secretary of State confirm that since 1997 business start-ups have dropped by 30 per cent.? Will she also confirm that 50 per cent. of Scotland's graduates emigrate each year because there are not enough opportunities for them in small business?

The hon. Gentleman obviously does not know his Scottish history, because one of its great strengths is that our graduates have moved throughout the world. Indeed, the hon. Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh), who is sitting next to the hon. Gentleman, is a Scottish graduate who sought to pursue her career elsewhere, as is the shadow Front-Bench spokesperson, the hon. Member for Beckenham (Mrs. Lait). That all adds to the resource that is available to Scotland internationally.

Does my right hon. Friend share my view that a very important niche market for Scottish business start-ups is the Scottish film industry, from the new Inverness film studio to the very successful "Monarch of the Glen", filmed in my constituency? Is not Scottish film going to be the start of the renaissance in Scottish jobs and business?

My hon. Friend asks an important question and makes an important point. The film industry in Scotland is composed mainly of small businesses, many of which are extremely successful. Ecosse Films, which made "Monarch of the Glen", is a very successful company. I had the privilege of visiting the "Monarch of the Glen" set a few weeks ago. I am very conscious of the fact that as a result of "Monarch of the Glen", 50 million people throughout the world can see how attractive my hon. Friend's constituency is. That helps more than small business; it helps the tourism industry the length and breadth of Scotland.

Given the initiatives in this year's Budget to stimulate the growth of small business throughout the United Kingdom, such as small business start-up helplines and starter packs, will the Secretary of State undertake to work closely with her colleagues in the Scottish Executive to ensure that both Administrations lend their weight to the creation of more small businesses in Scotland, especially in areas such as mine that suffer from high unemployment?

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I agree that we must work very hard to ensure that there is daily co-ordination between national schemes and Scottish schemes. Moreover, this is not just about Government schemes, because Governments alone cannot establish businesses, but about creating the right climate. The Government are creating the climate that helps small businesses to start—low inflation and low interest rates, reform of value added tax and changes to personal taxation—but politicians must make a co-ordinated effort to ensure that entrepreneurship is valued, as it should be. In fact, some years ago, research conducted by Scottish Enterprise revealed that entrepreneurs were classed with politicians and journalists; we have to do something to improve the status of entrepreneurs in Scottish society.

I hope that the question is brief, and that I shall get a brief answer. As new business start-ups are as likely to suffer from fires as any other business, can the Secretary of State tell us whether, when she leaves here, she will urge the First Minister and the Joint Ministerial Committee at No. 10 to make available all firefighting equipment to the troops wherever possible?

The Prime Minister has already made a statement on that issue, as has the Deputy First Minister in Scotland. Securing safety for people is a pre-eminent issue, and I share the view of the Prime Minister and First Minister that there is a need for the Fire Brigades Union to accept the recommendation; it should await the result of the independent review.

I understand that the Deputy Minister for Justice in the Scottish Parliament, who is a member of the Labour party, has said that firefighting equipment will not be made available to the troops—

Order. The hon. Lady is out of order. She must stick to the question before us; she should ask a supplementary question about start-ups.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker. Fires will affect small business start-ups just as much as they affect other businesses, so will the right hon. Lady make it clear that she supports making firefighting equipment available to the troops to protect Scottish small businesses and lives?

I reiterate the point that I made: the Prime Minister has made the Government's position absolutely clear, and that position is shared in Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom.

How can the Minister seriously talk about economic development when in some places the basic business link between Edinburgh and Newcastle is nothing more than a country road? Does not the fact that that road was closed by a little drop of rain today pour scorn on the multi-modal study? I ask the Minister to get in touch with the Scottish Executive and United Kingdom Transport Ministers with a view to building a proper road, dualled all the way from Newcastle to Edinburgh, so that we can achieve proper economic development.

I understand that rather more than a little drop of rain has affected the border between Scotland and England. Indeed, my sympathy goes out to all those people who have been inconvenienced as a consequence of the adverse weather conditions. The Government and the Scottish Executive are now putting considerable resources into transport policy, not just in Scotland but throughout the United Kingdom, with a view to ensuring that roads and the rail network are improved, especially the links between Scotland and England.

If she will make a statement on unemployment levels in Scotland. [73573]

Claimant count unemployment in Scotland is at its lowest level since 1975 and has fallen by more than 57,000 since the spring of 1997—a reduction of 38.8 per cent.

I am grateful to the Minister for her response to my question, but it would be interesting if she could explain to the House how she squares comments made in August by her colleague, the Secretary of State, with the latest figures to emanate from the Scottish Executive. Her colleague said:

"These encouraging figures are proof that the Scottish economy remains strong."

I am always fascinated when colleagues who represent parts of the United Kingdom other than Scotland seek to talk Scotland down. Data for the past two quarters have, of course, been disappointing, but I hope that the hon. Gentleman will acknowledge that the glitch is temporary and is nothing like the downturns that we saw over the previous 20 years. Underpinning the Scottish economy there is health, vibrancy and energy.

My hon. Friend will be aware of the problems that arose in my constituency last year as a result of the foot and mouth outbreak. At that time, many people were forecasting significant job losses, but unemployment in my constituency is 3 per cent., which is 14.8 per cent. down on last year and about 34.9 per cent. down on 1997. However, I ask my hon. Friend and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to impress on our colleagues in the Department of Trade and Industry the need to revitalise the manufacturing sector.

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. The area that he represents suffered terribly from foot and mouth disease. I know that he has been leading the campaign to reinvigorate the agricultural industry in his constituency, and I am delighted to hear that there has been a reduction in unemployment. Interestingly, the figures that he highlighted reflect the reduction in unemployment throughout all rural communities in Scotland. When the Government come under pressure about their attitude to rural communities, we should reflect on the fact that, on average, rural communities in Scotland have seen a reduction in unemployment of more than 45 per cent. I will take up my hon. Friend's specific point about discussions with the Department of Trade and Industry.

Is the Minister aware of the many reported job losses in the oil and gas supply industry, which particularly affect constituencies such as mine, where they have contributed significantly to unemployment? Many would attribute these factors, at least in part, to the changes set out in the Budget. What consultations has the Minister had with the Treasury on royalty? When might we expect a result from the recent consultation?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. We must be careful about the figures that have been bandied around about job losses in the North sea. There are job gains—in the new Ardmore field, for example. The hon. Gentleman knows that there is ongoing consultation. A report will be made available soon.

My hon. Friend will be aware —unlike those in Skegness, perhaps—that since 1997 unemployment in my constituency has dropped by 30 per cent., and long-term unemployment by 70 per cent. Does she agree that it is important to focus on providing additional support through the new deal to those who are still unemployed?

My hon. Friend is correct. The new deal has been one of the Government's success stories. Wherever Members go, they will come across people who have been long-term unemployed, who were thrown on the scrapheap because they have disabilities or because they are lone parents. It was rich of the Conservatives to say at their conference that the war on lone parents has been ended. The reality is that they left many vulnerable people on the unemployment scrapheap.

The Minister will be aware that Scotland has the second highest unemployment of the nations and regions of the United Kingdom and that the Scottish economy is in technical recession. Would she like to revise the statement that the Secretary of State made last November that the Scottish economy is performing well? Does she agree that Scotland is under-employed, rather like the Secretary of State?

No.

I am sure that my hon. Friend accepts that Opposition Members talk a lot of nonsense purely for the sake of publicity —they are always talking down Scotland. As one who is deeply involved in the oil industry, does she accept that analysts say that the Scottish economy, and the oil industry in particular, are riding out the world recession very well? That is seen in the chemicals industry in her own area, where Avecia is applying for a biotechnology research park. The future is there and the companies are going towards it—unlike Opposition parties, who are running away from it.

My hon. Friend is right, and, knowing that he represents Grangemouth, I bow to his superior knowledge of the petrochemicals industry. I recently held discussions with senior oil industry people and I know that they are extremely optimistic about what can still be produced from the North sea by introducing new technology and finding different ways of accessing North sea resources. Like my hon. Friend, I am really weary of hon. Members trying every month to talk Scotland down.

What message is sent to the unemployed when the PA to a Scottish Minister is put up for two nights in a five-star hotel, paid for from a fund that is supposed to benefit the people of Lanarkshire?

That is not a matter for the Government; it is a matter for the Labour party. The hon. Lady should not have gone down that path at a Question Time that is intended to highlight the issues that affect Scotland —jobs, education and employment, in which the Government are scoring a great success.

What plans she has to help combat poverty arising from debt in Scotland; and if she will make a statement. [73574]

We are consulting on a major overhaul of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to provide better safeguards for individuals taking on borrowing commitments. We are determined to tackle abuses by unscrupulous lenders head on.

Is the Minister aware that last year the citizens advice bureaux service in Scotland dealt with more than 160,000 cases involving some £70 million of debt, an increase of £10 million on the previous year? Credit unions and money advice centres also deal with several thousand similar cases each year. Given that responsibility for dealing with debt lies with both the United Kingdom and the Scottish Parliaments, does she agree that the best way to deal with that serious problem might be to draw up a joint parliamentary strategy between Westminster and Holyrood, as suggested by Citizens Advice Scotland; and will she take steps to ensure that that is done as soon as possible?

Like my hon. Friend, I am a great admirer of the work of citizens advice bureaux, and I was especially pleased to be able to speak at their annual conference in Scotland in August. In addition, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State was a volunteer in a citizens advice bureau during a recent volunteers week. CABs do significant and valuable work on debt and with people who find themselves in debt. I agree that the Government and the Scottish Executive should look for ways in which to work together, so I am sure that my hon. Friend will be delighted to learn that the Government, the Scottish Executive and the financial sector are piloting three debt telephone helplines, one of which is in Fife, and seeking ways in which they can provide additional advice and support for those who find themselves in difficulties.

Will the Minister acknowledge the important role that LETS —local exchange trading schemes —and credit unions play in helping people not only to manage debt, but to avoid it? I am thinking in particular of the Strathbogie credit union in my constituency, which I believe covers the largest rural area of any credit union in Britain. Does she acknowledge that credit unions have a good record of protecting their customers' interests as well as giving them advice, and will she make representations to ensure that the Financial Services Authority does not regulate them in a way that creates excessive charges and means that they cannot operate effectively?

I agree about credit unions' valuable work. The credit union in the Raploch area of Stirling provides a very valuable resource. However, we have to recognise that if credit unions in Scotland are to come of age, they need robust financial regulation around them. Work is being done with the FSA and volunteers and staff at credit unions to make sure that they have a robust regime that has the confidence of both creditors and those who want to borrow.

Does my hon. Friend agree that credit unions have come of age in Scotland, and none more so than Dalmuir credit union, which now has 7,000 members? It has grown since the Secretary of State opened the new building and it lets out £4 million a year. Scotland leads the way in that, and the biggest credit union in Scotland and in Great Britain is the Scotwest credit union, with more than 16,000 members. That is truly coming of age.

My hon. Friend is correct. I know that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State helped launch the Dalmuir credit union a few months ago. Yes, both the Government and the Scottish Executive have shown their support for credit unions. They are coming of age. All of us in the House have a duty not just to highlight the advantages of credit unions to some of our more disadvantaged areas, but to encourage people in our more advantaged areas to see the credit union as a valuable way of supporting their local communities.

What human rights issues she has dealt with since 9 July. [73597]

Last week, I appeared in the Privy Council in the case of R v. Her Majesty's Advocate. The case raises important issues, such as the interpretation and effect of article 6 in so far as it deals with the right to have a trial determined within a reasonable time, and its relationship with the Scotland Act 1998. In addition, I have dealt with more than 60 new cases, which have been intimated to me as devolution issues alleging various breaches of convention rights.

In view of the fact that the distinguished Glasgow solicitor, Eddie McKechnie, has taken the case of his client in Barlinnie to the European Court of Human Rights, what is the role of the Westminster Parliament in the Lockerbie case now?

There is a special procedure whereby the registry of the European Court of Human Rights would, if it thought fit, in due course make communication to the UK Government in relation to the Lockerbie case, but unless and until such communication is made there is no role for the UK Government.

What her role has been in the re-opened inquiry into the loss of the fishing boat, Trident; and if she will make a statement. [73598]

I requested and arranged a preliminary meeting of potential parties to the rehearing and their representatives, which took place before the Sheriff Principal at Aberdeen sheriff court on 27 September. I appeared personally to deal with the wide range of preliminary issues. As the hon. Gentleman may recall, I had previously met him in his role as constituency MP and one of the relatives on 25 April, at which time I explained my role and the general procedure that regulates such inquiries.

I thank the Advocate-General for her consideration in meeting the relatives with me. As she is well aware, they have waited a quarter of a century to find out what happened to their loved ones in the loss of the fishing boat, Trident. Can she therefore give an assurance, first, that, in so far as it falls within her responsibilities, there will be no unnecessary delays in the inquiry process, and secondly, that the families will have proper legal representation throughout the process through public funds?

A vast amount of the delay was caused by the fact that the fishing boat in question was not discovered until relatively recently. So far as it is within my power, I shall certainly do as much as I can to expedite the process. The hon. Gentleman is aware that it involves highly technical work, which is dependent on the seas and the weather, so there will inevitably be further delays.

What devolution issues have been raised with her since 10 July. [73599]

What devolution issues have been raised with her since 9 July under the Scotland Act 1998. [73602]

Since 9 July 2002, 67 devolution issue cases have been intimated to me; all but three related to criminal matters, such as the right to a fair trial, the right to silence and undue delay in trial. Of the three civil matters intimated, two concerned professional disciplinary bodies and the right to a fair hearing before them. The third related to planning law.

As the Advocate-General has explained on a number of occasions in the House that a key reason for her limited number of interventions in devolution cases is the desire to save the taxpayer money, can she confirm the total cost of her interventions to date, and the percentage that it represents of the total cost of her office since its inception?

I do not think that I said that cost was a key issue, although it is certainly important. When I handle cases personally—I do so whenever I can—a substantial saving is made, but I regret that the figures for which the hon. Lady asks are not available.

May I say what a pleasure it is to see the hon. and learned Lady in her place? Has she yet had occasion to give advice on the following scenario? The making of an application to extend a Scottish airport would be a reserved matter, whereas planning remains a devolved matter. Which jurisdiction would have the final decision?

I am always delighted to see the hon. Lady and I am glad to see that she, too, is still in her place. As I hope she knows, I always try to give her as much assistance as I can, but I regret that I must invoke the parliamentary convention that Law Officers have followed in the House for many years under different Administrations. I am afraid that it is not possible for me to give advice to the House about the various issues that I may or may not have considered.

How many (a) lawyers and (b) others were held to be in contempt of court for delaying court proceedings in the last year for which records are available; and if he will make a statement. [73604]

The Lord Chancellor's Department does not collate the requested information, but I am informed by the Bar Council and the Law Society that it is rare for lawyers to be held in contempt of court, but that where they are informed of cases, they can pursue disciplinary action. We are looking at new measures to reduce unnecessary delays in the courts.

I congratulate my hon. Friend and her Department on their input into the criminal justice White Paper, which will be a great step forward for many people, especially in my constituency, who need the nuts and bolts of the criminal justice system to be attended to. Before the proposals are considered in Committee, will she meet Inspectors Emmott, Wilson, Windmill-Jones and Whitmore from my constituency and hear their frustration about some of the difficulties that they encounter when witnesses are intimidated by yobs, youths and others in the constituency and fail to attend court? Will she talk to those people and listen to their concern that certain defence lawyers—not many, but significant numbers—abuse the system? Will she also consider using contempt of court and waiting cost orders to a greater degree in the Criminal Justice Bill when it finally comes before the House?

I am certainly happy to meet my hon. Friend and any delegation that he chooses to bring from his constituency to discuss the issues. He is right that there can be immense frustration among victims and witnesses when court cases do not go ahead on the day for which they are scheduled for trial. About 24 per cent. of trials do not proceed on the scheduled day, compared with 28 per cent. in 1997, so progress has been made but we need to go further. That is why we are considering a series of measures, including different incentives and sanctions for those involved in the process.

Delays and adjournments are not entirely the responsibility of defence lawyers. In magistrates courts, they are often due to the distances between courts following closures or the lack of availability of solicitors in criminal practice. May I make a positive suggestion to the hon. Lady? Will she consider applying a new rule to the Crown Prosecution Service requiring that all cases be prepared at least 36 hours before the listing of a case? Such a rule would ensure that all parties can be advised in due time if difficulties arise and that a costly adjournment that is pointless to everybody concerned can be avoided.

The hon. Gentleman is right that there are a series of reasons why cases do not proceed on the scheduled day, including the failure of witnesses and defendants to show up. About 6 per cent. of trials in 2001 did not go ahead on the scheduled day because either the prosecution or the defence said that they were not ready on the day. We are considering a series of ways of improving case preparation, involving judges, lawyers and other court users. Part of the issue is that nobody takes responsibility when the case does not go ahead on the day. We need to specify who is responsible in what circumstances and what the different sanctions or incentives might be when something goes wrong. That is what the case preparation project is dealing with and I shall certainly take on board the points that he made.

We have not mentioned one matter: the cover-up in the courts, to which we cannot refer in the House of Commons. Under the contempt rule, we cannot draw attention to cases that have been delayed by wealthy, greedy barristers who cannot agree their diaries. Cases have been drawn to my attention that I cannot mention on the Floor of the House because of our arcane contempt rules. Will the Minister go to the relevant file and discuss with the House authorities whether, without trespassing into the substance of criminal cases, we can, as custodians of the public purse, at least draw attention to the fact that the legal brethren are manipulating their diaries and maximising their profits and earnings at the expense of justice delayed?

I shall certainly look into my hon. Friend's points. Anxieties have been raised. For example, last year's Audit Commission report stated that

"the current fee structure for lawyers may be seen to offer an incentive for legal representatives to prolong cases in the judicial process unnecessarily. That could be countered by the establishment of a culture in the courts that challenges inadequate preparation and measures the performance of lawyers, and a payment scheme that rewards the expedition of cases where possible."

If he will make a statement on the implications of the comprehensive spending review for the performance of his Department in relation to IT. [73605]

The comprehensive spending review set out plans to invest more than £1 billion in IT in the criminal justice system over the next three years. The Lord Chancellor's Department, the Home Office and the Office of the Attorney-General have been working together to determine the best spread of investment throughout the criminal justice system. Those discussions are not yet complete, but we expect the programme to include IT infrastructure in the Crown courts, the development of exhibit and the investment for magistrates courts that is already under way.

Does the Minister's answer imply that she accepts the criticism of the Master of the Rolls, Lord Phillips, who said that the Department was seriously at fault for under-investing in IT in the courts, such that the Lord Chief Justice's reforms are being seriously imperilled and there is a major pile-up of costs and delays in the civil courts?

We certainly believe that there is a need for more investment in IT infrastructure, not only in the courts but in other parts of the criminal justice system and on the civil side. We are making progress in using IT. For example, the money claim online service, which allows people to issue claims over the internet, is proving a great success. The number of cases that now go through it means that it is the fourth largest county court in the country. Progress is being made, but it takes time to put in place the new infrastructure and IT that we need.

Does the Minister accept that it is a matter of using IT not only in her Department but in other Departments such as the Home Office? She knows that not enough progress has been made in reducing unnecessary delays in the court system from arrest to sentence. Surely the time has come to embrace the concept of modern IT strategy. which will assist with the more effective disposal of cases and reduce the alarming proportion that is unnecessarily discontinued. Will she make a pledge to use it more effectively?

I am glad that the hon. Member for Stone (Mr. Cash) is present; we heard that the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Mr. Hawkins) had taken over his responsibilities. I am glad that the hon. Member for Stone remains in his place; I imagine that he would be reluctant to give up being the shadow spokesperson for the Lord Chancellor's Department's new responsibilities for referendums and European elections.

What assessment he has made of the adequacy of facilities at child contact centres [73606]

My Department is working with the child contact organisations to survey the current provision of child contact centres. This will help us to identify where the gaps are in provision and how we can improve that provision. The Government are also providing funding of £900,000 over three years to key child contact centre organisations to develop models of supervised contact aimed at supporting those most at risk.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is she aware that, in a few cases, contact is between not only parents and children but sister and brother? Over the past three or four years, I have been involved in a case in which the sister is also subject to the provisions involving supervision when she meets her brother. What facilities can the Minister offer in rare cases such as this, in which sister and brother also have to meet under supervision?

My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the importance to children of keeping in contact with their siblings, when it is safe to do so. Through the parenting plan, the Government are encouraging parents who are separating to take that into consideration and to discuss it with their children when appropriate. When a court is considering contact between siblings, the children's views should be taken into account, whether through parents or through reports presented to the court. A child may also be separately represented. Of course, if a sibling is unhappy with a contact order, there are ways in which he or she can challenge it. I should be happy to write to my hon. Friend to set out those provisions in detail, if he would like me to do so.

I welcome the Minister's statement concerning contact with children, but is she aware of the deepening concern in Northern Ireland, in the courts and among social services and parents, about the lack of secure accommodation for children and young adults who need that particular kind of care?

I am certainly aware of the need for more facilities for supervised contact. Obviously, the issue of secure accommodation is not a matter for my Department, but we are looking into the issue of proper facilities for supervised contact, which is why we are carrying out the current survey. I take on board the hon. Gentleman's comments and shall ensure that the appropriate Ministers are made aware of them.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, although the contact centres do a really important job, it is also vital that the supervision that they offer is precise? There has been a number of very upsetting cases in which children have been attacked, and I hope that my hon. Friend will look closely at the provision of proper security for children who are already at risk and need to be absolutely sure that they are not going to be put into an even more dangerous position by coming to a centre.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. This is not only an issue for children; it can be an issue for other family members as well, particularly women who may be bringing their children to contact centres. It is certainly true at the moment that we need to look much more closely at what is available, particularly in terms of supervised contact. We want to work with children's organisations to develop proper methods of determining what is supervised and what is purely supported. Too often, we feel that there is not enough information available. Sometimes, there is not enough information available to the courts about where children are being sent, or about the adequacy of their supervision. This is something that the survey that we are conducting and the work that we are doing with those organisations will sort out.

What representations and submissions his Department has received in response to the criminal justice White Paper of July 2002. [73607]

The Government published the criminal justice White Paper, "Justice for All" on 17 July. Since then, the Lord Chancellor's Department has received 39 responses, the Home Office has received 64 and the Crown Prosecution Service has received four. A wide range of interested parties has responded.

Will the Minister ensure that the responses are published as a matter of urgency by placing them in the Library? Will she undertake that there will be time for the Home Office to consider them properly and, possibly, to respond to them—accepting the good ones and giving some public argument about why it rejects the poor ones, a bit like the way in which Select Committee reports are responded to?

I will certainly engage in further discussions about the responses that we have received—many from individual magistrates replying to letters we have sent them giving details. On previous convictions, the hon. Gentleman will know what was said in the White Paper. The Home Office has been leading a series of consultations and discussions with a range of stakeholders and will report to the House in due course.

To ask the President of the Council what plans he has to implement reforms of the sittings of the House. [73618]

The Select Committee on Modernisation recommended that the House sit at 11.30 am on Tuesdays and Wednesdays so that questions, statements and opening speeches could take place earlier in the day and there would be a better opportunity to set the agenda on public debate. The Committee's report will be debated in the House next week, and I look forward to receiving my hon. Friend's support then.

I am one of those Labour Members who are immensely proud that it was this Government who established the Modernisation Committee and are driving forward a programme for change not just for our own convenience, but for the better working of Parliament and better linking of Parliament with the public. Would it not be a pity if, despite their natural inclinations, Conservative Members who might be inclined to support our modernisation agenda were prevented from doing so next Tuesday?

I entirely agree that sitting hours should be changed not for the convenience of Members, but to enable us to do a better job on behalf of Parliament and to enable this place to be more objective. At present we take ministerial statements at 4 pm. They constitute major announcements of Government policy. No Member on either side of the House would voluntarily plan a press conference to take place at 4 pm, which in itself is a case for our meeting earlier.

indicated assent.

He has now done so again. Regrettably, however, Hansard has problems recording a nod, so it would be helpful if the right hon. Gentleman put his assent on the record from the Dispatch Box today.

Is it the President's understanding that should we decide, sensibly, to revert to a more intelligent method of dealing with our business at a more intelligent time of day—that was the arrangement at many times in the past— the earliest that the BBC could broadcast our proceedings would be January, because otherwise Prime Minister's Question Time would appear in the middle of children's programmes? Some Members would think that entirely appropriate; but can the right hon. Gentleman assure us that if the House votes for these important and useful changes they can be in place by the new year, at least?

I am happy to give that assurance. It is important that those substantial changes, if we vote for them on Tuesday, should be introduced properly. I understand that the Table Office does not feel confident about handling the shortening of the period of notice for oral questions, which we will also discuss on Tuesday, before January. I think it right for us to introduce that at a time when it can be dealt with competently.

Assuming that the House approves the reforms next week, as I sincerely hope will be the case, can my right hon. Friend explain what implications his proposals on the carry-over of Bills will have for private Members' Bills, possibly giving them more time to get through?

My hon. Friend makes a large assumption about the House agreeing to the proposals. The House will agree to them only if those who support them turn out and vote for them on Tuesday, and that would be my message to those who wish them well. On the question of carry-over, perhaps I should clarify that we are proposing carry-over only for Government legislation, not for private Members' Bills, for which there is a separate specific allocation within our Standing Orders. On the issue of principle, I have never understood why we have a sudden death for every Bill at the end of each Session. We are elected for a four-year Parliament, so it seems quite wrong—[Interruption.] Perhaps I have given away a secret and I should retract that. We are elected for a potential five-year Parliament, so I have never understood why we then carve it up into one-year lumps. If we want to carry out a better job of scrutinising legislation, we need more time and we will get more time only if we escape from the sessional straitjacket.

Does the President of the Council accept that we are elected here to serve our constituents and not the media? Will he tell the House how many people responded to the survey that he conducted during the recent recess and what percentage of those Members were not seduced by his proposals for these ridiculous new hours?

Of course we are here to serve our constituents. Certainly many of my constituents think that we are rather odd and eccentric when we sit here until 10 o'clock and occasionally until midnight, whereas we could be working normal, reasonable hours. Of course, our constituents know about us through the media and it is therefore perfectly proper that we should operate in a way that enables us to communicate with them.

To ask the President of the Council what plans he has to make proposals to the Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons on the experimental seating arrangements in Westminster Hall. [73619]

The Modernisation Committee recommended in its recent report that Westminster Hall be made permanent, but made no recommendations on the seating arrangements. My right hon. Friend has no plans to propose a change to the current seating arrangements, but he is aware that my hon. Friend preferred the original layout.

I am very disappointed by that reply, as I feel that Parliament has been perhaps inadvertently misled on this matter—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] When the original seating arrangement was changed, we were informed that it was an experiment, just as the original seating arrangement had been. I would have expected some assessment of the preferred outcome of the experiment. May I therefore urge the Minister to ensure that such an assessment is conducted if the Modernisation Committee's recommendation that Westminster Hall sittings be put on a permanent basis is pursued?

Just because the arrangement for sittings in Westminster Hall is to be put on a permanent basis, it does not mean to say that the configuration of the seating is being made permanent. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the current configuration, although it is continuing, is still experimental and she is as free as any other hon. Member to make representations to the Modernisation Committee. However, I would say to her that, as things stand at the moment, she is the only hon. Member who has expressed that view.

The Minister will confirm, I am sure, that the original design of the semicircular seating based on the Assemblée Nationale was to try to bring a spirit of co-operation between the parties. Has it worked?

The hon. Member knows that the original configuration was changed because a number of hon. Members, including those who chair meetings in Westminster Hall, complained that it sometimes made it extremely difficult to identify hon. Members who wanted to speak when large crowds of the public were coming in and out. I am not aware that the change to the configuration that my hon. Friend the Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart) is not so fond of has resulted in a less consensual atmosphere in Westminster Hall, but if I am wrong I am happy to hear from hon. Members that that is the case.

To ask the President of the Council if he will make a statement on plans to allow hon. Members to table written questions during the recess. [73620]

If the House agrees to a parliamentary calendar without a three-month summer recess, there will be less need for questions to be tabled and answered during the recess. The Government and the House authorities have already co-operated this year to ensure that questions tabled shortly before the House rose for the summer were answered during the recess.

If one effect of the modernisation proposals is to shorten the period in which we are not permitted to ask questions, to that extent I welcome them. I accept that, hitherto, it has been axiomatic that the House needs to be sitting for us to ask questions, but I wonder whether that is necessarily always so in relation to written questions. In recesses, Departments remain Departments and continue to function, and Ministers remain Ministers. Is it possible to find some mechanism whereby we can ask written questions, at least, when Parliament is in recess? Writing letters does not have the same effect as asking parliamentary questions. Could the Minister consider at least a weekly bulletin of questions during recesses that could be tabled and answered?

I shall certainly take away my hon. Friend's suggestion, but I ask him to acknowledge that the Government have made significant improvements in the way that the system operates. As he himself says, Members are still free to write letters to Ministers during the recess, and it is expected that those Ministers will reply within 15 working days.

Has the Minister read the report of the House of Commons Procedure Committee on parliamentary questions? As he will agree, it has a majority of Government Members, as have all Committees. In particular, has he read paragraph 101, which states:

"We…recommend that with effect from 1 September each year, Members should be permitted to table written questions. We recommend this change should be made irrespective of whether the Government's proposals for September sittings of the House are adopted"?

I am not ignorant of what is in the report, which I have read, and I think that the right hon. Gentleman will be pleasantly surprised when he sees the Government's official response to it tomorrow. However, it is also within the Government's prerogative not to accept all the recommendations of a report from a Committee such as the Procedure Committee. For the reasons that I have already given, we believe that the most sensible way forward is for the House to approve the changes in respect of September sittings, so that we can halve the time during which Members are unable to table questions.

To ask the President of the Council what proposals he plans to put to the Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons on improving the system of Select Committees. [73621]

The House debated the report of the Modernisation Committee on Select Committees in May, when it agreed to a large number of its recommendations, including increased specialist staff, better administrative support and a clear focus on core tasks. It is rather early to revisit the topic so soon, but I am always willing to listen to proposals for improvement.

After 10 years of serving on Select Committees, may I point out to the President of the Council that—too frequently, unfortunately—some witnesses approach the process with insufficient candour, and that there is often much ambiguity? That is true across the spectrum of witnesses. Is it not time that we introduced automatic use of the oath, so that a person tells the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Even if I cannot persuade my right hon. Friend on this issue, could the attention of every witness at least be drawn to the Sessional Orders that we pass—to the sound, wrongly, of much laughter—at the beginning of each Parliament? They state that anybody giving false evidence before a Committee will be dealt with with the utmost severity. It is time that we made people focus on this issue rather like a hanging, so that they concentrate on what they must do: show frankness and candour before Parliament.

I cannot say that I come to the Dispatch Box as a supporter of capital punishment, but I congratulate my hon. Friend on his many years of service on Select Committees, some of which—in fact, rather too many—overlapped with my period as the relevant Minister. Of course, it is important that witnesses tell the truth and the whole truth, and there may be merit in routinely making the Sessional Order available to witnesses so that they are aware of the gravity of the occasion in which they are participating. However, I would hesitate to involve lawyers any more than we have to and would deprecate a situation in which any witness came with a solicitor just in case they ended up committing a criminal offence.