Oral Answers to Questions

John Bercow Excerpts

Thursday 7th March 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Paterson]

To clarify the previous answer, Sodexo made it clear to all its customers which products there was a problem with. It has withdrawn them all but in the case of an investigation which might grow criminal, it would not be sensible to reveal names of suppliers. This is a criminal conspiracy which covers 23 different countries, and it does not help the police to arrive at prosecutions if information is revealed.

On horse passports, we are clear that we have fixed the problem of bute getting into the food chain. No carcases will get into the food chain until they have tested negative for bute. That is absolutely clear, and we are clear that the horse passport regime which we inherited from the hon. Lady’s party needs reforming, and we will do that in due course.

[Mr Speaker]

We are much obliged to the Secretary of State.

[Mark Lazarowicz (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab/Co-op)]

7. What recent discussions he has had with Ministers in the devolved Administrations on the adulteration of food in the UK.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Benyon]

The hon. Gentleman is wrong when he says that there is inaction; I can assure him that there is an awful lot of action. Alongside the negotiations that have been going on, we have been producing documents such as one that has been highly recommended by the British Institute of Insurance Brokers Association: “Obtaining flood insurance in high risk areas”. We are also assisting people in flood-risk measures they take for their property at household level so that that will be reflected in the premium. The hon. Gentleman is right to be concerned about the potential impact on mortgages and lenders, and that is one of the main drivers towards the quick result we want to get in this matter.

[Mr Speaker]

I am deeply obliged to the Minister, but there are a couple of people called Smith whom I still want to accommodate. I call Sir Robert.

[Sir Robert Smith (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I reinforce to the Minister the importance of achieving affordability? Will he take the message from the people of Stonehaven, who have been flooded for a second time, that urgency is also important so that they can have the comfort of reinsuring their properties?

[Richard Benyon]

I entirely accept what my hon. Friend says. There is an urgent need to get a resolution, but I hope that he agrees—I am sure he does—that it cannot be at any price; we have to be mindful of the needs of the taxpayer as well as those of his constituents. This is a fiscal matter and therefore a UK responsibility, so it is important that we liaise closely with the devolved Governments as well.

[Mr Speaker]

From Smith on floods to Smith on fish. I call Mr Henry Smith.

[Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con)]

10. What progress he has made on securing a ban on fish discards.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Heath]

I would be delighted to do that, but I am not sure that even the performance of the RPA will be enough entirely to cheer up farmers who are wrestling with the weather. In the written statement that I made to the House earlier, I confirmed that by 19 February 2013, the RPA had paid out a total of £1.6 billion to more than 102,000 farmers, which is 98.4% of customers. That exceeds the performance target for March and meets the EU benchmark some four months early. Farmer satisfaction levels are the highest ever recorded, and the RPA has just delivered the most successful payment record in its history. That is an extremely good job.

[Mr Speaker]

We are all now better informed.

[Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North) (Lab)]

The common fisheries policy was described recently by a continental EU politician as a “disaster”, so those of us in the UK who take that view are not alone. Is it not the case that monitoring fishing in EU waters, including discards, cannot be effective until those waters are returned to the historic boundaries of member states?

--- Later in debate ---

[Hugh Bayley]

In October, when we last discussed this matter, which was before it had been established that the remains were those of King Richard, the hon. Gentleman said:

“Once those tests are concluded, the nature, place and marking of any reinterment will need seriously to be considered.”—[Official Report, 25 October 2012; Vol. 551, c. 1070.]

I said at the time that those were wise words and that it would be wrong to bicker in this Chamber about the burial place. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the matter should now be considered by experts, taking account of the wishes that King Richard expressed during his life and the views of clergy who do not have a vested interest, people from York and Leicester and all other interested parties, so that a decision can be made?

[Mr Speaker]

I think that the hon. Gentleman needs an Adjournment debate so that he can develop his thoughts fully. He cannot speak to Richard III about it, I am afraid, but he may be able to address the House.

[Sir Tony Baldry]

The hon. Gentleman has an Adjournment debate on this issue on Tuesday, and I suggest that he put those issues to Ministry of Justice Ministers then. As for the Church, we believe that in a situation such as this the remains should be reburied in the nearest possible church, which, as it happens, is Leicester cathedral.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Leigh]

I do not think it is for me as Chair of the Public Accounts Commission to try to second-guess vigorous debate. In my humble opinion, the PAC under its present Chair and with its present members does an excellent job in holding the Executive to account, and I am sure on all occasions it would avoid party politics.

[Mr Speaker]

I dare say the right hon. Member concerned will bear stoically and with fortitude whatever arrows have been pointed in her direction.

The hon. Member for Banbury, representing the Church Commissioners, was asked—

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Tony Baldry]

It goes without saying that I would be extremely happy to go with my hon. Friend one Saturday night and see the work of the Kettering street pastors. Street pastors across the country do invaluable work in helping, caring and listening, and making our streets safer at nights and weekends.

[Mr Speaker]

We have heard from Mr Hollobone so we have got to hear from Mr Bone.

[Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)]

It is an outrageous slur from my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) to say that Kettering is the nightclub capital of north Northamptonshire when everybody knows it is Wellingborough and Rushden. Street pastors in my area do a tremendous job, in particular the Full Gospel church in Rushden, which has led the way with a homeless shelter. Does my hon. Friend the Second Church Estates Commissioner agree?

[Sir Tony Baldry]

On my way to Kettering, I promise and undertake to call on my hon. Friend’s constituency and witness the work of the street pastors there as well.

[Mr Speaker]

Gosh, the mind really is boggling.

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

8. What assessment the Church Commissioners have made of the steps taken by the Government to support the role of churches and faith groups in their charitable work since May 2010.