|

Yesterday in Parliament - 08 October 2008

Extracts from Hansard. Bob covered a lot of ground in his first two days back after the recess including:

1. Response to financial crisis, empowering Parliament and cutting costly quangos
2. Supporting the voluntary sector, keeping kids off drugs and drug use in prisons
3. Local elections timing
4. Selling off school fields for yet more building
5. Vat and Energy Efficiency
6. Protection of Essex Post Offices
7. Council planning failures
8. Very many other interventions by questions etc.

Mr. Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con) (Front Bench spokesman): Secondly, we will introduce a tough, new, forward-looking mandate for the public finances at the end of a forecast horizon, with falling debt as a percentage of GDP and a balanced current budget, after adjusting for the economic cycle. Thirdly, and crucially, for the first time in Britain we will create an independent body accountable to Parliament, the office of budget responsibility, to publish independent forecasts and to assess the performance of Government against the outcomes it has specified.

Bob Spink (Castle Point): Surely it is the job of Parliament to monitor and assess the Government's fiscal policies and performance? After all, Parliament has Select Committees and professional advisers to inform them. This solution is yet another quango of unelected, unaccountable people, and it is a bad policy. It is certainly not a Tory policy. Has the hon. Gentleman really thought this through?

Mr. Hammond: If the hon. Gentleman will forgive me, I will decide what is a Tory policy, not him. I reject his criticism, although he is right in one respect. Parliament has to hold the Executive to account, and the office for budget responsibility will give it the tools to do so. The OBR will be answerable to Parliament, delivering independent forecasts and an assessment of the Government's Budget proposals.

Let me explain, for the benefit of the hon. Member for Castle Point (Bob Spink), how the OBR will monitor the health of the public finances and hold Governments to account on an ongoing basis. First, the Chancellor will set the mandate for the public finances. This will remain his responsibility

Taking up Bob's theme:Mr. Adrian Bailey (West Bromwich, West): The hon. Gentleman does not seem to have covered this question: who will appoint the members of the OBR?

Mr. Hammond: I can offer to send the hon. Gentleman a copy of our plan for a strong economy. Members of the OBR will be appointed by the Chancellor for a single term— [ Interruption. ] The Exchequer Secretary says, "Ticking his own box",

Bob says: So that's ok then. The chancellor gives high paid jobs to a few buddies, very comfortable but hardly independent!)

(The interruptions were laughing by Tory and other MPs seeing Hammond struggling to explain a departure from the Tory line of scrapping quangos and returning power to parliament) And 'Bob's' debate went on ….)

Kelvin Hopkins (Luton): Like the hon. Member for Castle Point (Bob Spink), I think that another quango is surely being set up. Is it not the case that holding the Government to account is a job for Parliament? Would the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond) not also agree that when the European Union tries to interfere in our economic strategy policies, we object to that, too? We already have the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Audit Commission and the National Institute of Economic and Social Research; a number of bodies look at the way in which Government finances work and how they operate. Surely it is the job of Parliament, using all that information, to keep the Government held to account.

Mr. Hammond: The office of budget responsibility will give Parliament an official independent-of-Government report, a series of projections of the fiscal position

(Hammond refused to tell Bob how much this new quango would cost.)….

Bob Spink (Castle Point): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I understand from the House of Commons Library that the Department for Communities and Local Government has just announced that it will delay the English local government elections to coincide with the European elections on 4 June next year. I wonder whether we are going to have a statement from those on the Government Front Bench on this matter and whether we can have a debate on it.

Mr. Speaker: That is not a matter for me. I must deal with the business of the day.

My apologies to the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond), but has he finished moving the motion?

Mr. Hammond: I have, Mr. Speaker. (Hammond seemed to just give up!)

Mr. Speaker: Thank you. I call Yvette Cooper to move the amendment

Different Debate: Drugs and Voluntary Sector and Prisons

Bob Spink (Castle Point): It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen). He spoke about the part that the statutory sector—schools and police—can play in increasing drug awareness. His contribution was characteristically calm, almost forensic at times, and he showed a lot of compassion and common sense, as is his usual manner. I congratulate him on bringing this important subject to the House so soon after its return from recess.

I want to talk about partnership working, which he mentioned, and the valuable part that the voluntary sector can play in this issue. The Minister will not be surprised to hear that I also want to discuss funding of the voluntary sector. Thundersley Congregational church, in my constituency, is a large and fast-growing, fairly evangelical church that has an honourable history of doing outreach work on drug awareness, tobacco and alcohol, and bad behaviour on the streets. It uses a bus

7 Oct 2008 : Column 8WH

called the Bar-N-Bus. I went out with that bus 15 years ago, as it went around Southend and Canvey sea fronts, providing a safe haven for kids where we could talk to them, provide them with alternative diversionary activities, find out what their problems were and help them. The church has been doing excellent work locally for many years.

Richard Keeler and Ian Miles of that church recently came to one of my advice surgeries and told me that they are running a scheme in which they visit local schools and teach kids about drugs. I do not want to go into the matter too deeply, but one of those guys has extremely close knowledge of drugs and the devastation that they can wreak on a young life. He is doing superb work, and the kids will really listen to him, because he has something to say. He has enormous energy and that special knowledge—they are guided by their Christian ideals. I should make it clear that I am not a member of Thundersley Congregational church. They understand, in a way that many parents and some MPs do not—indeed, I did not, until recently—the pressure that kids today are under regarding drugs. I shall come to that in a moment, and to kids’ attitude to drugs. Those pressures are massive.

Richard and Ian wanted £550 to buy a drug awareness kit, a drug demonstration box and some DVDs, so that they could use them in schools and make their activity there more effective. I wrote to the Minister and tabled early-day motion 1283, which is in the Library pack for today's debate. The EDM states that

"such charities receive little or no funding from Government sources; and calls on the Government to fund preventative drugs programmes such as that provided by Thundersley Congregational Church."

I am sorry to say that no Members taking part in the debate signed the early-day motion, but that is probably because it was localised in respect of Thundersley Congregational church.

I got nowhere with obtaining the cash, so I got off my butt and held for the church yet another charity event—the third in two years—to raise money to buy the kit. We had a curry night at the Tandoori Parlour, a superb Indian restaurant, on Hart road, and we raised £1,100 clear profit, so we were able to buy the kit and to do more as well. The kit is now in good use. The drug display box and DVDs were obtained from the south-east Essex drugs partnership, headed by Ray Hatter, a professional and helpful guy who could do with more money. If he had more money, he could do more work, prevent more human suffering and save on costs to society in the long run. I see that the Minister is making notes; Hatter is spelt H-A-T-T-E-R. Actually, we are lucky to have such a superb Minister with us this morning, and I congratulate him on his promotion, which is long overdue. He is one of the best, most caring and able-to-listen Ministers in the House, and on this sensitive area of drugs and preventive measures he has always done all that he can.

As I speak, Richard and Ian are at the Deanes school, speaking to a year 9 group of 13-year-olds and taking a lesson on drugs. Yesterday, they were doing drug awareness work at a secondary school in my constituency, where they got a superb response from the youngsters. When a class of about 30 children was asked whether anyone had been offered drugs, taken drugs or been aware of anybody in their peer group who

7 Oct 2008 : Column 9WH

had taken drugs, about 50 per cent. put their hands up, and some gave examples. It is a massive problem in my locality, which is relatively crime-free and clean. A few kids go through problems growing up, but broadly speaking, in my constituency the young people are fantastic and decent.

I warmly congratulate Thundersley Congregational church, and Richard and Ian in particular, on what they are doing. Clearly, Richard and Ian could not do their work without the support of the whole church, and the Minister knows where I am leading now: just a small sum to support voluntary organisations could be very effective. I am sure that the message will get back to the Home Office. We need more flexibility to provide small grants, because £500 here or £500 there—used properly, particularly where people have specific knowledge of the disaster that drugs can cause families and society—could be very effective.

Finally, I shall make three brief points. First, the hon. Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) rightly raised the issue of smoking, particularly among teenage girls, which is not a problem that is going away. We must tackle it and address it more firmly if we can, particularly through parents, schools and education. Secondly, we need more residential drug rehabilitation places to allow people who are afflicted by drugs to change their lives. We will not do so without dramatically increasing the number of such places, and it would be a very cost-effective use of money. I see the Minister nodding. Thirdly, we need tougher action both to stop drugs getting into prisons and to deal with prisoners who are on drugs and end their addiction; otherwise, they will simply be in a revolving door. I know that the Minister agrees.

I congratulate the Minister and the Government on what they have done in respect of drugs over the past few years, because they have been moving in the right direction. I am not being picky; I just wish that we had a little more flexibility to divert some of the funds to voluntary organisations.

10.5 am

Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington): I also congratulate the hon. Member for Castle Point (Bob Spink) on drawing attention to the important role that the voluntary sector has to play in tackling the issue. Clearly, Government and health service resources are limited and likely to become more constrained in the next few years, so as we face difficult financial times, the voluntary sector’s role is likely to grow rather than to shrink….

The Minister of State, Home Department (Mr. Vernon Coaker): The hon. Member for Castle Point made some interesting points. I cannot give him a commitment to fund his voluntary group, but such groups are tremendously important. The work that many faith organisations, churches, mosques and so on do across the country is vital. Sometimes the voluntary sector can reach people that the statutory agencies cannot get to. I commend the work of Mr. Hatter and his colleague. Indeed, I commend the work of all the people who work in the voluntary sector in relation to this issue, both in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency and in constituencies across the country.

Bob Spink: The Minister mentioned the quality of education. We know that the target youngsters, to whom we want to get the message across, are not very receptive. They are going through hormonal and attitudinal changes during the difficult teenage years when they grow up and we all understand that. Teachers and parents are often not as effective in getting the message across to that group of children as they could be. Mr. Hatter is probably not a reformed drug user, but I know a reformed drug user who had to make the decision either to die or to change his life. He now teaches and speaks to children about his experiences and is extremely effective in getting his message across. The children listen to him because he has been there and he can tell them what it is really like. Is there any way in which we can encourage more people who have been rehabilitated to teach our children about this issue?

Mr. Coaker: I agree with the hon. Gentleman's intervention. The problem of drugs can be more effectively dealt with by people who have been on the other side of the fence, as it were—and that is the case in relation to a range of social problems, not just substance misuse. It is important to remember that.

On the points about prisons that the hon. Gentleman and a number of other hon. Members made, we are increasing the amount of money spent on prison education during the next three years by £70 million. That is a considerable and welcomed increase in investment….

Protection of Playing Fields

10.29 pm

Bob Spink (Castle Point) (UKIP): I am honoured to present a petition organised by Jo Grey and other excellent community campaigners on Canvey island against the selling off of one of our secondary school fields by Essex county council so that the borough council can build houses that are not wanted and that will cause blight and harm to the wider community of Canvey island. I warmly congratulate all who signed the petition, including Dave Blackwell, who brought the petition to my attention. He is a superb fighter for the people of Canvey island, along with his independent council colleagues.

The petition states:

The Petition of Jo Grey, concerned Canvey Island residents, and others

Declares that Castle Point Council is wrong to plan to build over 100 houses on Castle View School Playing field, that this is insensitive, inappropriate and will result in more homes built on a green belt, high flood risk site; believes that there is sufficient previously developed, brown land to build any necessary additional homes without selling off valuable school playing fields for that purpose, and that councillors should stand up for residents’ interests and consider the impact of their plans on road congestion and safety for all Island residents, and reject the Castle Point Borough Council Core Strategy.

The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to press Castle Point Borough Councillors to speak out and act and vote against the plan to sell off a Canvey Island school playing field for yet more building.

And the Petitioners remain, etc.

7 Oct 2008 : Column 249

Energy Efficiency

Bob Spink: I am sure the House needs no reminding of the importance of improving energy efficiency in domestic homes and businesses. This petition, which supports an electronic petition of approaching 1,000 signatures, calls on the Government to put their money where their mouth is, and to promote energy efficiency and our excellent hi-tech British manufacturing industry. How could they refuse? However, I stress that I do not promote any particular business or product and I have no personal interest in any of this.

The petition states:

The Petition of Andy Jones and concerned residents,

Declares that substantial energy savings, and consequential environmental benefits, can be achieved by the use of high technology, generic, double glazing and other energy efficiency products and components and that the Government should therefore reduce VAT on such technically advanced products.

The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to reduce VAT to 5 per cent. on products and components that will make a significant contribution to improving energy efficiency.

And the Petitioners remain, etc.

Post Offices (Essex)

Bob Spink (Castle Point) (UKIP): I rise to present a petition that represents the views of many thousands of my constituents who believe, as I do, that the Government should adopt a positive policy of supporting post offices. Post office closures hurt the whole community, but they disproportionately hurt vulnerable people, in particular the disabled, pensioners and people with young families. I warmly congratulate and thank the good and caring residents of my constituency who took the trouble to sign this petition and send it to me during the recess.

The petition states:

The Humble Petition of the residents of Castle Point and others,

Sheweth

That our local post offices are important to community cohesion, that they provide a vital service to the local community, particularly to vulnerable people, but that their future is threatened by uncertainty over Her Majesty's Government's support for post offices generally, and specifically by the possible abolition of the Post Office card account in 2010, which would be totally unacceptable to the residents of Castle Point, especially vulnerable groups who rely on post offices and the viability of our important high street shopping parades.

Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House call upon Her Majesty's Government to review its policy on post offices and to recognise that they are greatly loved by the community.

And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, & c.

[P000268]

Planning and Development (Essex)

Bob Spink: I shall be very brief, since I tabled a petition similar to this one just before the House went into recess. I received this one in August. Residents of Castle Point believe—to my mind, correctly—that public land that is used as open space by the community and has been for decades should be protected by the council, yet Castle Point council has yet again acted against the public interest and failed to protect the land in question. I congratulate each and every resident who, by signing this petition, showed that they really do care about the community in which they live and are prepared to act on its behalf.

Following is the full text of the petition:

The Petition of J Everett, the residents of Castle Point and others,

Declares that they suspect that there is a hidden agenda in respect of the public open space bounded by the Chase Thundersley on the north side, and by Runneymede Chase on the east side. They have reached this conclusion first, because a large area adjacent to the annex of the SEEVIC College has been fenced off and they challenge the legal right for this to have been done. Secondly, because Castle Point councillors have decided to no longer regularly cut the grass allowing it to become largely overgrown, and they suspect this is an attempt by councillors to deter people from using the public open space so that the land can be developed. Thirdly, because lately it appears that students of SEEVIC College have been allowed or encouraged

6 Oct 2008 : Column 105

to take over the area during breaks, making other users of this public open space feel like interlopers and leaving the space littered with food wrappers, drinks cans and bottles and other rubbish, adding to its dereliction.

They further believe that this land, like all public assets, belongs to the people, not to the council or the councillors, and councillors should respect that fact and keep the public fully informed of their and their officers’ discussions and intentions regarding land use and the future of all our public assets.

They therefore urge councillors to return this land to full and proper public use and to protect it in future, for many valid planning and community interest reasons, and to ensure that this matter is dealt with by councillors rather than officers given its importance to the wider community and the need to protect their valuable public open spaces.

The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to press all Castle Point councillors, since they have the direct responsibility for this matter, to ensure this public open space is retained for its ancient and established previous use and to immediately publish its discussions and intentions regarding land in this area and behind the Runneymede swimming pool and to be transparent in future with the public on all planning and land use matters.

And the Petitioners remain, etc.]