1. With reference to the Ecclesiastical Offices (Terms of Service) Measure, for what reason the ownership of a parsonage house is being removed from incumbents and vested in the diocese. (185162)

Good morning, Mr. Speaker. The proposal, which recognises that housing is an important element in the terms of service of office holders, seeks the provision of appropriate accommodation and the establishment of a consistent framework to govern the relationship between housing providers and office holders.

Will the Church Commissioners listen carefully to the concerns of the diocesan synods and the meeting of the Church of England General Synod next week about this transfer of £4 billion of property from the parishes to the dioceses? The current legal vehicle, the corporation sole, ensures unencumbered continuity of these properties from generation to generation. The new trust will not do that. Will the hon. Gentleman assure me that the commissioners will look carefully to see that the property vested in the new parsonage boards of the dioceses will be as safe and inviolable as it is under the current legal arrangements?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall listen very carefully to the views of the General Synod next week. As he will know, “Render unto Caesar that which belongs to Caesar”. To reverse the role, we must render unto the General Synod that which belongs to the General Synod. It will meet next week to discuss the matter. There are differences of views, but the hon. Gentleman, who is a member of the Synod, will be able to participate in those proceedings as well as the proceedings here.

A large proportion of parsonage houses were endowed locally. Land was given by a local landowner, and the houses were often built by a local individual after a fundraising effort on a grand scale. Why should we interfere with arrangements that have worked well for many years? We are transferring the title to the diocesan body, which will undoubtedly have a significantly different agenda of its own—different from that of the local community.

In order to enlighten my hon. Friend and the House on what will be proposed and debated at the Synod next week, I can tell him that the primary aim of the legislation is to improve the security of the clergy by giving them rights equivalent to those enjoyed by employees under the Employment Relations Act 1999. As I said, the General Synod will consider that significant piece of legislation next week, and we await the outcome of its considerations.

I refer hon. Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Interests. I would like to follow up a point made by the hon. Member for North-West Leicestershire (David Taylor). Many parsonage homes were endowed locally for the furtherance of the Church’s work locally. This centralising measure will take power away from benefices and give it to diocesan boards of finance. Will the hon. Gentleman representing the Church Commissioners convey the serious concern that exists among a great many people throughout the country about this centralising measure?

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to these question sessions, and I also welcome the pertinence of his question. Clearly, the matter he raises preoccupies Members of the House. The General Synod will be aware of that when it meets next week, and I have no doubt that the views expressed here will be taken into account in its debates.

2. What additional measures the Electoral Commission has considered to increase public participation in the democratic process. (185163)

The Electoral Commission undertakes a range of activities to ensure people understand how to register and how to vote. Additionally, the commission is launching a campaign with London Elects to provide information about the London election on 1 May, and an information campaign for the English and Welsh local elections on the same day.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his answer. He will know that in last year’s local elections, an attempt was made to increase voting through voting by phone. Unfortunately, a report came out in which the commissioners said that such schemes had a negligible effect on turnout. Will he explain why that was, what lessons were learned from that experience, and how they are going to take the process forward in the London elections this year?

The hon. Gentleman makes a detailed point and I would like, if I may, to investigate the matter. I undertake to write to him about it.

On the more general point, other bodies undertake work to increase turnout and the commission has significantly refocused its public awareness activity on providing information about registration, elections and democratic institutions. Indeed, it is another main thrust of the Electoral Commission’s work. Of course, it is still much involved in promoting registration and voting.

Will the hon. Gentleman comment on the number of local authorities that do a reasonable canvass of their areas to get more people on to the register? Little of that appears to be going on in the Bradford district. It is terribly important in Bradford because approximately 50 per cent. of the Asian community do not speak English and are illiterate. It would be a great help in my constituency if we had a really good canvass to get more people on to the register.

Yes, the commission works closely with local authorities throughout the United Kingdom to support and advise them on voter awareness activities. The commission provides voter information materials free of charge and runs training sessions with electoral registration officers. Support is also available via a dedicated website. In the past year, more than 2 million voter information leaflets and resources have been ordered by electoral administrators to encourage registration and understanding of the democratic process.

On the hon. Lady’s specific point, the Electoral Commission is vigilant in trying to ensure that a range of information and materials is available in different languages.

As a non-conformist, I feel on rather safer ground with the Electoral Commission than I do with the Church Commissioners.

The hon. Gentleman knows that there has been much debate about refocusing the Electoral Commission’s work and tilting the balance towards regularity and probity in electoral matters. He knows that we are anticipating early legislation on the matter. What discussions has he held with the Lord Chancellor in advance of that legislation to ensure that the Electoral Commission can greatly expand its work and thus make sure that our elections are held fairly and properly?

I think the best answer I can give is that, although, on behalf of the Speaker’s Committee, I do not personally become involved in negotiations and discussions with different Departments, it has occasionally been suggested that it would be appropriate for the House to deliberate on Electoral Commission issues. I instituted one debate, which was allowed by the Liaison Committee, on the subject, and perhaps it would be helpful for hon. Members to have an opportunity soon to discuss Electoral Commission issues. Indeed, given that we are seeking a new chairman for the commission, that would be very appropriate. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman agrees that a general discussion in the House might be useful.

Hon. Members have repeatedly referred to voter registration as a key matter. Surely, we need, first and foremost, to heed the advice that the Electoral Commission has already given us and enact legislation on individual voter registration as a matter of urgency.

Indeed, since 2003, the Electoral Commission has urged that individual voter registration should be introduced. The subject causes the commission some concern because there is an opportunity in the current system for the head of a household, or the person who receives the mail, to deal with electoral registration as he thinks fit. Of course, in most cases, that is done with propriety, but there is an opportunity for corruption and for the head of a household to overlook the duty. The Electoral Commission has urged the introduction of individual registration.

With respect to the hon. Gentleman, I do not think that he replied adequately to the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Mrs. Cryer). She made the point that the extent of under-registration in several areas can genuinely be addressed only by door-to-door canvassing. She asked what steps the commission was taking to ensure that such canvassing, which happens in many places, is adopted universally.

The Electoral Commission informs me that its advertising campaigns for the 2007 elections involved activity targeted at under-registered black, Chinese and Polish communities and included radio, press, outdoor and online advertising. The Electoral Commission has also undertaken special work to encourage students to register. It has been especially vigilant in trying to ensure that younger people and students are aware of their opportunity to register and vote.

3. What estimate the Electoral Commission has made of the number of eligible UK voters who live abroad but have not registered to vote. (185164)

Recent research suggests that the total number of British people who live abroad for a year or more may be approximately 5.5 million. Only British citizens who have registered to vote in the United Kingdom in the past 15 years are eligible to register while living abroad. There is no effective way of measuring that number.

One can only imagine why so many Brits want to live abroad. Of the many millions that my hon. Friend mentioned, only 13,000 are registered to vote in general elections. That is a low figure. The amount of money that the Electoral Commission spends on promoting voting abroad is £12,000. Is not that figure far too small? Should not it be greater and be properly focused to try to attract those who are eligible to register and vote?

The Electoral Commission ran a campaign last autumn at a cost of about £100,000, which was more than twice as much as was spent in advance of the previous general election. The problem, of course, is identifying the market. The number of people is extremely large, but the number registered is extremely small, as my hon. Friend pointed out. The most recent campaign to reach British citizens living abroad included online advertising, public relations activity, mailing to British people living overseas and the distribution of information via British embassies and high commissions.

The Electoral Commission is also proposing to convene a seminar later this year with political parties to discuss ways of improving registration levels among overseas residents. How good it would be if we could learn something from the American elections. I understand that it is estimated that many thousands of American citizens living in London are exercising their right to vote. I have been advised to be cautious about quoting those numbers, but it would be nice to think that lessons could be learned from that campaign.

One of the problems with the votes in the American presidential elections is that they sometimes arrive far too late to be counted, but that is another matter. I agree with the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) that the number of people voting among those living abroad who are eligible to vote is woefully low. I wonder whether the electoral registration officers, who play such an important role in getting our registers up to date, have a role in attracting people who live overseas to register to vote.

The hon. Gentleman makes an extremely good point. There are three parties involved. The first is the Electoral Commission, which takes the view that it would not be proportionate for it to devote very large amounts of resources to overseas voters, because of the difficulties of reaching them. The second is the electoral registration officers and I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making a valid point about them. I will discuss with the Electoral Commission what further can be done to enable them to fulfil their duties in that regard. The third is the political parties. The Electoral Commission takes the view that it is primarily the responsibility of the political parties to seek to encourage overseas citizens to register and vote in UK elections.

Does the Electoral Commission have a view on whether UK citizens living abroad have been deterred from bothering to register to vote by the Government’s decision to cut the qualifying period during which people who have left the UK can participate in general elections?

This is of course a controversial issue. Parliament has taken the view that residents who have lived overseas for 15 years or less after their period of registration in the United Kingdom should vote. It has been suggested that that period should be lengthened or even shortened. My hon. Friend makes a fair point, although it would not be appropriate for me to express an opinion.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that many of my constituents would regard spending resources that could be better used to increase registration among those who live in the United Kingdom as a gross waste of money? I have nothing against those who live abroad, but they often pay no taxes and break the connection. I would far sooner encourage UK residents to vote than those living overseas.

The Electoral Commission spends less than 2 per cent. of its budget on exhorting overseas residents to register and vote. The commission believes that to be a proportionate amount, but the hon. Gentleman’s point will of course be noted.

5. If he will make a statement on the consultation process in relation to women bishops in the Church of England. (185166)

A legislative drafting group, chaired by the Bishop of Manchester, having received more than 300 representations from across the Church, is now preparing a report for discussion at the General Synod, hopefully in July.

Is the hon. Gentleman concerned that an inadequate consultation opportunity has been given to the Third Province Movement, whose membership includes a significant number of clergy and laity? Will he please ensure an opportunity for the widest possible consultation on the women bishops’ proposal, particularly with those who have prominent and active leadership roles in the Church?

The hon. Gentleman will know that the legislative drafting group has met a number of consultees representing a wide cross-section of views. The drafting group’s challenging task is to identify possible arrangements for those who may be conscientiously unable to receive the ministry of women bishops. We should hesitate to be critical of those who are trying to preserve the Church of England as a broad church that gladly encompasses such differences. By way of teasing the hon. Gentleman, I shall use a phrase from the European Union: within the Church, there may be unity in diversity.

6. How many listed vicarages and rectories the Church of England has sold in the last 10 years. (185167)

The information that the hon. Gentleman requests is not held centrally. However, since 2001, dioceses have been free to sell parsonages without any reference to the commissioners, so long as there are no objections, the sale meets standard criteria and the property is sold at full value.

I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I share the general nervousness of other hon. Members about the centralisation of the Church estate, and I hope that he will make those views known to the Synod. Of course I understand the problems of merging parishes, which can, in some areas, leave too many vicarages or houses tied to the Church. Will he also convey to the Synod the feeling, particularly in rural areas, that the temptation to sell off desirable houses and to separate the rectory or vicarage from the church in order to make a quick cash gain can have long-term negative implications for the local community?

The hon. Gentleman puts his finger on one of the problems of our era. How can the Church deal with the changing nature of our society in relation to the location of our parsonages and churches? The points that he has raised, which are related to other points raised today, will be taken into account by the Synod and by the Church generally.

12. What assessment she has made of the performance of the Crown Prosecution Service in presenting victim impact statements to courts at sentencing. (185154)

The Crown Prosecution Service has not conducted detailed assessments of its performance, but Law Officers and the CPS recognise that victim personal statements can have real value in providing victims of crime with a chance to tell a court about the impact that a crime has had on them. Under the CPS’s victim focus scheme, prosecutors play a key role in helping bereaved families to make a victim personal statement.

It is great that a Labour Government whom I support and a Parliament in which I serve has acted decisively to put the rights of victims at the heart of the criminal justice system. How confident can my hon. and learned Friend be, however, that the component parts of the criminal justice system now have sufficiently robust systems in place to assure victims of the exercise of their rights? In respect of the Crown Prosecution Service in particular, is she satisfied that there is adequate guidance and training for members of staff to enable them to carry out their duties to the best of their abilities?

I echo what my hon. Friend has said. It is a very important step indeed to put the victim at the centre of the criminal justice service, as it is now called. It is no longer a system; it now recognises itself to be a service, intended to provide people with the opportunity to tell a court concrete facts such as the effect that bail might have, and to give them the chance to express the way in which a crime has impacted on them.

It is important that we learn as we go along, and that there is a lot of input from victims themselves into the way we develop the system. I am confident that the Crown Prosecution Service guidance is good and strong, and that there is a huge commitment from the individual officials at the CPS to make this scheme work. I do not doubt that there is learning still to be done, but these measures are capable of giving victims more satisfaction from the criminal justice system than they have had in the past.

Can the Solicitor-General confirm that it is now routine that, in every case, the victim is offered the opportunity to make a victim impact statement? Will she confirm that, in tragic cases of homicide, someone is able to give a statement to the court on behalf of the victim’s family before sentencing?

Yes, it certainly should always be the case that there is an opportunity to make a victim personal statement. The victim care unit, the Crown Prosecution Service and the police working together have made that process more secure. There are two schemes: the victim advocate scheme and the victim focus scheme for bereaved people. The victim focus scheme is run by the CPS and it has been rolled out nationally even while the victim advocate scheme, which was the pilot for bereaved families, is being assessed. The CPS feels that it has been such a beneficial scheme that it should be rolled out without further delay. The focus scheme gets the CPS to help a bereaved family to make just such a statement, but it is usually read by the prosecutor or simply read by the judge and referred to by the prosecutor. My understanding is that judges adjourn in order to make the point to the bereaved that they are reading and digesting what is in the statement.

I also share the enthusiasm of my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) and, indeed, of the Solicitor-General for the victim impact statement process. There is a pilot in Manchester Crown court and I know that it is being well received there. Will my hon. and learned Friend go a little further today in saying how we can ensure that best practice is taken forward, as the court process is still intimidating, particularly when the victims themselves may be bereaved? The assistance that she described is extremely helpful, but how can we ensure that best practice is translated and spread across the whole service?

I think we can say that we can do that. I am very grateful to my hon. Friend, whose area has seen a pilot of this advocate scheme, which has, I think, been well regarded. The assistance given by the CPS is not just to make a statement. It applies to bereaved families and to all kinds of bereavement caused through crime, including through road traffic crime. The CPS will meet the family beforehand and explain the whole process to them. One hopes that the inevitably daunting experience of attending court is alleviated a little by that exposure.

13. What assessment the Crown Prosecution Service has made of the effectiveness of the system for presenting objections to bail. (185155)

The Crown Prosecution Service has not done a discrete assessment of the effectiveness of the system for presenting objections to bail. Police concerns about granting bail to the accused are reviewed objectively by prosecutors against the Bail Act criteria. Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service inspectorate periodically reviews CPS systems generally and has not identified any inherent weaknesses in performance.

I am surprised at the Solicitor-General’s response as in recent weeks we have seen an increasing number of dangerous people released on bail and going on to commit even more horrendous crimes. The police are sick to the back teeth of arresting the same people week after week who abuse the bail system and breach bail conditions, yet nothing ever seems to happen. What is the Solicitor-General going to do to deal with this abuse of bail and end her complacent approach, which we also saw in her earlier answer?

There is nothing complacent about the Crown Prosecution Service or my approach to the issue of bail. In all the cases that have hit the headlines—I am not going to talk about the defendant called Swellings, because he has not yet been sentenced—the CPS opposed bail robustly, repeatedly and at length. The law in the UK is that a person is not guilty on the basis of an accusation, but only when they have been proven guilty before a jury. Until that time, they are entitled to bail. When public safety or justice requires it, of course the CPS resolutely objects to bail. We also have an independent judiciary in this country and we are very proud and pleased that we do, and the judiciary takes the decision as between public protection and the right of an unconvicted defendant. It cannot predict the future and cannot read minds, but it makes good rational judgments on a sensible basis. That is what has happened in all those cases.

Let me make the following very clear to the hon. Gentleman. My right hon. Friend the Lord Chancellor —and the Ministry of Justice—has said that when the dust on those cases has settled, as it were, and if any issues are raised that require changes in the law, he will look to see whether they are necessary. I have no hesitation in saying, however, that the CPS tries very hard—

Order. I must stop the Solicitor-General.

But the points raised by the hon. Member for Shipley (Philip Davies) need to be examined. Should the Solicitor-General not meet the Home Secretary and the Lord Chancellor to establish what further steps could be taken to analyse the results of the granting of bail? I think that is all that the House is asking. Let us look at what has happened, let us look at the impact on resources, and let us see whether any lessons can be learned from the procedure.

As ever, my right hon. Friend has made a sensible suggestion. I meet the other two Justice Ministers frequently, as does my noble Friend the Attorney-General. As I have said, the Lord Chancellor is taking the lead on the issue, and I have no doubt that he will consult both the Attorney-General and the Home Secretary on any proposals that he concludes, having consulted us, are necessary following the changes that have taken place. However, as I have also said, the system is as it is.

I hope the Solicitor-General agrees that whatever changes are made, she should return to her original statement that the right to bail follows logically and inevitably from the presumption of innocence: the rule that we are all innocent until proven guilty. I hope she can assure us that the Government have no intention of following the route followed even in progressive countries such as Canada, where two thirds of prisoners are on remand, towards almost automatic remand for those accused of criminal offences.

I think I have made the position very clear. Indeed, I have been criticised for making it extremely clear. The position is, as the hon. Gentleman says, that a person is presumed innocent until a jury decides that he is guilty, or he himself pleads guilty. At each stage, people are entitled to bail unless the public need to be protected from them, or there is a danger that they will interfere with witnesses or not turn up in court. Those criteria have served us well for 30 years. The cases that have been mentioned have caused us to look at the issue again, but that is all that we are doing—looking at it again.

As the Solicitor-General will know, some of the cases that have caused public concern relate to the grant of bail by the Crown court. Others appear to relate to the grant of bail by the magistrates court. The power exists, and has existed for some time, for the Crown Prosecution Service to appeal to the Crown court against a mistaken grant of bail. Can the Solicitor-General assure us that the position will be investigated to establish whether there are cases in which, far from robustly opposing the grant of bail initially, the Crown Prosecution Service ought to consider appealing from the magistrates courts if bail has been granted?

Yes. As the hon. Gentleman says, none of the cases that have given rise to concern are in the category of magistrates court cases on which an appeal could have been made. In all those cases, the decisions were made by senior and experienced judges in the Crown court. I am not aware of any anxiety about a failure to appeal against grant of bail in the magistrates court if the Crown Prosecution Service is apprised of the need to do so, but I take the hon. Gentleman’s point, and I have no doubt that it can be addressed as part of the overall issue.

14. What representations the Attorney- General has received on the merits of detaining terrorist suspects for a limited period without charge. (185156)

The Attorney-General has discussed the issue with the Director of Public Prosecutions, and she has received representations from one pressure group.

I wonder whether the Solicitor-General could help a bewildered Back Bencher. Has she observed that the former Attorney-General has said that there is no case for keeping people in custody without charge for more than 28 days, and that that view has been echoed by her former ministerial friend Lord Falconer—the former Lord Chancellor—and, more important, by the existing Director of Public Prosecutions? Have all three of those learned gentlemen gone completely gaga, or are they telling us the naked truth?

I have never seen any of them either gaga or naked. It seems that all the assertions have been that we do not need that change now, but it equally seems that everyone has agreed that it is very possible that an extension beyond 28 days will be needed before very long. The proposal is to legislate to provide an opportunity to extend the period if necessary.

I want to make it very clear that there appears to be agreement across parties, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said yesterday. The issue is how this is done. In my view, the important thing is to have it under judicial control. This proposal would do that: it would put detention not into the hands of the Crown Prosecution Service or the police, but under judicial control, which is where it properly should be.

20. What recent steps the Government have taken to reduce discrimination against women in the workplace. (185134)

Most women now work, and women now have equal educational qualifications to men, but women are still not equal at work. We have helped women in the workplace by tackling low pay, a problem that mostly affects women, through the national minimum wage and tax credits, and we have helped to balance work and family, a requirement which also mostly affects women, through better maternity pay and leave and flexible working, but there is more to do.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer, and I recognise that the Government have done a lot to combat discrimination against women, but is she aware that women sometimes still have to go to court to get equal pay? Can we do something about that?

We need to do more in respect of equal pay in the public and private sectors, and in local government. In that connection, my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government has announced £500 million for capitalisation, to help local government on equal pay. We need fair pay and good local public services, and we can achieve both.

The Minister for equalities will know that in the process of reducing discrimination against women it is important that the Government Equalities Office take a leading role. Can she tell the House when she will be able to appoint a permanent secretary?

What matters is that we get on with doing the job. My fellow Ministers and I are getting on with the work, and we are properly supported by our equality unit—and, actually, a new appointment has just been made.

I wonder whether the right hon. and learned Lady shares the concern I felt when I saw that the 10 most recently appointed judges announced by the new Judicial Appointments Commission were all men, and white men at that. Will she make urgent representations to the Secretary of State for Justice to look into why the new rules did not deliver the intended outcome?

This issue has been raised previously by Members not only in respect of judicial appointments, but public appointments in general. As I have told the House before, we all think it is unacceptable that there has been no increase in women’s appointments to public office in the past 10 years. The independence of the Judicial Appointments Commission, and its target for increasing the number of women at the top level of the judiciary, has yet to bear fruit. I expect to meet the heads of the JAC and the Appointments Commission to see what further can be done soon.

As has already been said, one continuing form of discrimination against women in the workplace is the gender pay gap. Last night at the Fawcett Society reception to celebrate 90 years of women’s suffrage, the right hon. and learned Lady reiterated her desire to do something about that, but also confirmed that we will not have an equalities Bill until the next Queen’s Speech. The Government could act now on the gender pay gap by adopting my proposals. Why will she not do that?

We will have an equality Bill in the next Queen’s Speech; that is when it was scheduled for. We want it to be a radical and effective Bill that makes a difference. I remind the right hon. Lady that Labour women have struggled over the decades to make a difference for women in this country, and that Conservative women have simply sided with Conservative men against that aim.

22. What plans the Government have to mark the 90th anniversary of women’s suffrage. (185136)

The Ministers for women hosted a reception with the Fawcett Society on 6 February to mark the 90th anniversary of women’s qualified suffrage. The event brought together about 200 parliamentarians, including the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs. May), and stakeholders from a wide range of sectors to celebrate the achievement of women’s suffrage and to highlight the need for a more representative democracy. I was pleased that the Prime Minister said yesterday that the Government would consider erecting a statue in Parliament square to honour the suffragette movement; that would be the first statue of a woman in Parliament square.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Despite all the progress, there are still only 97 Labour, 17 Conservative and 9 Liberal Democrat women MPs, and the Fawcett Society estimates that it will take at least 200 years to get anywhere close to having 50:50 representation. All-women shortlists have helped in our case, but those provisions contains a sunset clause and are due to end. What more can we do to ensure that we get closer to having 50:50 representation in my lifetime, rather than in the lifetime of my great-granddaughters?

I thank my hon. Friend for that question and for her work in this vital matter. There is no doubt that the 98 Labour women MPs vastly outnumber the women on the Opposition Benches. I would like to see more on the Opposition Benches—[Interruption.] I said more, not enough, and that means some of the men have to move off those Benches. [Interruption.] There is no point in getting into an argument about that. We need the Opposition parties to take the issue seriously and to put their votes where their mouths are. We will—

Order. I want to call some more lady Members. Fiona Mactaggart.

There is an area of public life where women’s representation is even worse than it is in Parliament—local government. Following the Councillors Commission report, have the Ministers responsible for women and equality had any conversations with their colleagues in the Department for Communities and Local Government about what action will be taken to promote more women councillors, given that every piece of evidence shows that they are the most effective councillors in representing their communities?

This matter is very close to the Government’s heart. We are doing what we can to increase the number of women councillors, in particular the number of black and Asian women councillors. We hosted the largest annual gathering in the Houses of Parliament for regional black and Asian ethnic minority women, which focused on the need for more women from different communities to become councillors; the Women Take Part campaign, which was launched by Ministers in October, is working on the same issue; and the Prime Minister has launched the National Muslim Women’s Advisory Group. We are trying to ensure that more women come through in local government, because that is the seedcorn for Parliament.

23. What steps the Government are taking to deter advertising in local newspapers linked to the trafficking of girls and women for sex. (185137)

Last week, the Government published “Women Not for Sale”, which examined the prevalence of this type of advertisement in local newspapers in England on one day last October. Following constructive meetings with representatives from the newspaper and advertising industries, the Newspaper Society has agreed to draw up tougher guidance on advertising for local newspapers.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. I wonder what plans the Government have to tackle the demand side of prostitution, given its links to the trafficking of girls and women for sex.

The Government believe that tackling the demand side is vital in fighting trafficking, as highlighted in the UK action plan that we published in March 2007. I visited Sweden with other Ministers to see how its legislation is tackling demand. Although we do not anticipate reviewing legislation, we are examining ways in which we can reduce demand.

24. What funding the Government are providing for rape crisis centres in the next two financial years. (185138)

The Government recognise the vital role played by voluntary and community sector rape crisis centres. Decisions on the victims’ fund and funding for independent sexual violence advisers for the coming financial year will be announced by the relevant Departments in the near future.

I thank the Minister for her reply and hope that we can conclude that there is some optimism about future funding. She will know that the reporting of violent sexual offences compounds the trauma that victims have already experienced, and it is extremely important that facilities are there to make it as easy as possible for victims. Of course, the police cannot take action unless the crime is reported. Will she take that on board when she is considering funding so that we can ensure that rape crisis centres have the funding to continue?

I thank the hon. Lady for those remarks, which I take on board. I am visiting rape crisis centres at present and we recognise that they face significant financial challenges. I would like to underline the fact that there has been no reduction in Government funding for sexual violence support services. This year, the Government will invest £3 million in support for victims of such crimes, including more than £1 million for rape crisis centres. We are core funding Rape Crisis England and Wales and the Survivors Trust. We are working with rape crisis centres to do what we can to ensure that they get the necessary funding.

25. What steps she is taking to encourage female entrepreneurs. (185139)

Women’s entrepreneurship is a significant strand of enterprise development. The Government have established the taskforce on women’s enterprise to accelerate the levels of female entrepreneurship. We are also committed to working with key partners, such as regional development agencies, to support further development of women’s entrepreneurship. That includes a national network of 1,000 women’s enterprise ambassadors.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Would she agree that one measure that would do untold damage to the cause of female entrepreneurship would be the implementation of the EU agency workers directive? Can she confirm that it is still her Government’s intention to resist the directive?

That would not be its effect, and we do need to have protection for migrant workers.

27. If she will collate and publish information on access to nursery facilities as a means of encouraging women into work. (185141)

Intermission!

I apologise to everyone for the delay in answering.

We are supporting women who return to work by ensuring that they have access to good quality child care. The Government are working with local authorities and stakeholders to implement practical ways of increasing access to formal child care that will bring positive benefits to children and families. We have placed a new duty on local authorities in England to collate and publish information on child care sufficiency by March.

My hon. Friend’s answer was worth waiting for. [Interruption.] The House is very slow this morning, Mr. Speaker. The need to collate information is absolutely vital in this area. We now know that among the biggest barriers to women returning to work is the lack of affordable and available child care. We also know that child care provision is patchy across the country, particularly in areas with Conservative councils. When the information is collated, will it be possible to bring some pressure to bear on the local authorities in areas of under-provision to ensure that women are given a proper chance to get back into work?

I thank my hon. Friend for his courtesy and apologise for my slowness. I congratulate Manchester City council on its work in that respect, which has helped many more women to get into work. The Government are providing substantial help, totalling £18.5 million a day, for working families through the working tax credit. We provide £3 million a day to help working families with 80 per cent. of their child care costs. A lot is being done and we hope to do a lot more. I hope that the relevant figures will be made available to my hon. Friend and to other hon. Members so that they can ensure that their constituents get the child care they need and deserve.

30. What assessment she has made of the effectiveness of topical debates. (185144)

I have issued a written ministerial statement today setting out a timetable for a review of topical debates and setting up a procedure for publishing subjects proposed by Members. I welcome comments from Members to that review.

So, yet another review, from the Government of review, review, review: may I suggest to the Leader of the House that there is no need for a review this time? The public want topical debates so that we in the House are right up to date, but they do not want Government media stunts instead of topical debates.

The right hon. Gentleman criticises the proposed review, but we have to make decisions on important matters, such as the business of the House and issues that affect the lives of people outside it. To do that, we need the facts: we have to consult people and listen to what they say, and that means that we have to have a review. Doing things on the back of an envelope for the sake of a cheap headline is something that I shall leave to the Opposition.

To have more effective topical questions, can we double the time allotted to them and halve the amount of time allocated to Front-Bench Members in topical debates?

Topical questions have been working well, and we do not propose to review them at the moment. The topical debates have caused controversy but, as I said, I have issued a written ministerial statement about them this morning. I want to seek the views of hon. Members on all sides of the House so that we can discuss how to take matters forward. We will then make further proposals to the House.

In her ministerial statement on topical debates, the Leader of the House says that she will publish a quarterly list of the subjects that have been proposed, but the Modernisation Committee has recommended that that list should be published every fortnight. Why has the right hon. and learned Lady gone for the longer option? In addition, will she publish the names of the people proposing the subjects? I am sure that it would be of considerable interest to the House to know whether a subject had been proposed by a Back Bencher with a genuine interest in it—or by, say, the Government Chief Whip, with an eye to his own media agenda.

I shall take those suggestions as a contribution to the review. I should point out that the subject for this afternoon’s topical debate was chosen, not by the Chief Whip, but by the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs. May), who is sitting next to the hon. Gentleman.

31. What recent representations he has received on the provision of BlackBerrys to hon. Members. (185145)

There has been one written parliamentary question about BlackBerrys, and the Parliamentary Information Communication and Technology department—PICT—has received one e-mail inquiry from an hon. Member on the matter in the past three months. At a recent ICT event in the atrium of Portcullis house, two hon. Members asked about the availability of BlackBerrys.

I am grateful for that reply, and I acknowledge that this is not the most pressing issue before the House this week. I do not want to promote a particular brand of personal digital system, whatever that might be, but I believe that hon. Members should be given the maximum choice so that they can best serve their constituents. Will the matter be considered again?

I have some sympathy with the hon. Gentleman’s remarks, but the provision of mobile computing services to the House was the subject of a full EU tender four or five years ago. I should explain that BlackBerrys are not marketed directly, and none of the companies bidding at the time offered a service for that product. Since then, the House has invested a good deal of time and money in Microsoft-based hand-held devices, but BlackBerrys operate on a completely different system. The result is that they would not be compatible with the infrastructure that we have developed.

As an avid BlackBerry user since 2005, I am rather surprised by the small amount of representation on their behalf that has been received. I do not want to endorse the use of any particular product in the House, but the personal digital assistant that I have received from PICT is not in the same league as a BlackBerry. I hope that PICT will not take the small number of representations on behalf of BlackBerrys to mean that hon. Members are not interested in them.

I have noted the hon. Lady’s remarks and will convey them to PICT.

32. What the Government’s policy is on the right of hon. Members representing Scottish constituencies to vote on matters relating to England where responsibility for such matters in Scotland has been devolved. (185146)

As I said to the House on 13 December, the Prime Minister set out the Government’s policy to the House on 3 July. The Government do not accept that there should be any discrimination in the right of hon. Members to take part in the business of the House. English votes for English laws would lead to the break up of the Union. The Government believe in the Union and will do nothing to harm it.

With a Scottish mother and an English father, I am understandably supportive of the union between Scotland and England. Why have the Government been so dilatory in coming forward with proposals to address the West Lothian question, and when will they address and end positive discrimination against the English, following their flawed devolution policy?

We have already taken forward significant policy changes on that issue by introducing devolution, and we are now looking at the accountability measures needed. All that the hon. Lady is doing is demonstrating that on this subject, as on others, she is completely out of step with not only Government policy but her own party leadership. I suggest that she read the speech given by the right hon. Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron) on 10 December, in which he said:

“Better an imperfect union than a broken one.”

May I say to the Deputy Leader of the House that the hon. Member for Congleton (Ann Winterton) is not out of step with the views of the British people on this issue? The Government appear to have a complete blind spot when it comes to acknowledging that further constitutional reform is needed. I put it to the Deputy Leader of the House that now that there is successful devolution in Belfast, Edinburgh and Cardiff, and the prospect of more, it is important that we consider how matters of purely English consequence are dealt with by English elected Members of Parliament, in a way that is compatible with fully supporting the United Kingdom.

The hon. Gentleman needs to take account of the great deal of work that is being done on the issue. As he knows, the Modernisation Committee is considering ways of improving regional accountability for England. I am glad that he indicates that he supports that. As for Wales, we already have a means of reviewing and, if agreed, amending the devolution settlement through the government of Wales mechanisms. Similarly, it has been agreed that there should be further devolution to Northern Ireland when the Assembly feels ready for it.

Does the hon. Lady not recognise that there is a lingering sense of injustice in England, following the constitutional resettlement giving Welsh and Scottish Members more independence? Will she at least allow the House a topical debate on the subject?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, it is not for me to take receipt of requests for topical debates now. I remind him that 85 per cent. of Members of the House are English, and that secures the interests of English voters.

Select Committees

33. Whether she plans to bring forward proposals for changes to the Standing Orders governing the ability of Select Committees to meet in public. (185147)

The Government have no plans to change the Standing Orders for Select Committees generally. With respect to the European Scrutiny Committee, the matter is on the Order Paper for discussion this afternoon. I look forward to hearing the right hon. Gentleman’s views then.

And I am sure that she will, but the issues of openness and the public’s right to know are not on the Order Paper. Is the hon. Lady aware that in the Committee’s routine weekly meetings, it has to meet in private? It scrutinises more than 1,000 draft regulations, directives and laws from the European Union every year, but the public and the press are not admitted. Will she alter that in line with the Government’s pretended belief in openness and the public’s right to know?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, I have twice attended the European Scrutiny Committee recently and I am perfectly well aware of the situation. Everybody in the House believes that we should conduct proceedings transparently whenever possible, but that is not the same as holding every single meeting under the glare of publicity. The right hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do that his Committee has taken contradictory positions when it has looked at the matter.

34. What plans she has to review procedures relating to parliamentary questions. (185148)

From the beginning of the current Session the House agreed an experiment for a period of topical questions at the end of each of the main departmental question times. This will be reviewed at the end of the current Session. The Government have no further plans for review of procedures relating to parliamentary questions, but we await with interest the report in due course from the Procedure Committee on written questions.

It is on written questions that I want to probe the Minister. I welcome the changes that mean we can table questions during the parliamentary recess, but why can we not table written questions during the entire recess just as we do on any other day? By what logic is it that if we table a written question in the recess just after the tabled cycle has been answered, it stays in a box for some weeks until the next cycle comes up? Why can it not be processed through to the Department to which the question was addressed? The situation is crazy.

Once again, my hon. Friend demonstrates his fantastic grasp of House procedure. His suggestion can be looked at further by the Procedure Committee, if not by the Government.

35. How much the House of Commons Visitors Reception Building was originally estimated to cost; and how much it is now estimated to cost. (185149)

The original estimate in the business case was £8.6 million. Taking into account the delay and remedial work the cost is now estimated at £11.2 million. Professional fees for completing the project and reviewing the lessons learned about what went wrong may add about another £1 million. Additional equipment in the new building will cost about £250,000. The split between the Commons and the Lords is 60:40.

Norman Baker: I am increasingly concerned about what appears to be the inability of the House of Commons Commission to manage projects within time and within budget. I remind my hon. Friend of the walkway downstairs, which cost £422,000 for a bit of glass on stilts. Is it not time that there was proper economic management of the House of Commons Commission so that the public could have confidence that public money is being properly looked after in this place?

There have been a series of problems with the project. Initially, piling and hidden services were found beneath the site and later there were a number of technical problems with the building itself, both of which led to delays and to the remedial works that were needed, and have added to the cost. Last summer, a recovery manager was brought in to ensure the completion of the project and he has now been engaged to make a study of what went wrong. With respect to my hon. Friend, I think he may be leaping to conclusions about where responsibility lies, but we look forward to receiving the report of the expert recovery manager in due course.

36. What steps she is taking to encourage public debate on those elements of the Governance of Britain White Paper which fall within her remit; and if she will make a statement. (185150)

The Leader of the House has an interest in a range of issues under the governance of Britain programme, with a particular responsibility for the proposals relating to the draft legislative programme, the dissolution and recall of Parliament, departmental debate days and regional accountability in the House. Those are all being considered in inquiries by the Modernisation Committee, chaired by my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the House, to which public contributions have been invited.

The effort to revive our democracy was given a starburst opening when the Prime Minister chose to make his first speech to Parliament as Prime Minister on the governance of Britain and to produce a Green Paper within days of taking over as Prime Minister. Does my hon. Friend agree that a little bit of the excitement, passion and drive may have gone out of the agenda? Can we not involve millions of people in debate on the issues, rather than just those of us in the asylum, so that we can take them further and get more and more people involved in moving our democracy forward?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his attempts to bring more excitement to the issue. The Leader of the House published the draft legislative programme and put it on the Cabinet Office website. Regional Ministers held meetings to discuss it and a national deliberative forum was held. The programme is being taken forward across the board.