here - United Kingdom Parliament

1685 Business of the House
6 JUNE 2013
Business of the House
1686
Mr Lansley: Yes, to reiterate a point I made earlier,
my hon. Friends from the Department of Health will
answer questions in the House on Tuesday next, when
the hon. Lady might wish to raise that issue with them.
The Minister of State, Department of Health, who has
responsibility for care services, recently set out further
details on how, for example, the Winterbourne View
cases are being followed up by the group to ensure that
the residents are being well looked after. That example
illustrates how important it is that people are not lost in
the system, and that serious case reviews are followed
up.
Andy Sawford (Corby) (Lab/Co-op): Given yesterday’s
announcement from the Deputy Prime Minister that
the Government’s plans to cram more toddlers into
nurseries have been dropped, may we have a statement
on child care policy? It is welcome that Labour Members’
campaigning and that of tens of thousands of parents
and child care professionals has forced the Government
to drop their plans, but it is shocking that we have not
had a statement today. If the Leader of the House will
not arrange a statement, will he at least tell us the
current policy? The Deputy Prime Minister said yesterday
that the plan had been dropped, but the Leader of the
House has told us this morning that it is being reviewed.
What is the policy? It is a shambles.
Mr Lansley: Our policy is to ensure an increase in the
quality of child care and to improve affordability for
parents: that is what we are setting out to do and that is
what we will do. As soon as the policy is agreed, there
will no doubt be an opportunity for it to be announced
in the House.
Neil Carmichael (Stroud) (Con): As was highlighted
on Tuesday by the “Gloucestershire goes to Westminster”
event, locally produced food and drink is extremely
popular. May we find a way of demonstrating how
important local produce is to the rural economy, and
have a debate to discuss our locally produced food in
the context of the common agricultural policy?
Mr Lansley: As chance would have it, as I announced
earlier the House will discuss a motion on reform of the
CAP. Members greatly welcomed Gloucestershire coming
to Westminster—many other areas have held similar
events—to tell us about its local produce, something we
all value in our constituencies.
Valerie Vaz (Walsall South) (Lab): May we have a
debate on the Olympic legacy? Walsall has the only
brine swimming pool in the west midlands, which is
used for hydrotherapy and general fitness. Walsall also
nurtured Ellie Simmons, the Paralympic champion.
However, the Gala baths are threatened with closure.
May we have an urgent debate on how to protect these
vital community services?
Mr Lansley: I cannot offer time at the moment, but
we attach the greatest importance to the Olympic legacy,
which Lord Coe is pursuing actively. We committed to
the legacy as part of our Olympic bid, and I hope it will
be as successful as the Olympics and Paralympics
themselves. As regards securing a debate, I suspect that
the hon. Lady might like to get together with other
colleagues with a view to making representations to the
Backbench Business Committee.
Chris White (Warwick and Leamington) (Con): In an
article in The Times yesterday, Daniel Finkelstein raised
the issue of industrial policy and called it the economic
big idea. I agree completely with this viewpoint. We still
need a comprehensive industrial policy that will encourage
investment in British manufacturing. May we have a
debate on industrial policy and the role it can play in
helping to rebalance our economy?
Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend will share my strong
support for the industrial strategy set out by the Secretary
of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, my right
hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Vince Cable),
which focuses on the many sectors where we have identified
comparative advantage, and on rebalancing our economy
geographically and away from an undue reliance on
financial services, to bring forward internationally tradable
manufacturing and service industries, which are the
only basis for paying our way in the future. I cannot
offer a debate on the strategy at the moment, but I hope
I have indicated the importance we attach to it. We will
look for opportunities for the House to help to frame its
implementation.
Geraint Davies (Swansea West) (Lab/Co-op): Further
to the previous question, City and Guilds today published
research that shows that we in this place spend four
times as much time debating academic qualifications as
vocational qualifications and skills. Most people do not
have degrees, while the vast majority of MPs do have
them. When can we find time to debate the important
issue of skills and vocational training in relation to our
growth strategy? Does the Leader of the House have
any idea how we might get more representation from
people who have had real jobs in the past, and who have
even faced redundancy?
Mr Lansley: I have found in business questions that
hon. Members pay consistent and frequent attention to
the development of skills. My colleagues have supported
the doubling of apprenticeships that has taken place
under this coalition Government and the introduction
of traineeships to secure, as the Queen’s Speech set out,
the expectation that all young people should be going
into higher education, traineeships or apprenticeships,
to ensure that we have appropriate skills at all levels for
those going into the work force.
Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con): I suspect that
when the House meets to consider private Members’
Bills for the first time this Session on Friday 5 July it
will be rather fuller than it is sometimes on a Friday.
Given the likely increased interest in private Members’
Bills, may we please have a statement on whether the
Government will if necessary provide more time for
their consideration, and clarification on whether, if the
Backbench Business Committee were so to decide, the
time made available to that Committee could be allocated
for the consideration of private Members’ Bills?
Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend, who increasingly
understands intimately the workings of the House, will
recall that the time available for private Members’ Bills
is established in Standing Orders. It might encourage
him to recall that last year that time was sufficient for
10 private Members’ Bills to secure Royal Assent.