Oral Answers to Questions

Stuart Bell Excerpts

Monday 26th July 2010 Commons Chamber

[Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)]

1. What representations the House of Commons Commission has received from new hon. Members on Parliamentary Information and Communications Technology’s policy that ICT equipment is allocated only to the permanent office of an hon. Member.

[Sir Stuart Bell (Middlesbrough)]

None, sir.

[Duncan Hames]

It is a very serious matter when Members of the House are denied the tools to provide an efficient and effective service to their constituents, at home in their constituencies. Will the hon. Gentleman please consider removing that obstacle to Members, recognising that those such as me who did not rush into taking out office leases saved the taxpayer money and should be entitled to the IT provision available to other Members?

[Sir Stuart Bell]

I sympathise with the hon. Gentleman. If there are special circumstances in any case PICT will be prepared to consider an alternative approach. Under its current approach, each and every Member ought to have a permanent office, either in Westminster or their constituency, before they order equipment. That ensures that the equipment ordered is suitable for the space being occupied, and it avoids the need to relocate often heavy equipment and to set it up twice.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight) (Con)]

4. If the House of Commons Commission will bring forward proposals to reduce parliamentary recording unit charges for small independent broadcasters.

[Sir Stuart Bell (Middlesbrough)]

We have already taken action. In anticipating new licensing arrangements due to come into effect in August 2011, we have decided to stop charging copyright licence fees to broadcasters for the material that we hold.

[Mr Turner]

It sounds as if I must be very grateful for that. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will now give me further information.

[Sir Stuart Bell]

I am aware that the hon. Gentleman has had discussions with the parliamentary recording unit. He has been very diligent, and I congratulate him on that. As he knows, the principles and level of charges were originally set out in 1993 by what was then the Select Committee on Broadcasting and have thereafter been reviewed at official level. The technical duplication charges, to which the hon. Gentleman did not refer but which I know he understands, will be reviewed during the business planning for the new broadcasting arrangements that will be introduced in August 2011.

The Leader of the House was asked—

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

6. How much it costs to print early-day motions in 2009-10.

[Sir Stuart Bell (Middlesbrough)]

The cost of publishing early-day motions, including printing, staff time and technical support, was approximately £1 million in the financial year 2009-10. Printing alone accounts for some £776,000.

[Mr Hollobone]

Taxpayers will be shocked by the figures that the hon. Gentleman has just read out to the House. Should this not offer scope for huge cost savings and, hopefully, be another nail in the coffin of the wretched EDM system?

[Sir Stuart Bell]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his remarks, and he will be happy to know that from the start of this parliamentary Session older EDMs have not been reprinted weekly, saving 2.5 million sheets of paper and up to £300,000 in printing costs per year.

[Mr David Hanson (Delyn) (Lab)]

I confess that I have been here for only 18 years but I have not yet seen an EDM debated. Would it not be a good idea for us to pick four or five EDMs for debate in the course of a year and therefore, through the Backbench Business Committee or the Leader of the House, vent those issues and make the system better value for money?

[Sir Stuart Bell]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend, but I cannot add to the points made by the Deputy Leader of the House and the hon. Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis). As my right hon. Friend will no doubt know, this is a matter for the Procedure Committee or the Backbench Business Committee.

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

Would it not be a good way to save money to publish EDMs just on the internet and not print them on the Order Paper?

[Sir Stuart Bell]

That is an interesting point. In 2007 the Procedure Committee said there should be no electronic tabling of EDMs without stronger authentication than that in place for questions.

[Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)]

Why?

[Sir Stuart Bell]

My hon. Friend asks why. The Procedure Committee said there should not be such electronic tabling unless

“significantly stronger authentication than is currently required for parliamentary questions can be guaranteed”.

The Procedure Committee went on to say that it cannot therefore

“recommend the introduction of e-tabling for EDMs.”

I am happy to answer the hon. Gentleman’s question, and my hon. Friend’s question from a sedentary position.

[Hugh Bayley (York Central) (Lab)]

7. Whether the House of Commons Commission plans to seek the views of hon. Members on ways of reducing the running costs of the House.

[Sir Stuart Bell]

The Commission will seek the view of Members in the normal way through the Finance and Services Committee and the Administration Committee. I am pleased to see on today’s Order Paper the submission of names to the will of the House for both those Committees. The Commission will also welcome the submission of views from individual Members, which should be sent to the secretary of the Commission.

[Hugh Bayley]

I understand the need for the House to cut its costs, but I am worried about the size of the cut in respect of Select Committee travel, because it will undermine the ability of Parliament to scrutinise the Government. Will the Commission seek savings in other areas which do not have a direct impact on how Parliament does its job? For example, at a time of widespread public concern about public sector bonuses, will the Commission examine what impact the bonus scheme for senior staff of this House has had on their output and productivity?

[Sir Stuart Bell]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. On the cuts in the Select Committee budgets, I am afraid that we are not able in this House to distinguish between one set of expenditure and another. The cuts announced recently are for this year only and are in response to the general financial stringency being applied to the public sector in the current year. Following scrutiny by the Finance and Services Committee last December, the Commission agreed to a reduction of 9% over three years and will consider the position for future years in the autumn. My hon. Friend’s point about bonuses will be included in that review.