04.06.2014 Views

here - United Kingdom Parliament

here - United Kingdom Parliament

here - United Kingdom Parliament

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

1683 Business of the House<br />

6 JUNE 2013<br />

Business of the House<br />

1684<br />

Mr Lansley: I do not have to agree with the hon.<br />

Gentleman to say, just from a business point of view,<br />

that he will note that the Government have published<br />

the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Bill. I have<br />

not yet been able to tell the House the date of its Second<br />

Reading, but when that time comes the hon. Gentleman<br />

will have an opportunity to make his points.<br />

Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury and Atcham) (Con):<br />

Recently, the British Chambers of Commerce again<br />

called for extra support for British exports from the<br />

Government. We have not had a debate about exports<br />

on the Floor of the House since 2010, yet UK Trade &<br />

Investment receives more than £400 million of British<br />

taxpayers’ money to help British companies export<br />

overseas. I have spent the last 10 months interviewing<br />

hundreds of SMEs to get their first-hand experience of<br />

UKTI. May we please have a debate on the Floor of the<br />

House to scrutinise how the money is spent and consider<br />

what more needs to be done to ensure that British<br />

companies get the support they rightly deserve to start<br />

exporting all over the world?<br />

Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend is an active, energetic<br />

advocate for promoting British exports, and I know the<br />

work he does. When I was at the British Chambers of<br />

Commerce we set up the export advisory service and<br />

took on delivery of the export marketing research scheme<br />

back in the late 1980s, so I completely understand<br />

w<strong>here</strong> the British Chambers of Commerce is coming<br />

from. I will, of course, discuss with my hon. Friends<br />

what opportunities t<strong>here</strong> may be, and the Chancellor set<br />

out in the autumn statement his ambition to support<br />

the UKTI in whatever it can achieve to maximise our<br />

impact in terms of exports. Whenever we have an<br />

opportunity for a debate on economic issues, it is important<br />

that we bring forward export and trade promotion as<br />

one of the central measures to promote growth.<br />

Several hon. Members rose—<br />

Mr Speaker: Order. More than 20 Back-Bench Members<br />

are seeking to catch my eye and I am keen to accommodate<br />

them. I remind the House that t<strong>here</strong> is a statement by<br />

the Foreign Secretary to follow, and then a number of<br />

debates under the auspices of the Backbench Business<br />

Committee to which I must give proper consideration.<br />

T<strong>here</strong> is, t<strong>here</strong>fore, a premium on brevity from those on<br />

the Back and Front Benches alike.<br />

Alison McGovern (Wirral South) (Lab): The Leader<br />

of the House may be aware that the pre-inquest hearings<br />

into the deaths of 96 people in the Hillsborough disaster<br />

are taking place. Given that press reports of yesterday’s<br />

hearing said that lawyers representing the match day<br />

commanders accused the Hillsborough independent panel<br />

of having a so-called “agenda” guided by the families of<br />

those who died, and that questions were raised on<br />

whether the Home Office put a block on providing<br />

sufficient resources for the inquiry, does he believe it<br />

could be helpful to have a debate or statement on the<br />

matter?<br />

Mr Lansley: I am not sure whether I can endorse the<br />

hon. Lady’s request for a statement at this stage, not<br />

least because I am not sure whether my ministerial<br />

colleagues would wish to come to the Dispatch Box and<br />

intervene or express a running commentary on inquest<br />

proceedings. She will know that I was able to announce<br />

at previous business questions Government support for<br />

the families’ legal costs for that inquiry, but in order to<br />

be sure I will bring her point to the attention of my<br />

right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General<br />

and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary so that<br />

they are aware of it.<br />

Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con): Has my right hon.<br />

Friend seen the case of Geoffrey Bettley, a teacher at<br />

St Mary’s in Menston, on the border of my constituency,<br />

who downloaded child porn images and was rightly<br />

sacked by the school and put on the sex offenders<br />

register? In a decision ratified by the Education Secretary,<br />

Geoffrey Bettley has been told that he is allowed to<br />

teach again. I am sure my right hon. Friend the Leader<br />

of the House will appreciate that many parents will be<br />

deeply disturbed by the fact that somebody who has<br />

been convicted of downloading child porn should be<br />

allowed to teach again. Can we have a statement from<br />

the Education Secretary so he can explain what on<br />

earth he was thinking when he allowed that person to<br />

teach again?<br />

Mr Lansley: I have read press reports on the matter.<br />

The decision was taken by the National College for<br />

Teaching and Leadership and then endorsed by a senior<br />

official at the Department for Education. I will be in<br />

touch with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State<br />

for Education so that he might give my hon. Friend an<br />

account of the process in the case.<br />

Jim Sheridan (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab):<br />

In responding to a question yesterday from my hon.<br />

Friend the Member for Glasgow South (Mr Harris) on<br />

the latest lobbying scandal, the Prime Minister made a<br />

strange comparison with the open and transparent<br />

donations by trade unions to the Labour party. He also<br />

said that he would clear up over-influence in the House.<br />

Will the Leader of the House clarify what the Prime<br />

Minister meant by “third parties” other than trade<br />

unions?<br />

Mr Lansley: What the Prime Minister said was very<br />

clear, and it was not just about the question of the<br />

statutory register of lobbyists, which should ensure<br />

transparency and greater accountability in relation to<br />

third-party influence with Ministers and in <strong>Parliament</strong>.<br />

We must be sure that the whole political system has not<br />

only a transparent structure, but one that is accountable<br />

and open about those who seek to exercise such major<br />

third-party influence. Not just trade unions but other<br />

organisations seek to do so; the trade unions are a<br />

major source of third-party influence in the political<br />

system, as the hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well.<br />

Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD): Will the Leader of the<br />

House allow time for a debate on the processes in place<br />

to follow up the implementation of recommendations<br />

made in serious case reviews, and to review and report<br />

in public in the long term on the ad<strong>here</strong>nce to points<br />

made in action plans after incidents in care homes, so<br />

that changes to poor practice are made for the long<br />

term, and that care of the vulnerable and elderly does<br />

not slip backwards?

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!