Lords Sitting of 30 June 1994

Preamble
The House met at three of the clock (Prayers having been read earlier at the Judicial Sitting by the Lord Bishop of Guildford.): The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
The Lord Chancellor: Leave of Absence
The Lord Chancellor (Lord Mackay of Clashfern): My Lords, before the commencement of business, I take the opportunity to inform the House that I am to undertake official engagements in Edinburgh related to the state visit of the King and Queen of Norway between Tuesday 5th and Thursday 7th July 1994. Accordingly I trust that the House will agree to grant me leave of absence between Tuesday 5th and Thursday 7th July.

Investments: Advertising Standards
3.01p.m.
Lord Lucas Lord Lucas asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they consider that recent advertisements for fixed income investments by Norwich Union, General Accident and others are likely to mislead some unsophisticated investors, and in particular the elderly.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Employment (Lord Henley):My Lords, the regulators have offered guidance to investment firms about advertisements for certain kinds of products, notably high income yielding investments. However, I will ensure that my noble friend's concerns about these advertisements are passed on to the appropriate regulators.
Lord Lucas: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Is he aware that investments which offer 9 per cent. income fixed for six years, accompanied by such phrases as "a brilliantly simple way to keep up your spending power", are likely to mislead unsophisticated investors, particularly the elderly, into putting their capital at risk when they do not wish to do so? Is he also aware that the investment ombudsman and a large number of other commentators have noted that many such investors have been so misled? When he passes on my concerns to the regulators, will he add that the Government share them?
Lord Henley: My Lords, I think that it would be wrong for me to comment on any particular advertisement. As I said, LAUTRO, which is the principal regulating authority in this area, imposes a fundamental responsibility on all its members to avoid issuing advertisements which are either misleading or likely to be misunderstood. Certainly, if advertisements are found to be so misleading, then the members will be asked to undertake the appropriate remedial action. I can
858
give the assurance to my noble friend that, where necessary, that would include providing compensation to investors.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, will my noble friend confirm that the elderly are not necessarily unsophisticated investors?
Lord Henley: My Lords, as one of the younger Members of this House, I confirm and thoroughly endorse what my noble friend says.
Lord Eatwell: My Lords, will the Minister confirm that the investment ombudsman has criticised those advertisements? Is that not yet another example of the lamentable free-for-all in the personal investments industry, particularly as it affects pensions and pensioners? Will the Government now commit themselves to establishing an all-party commission to agree a proper statutory framework of regulation, building on the Goode proposal for a pensions regulator? Only if the Government agree to do that will pensioners have any confidence that the Government are on their side and not on the side of those who are intent on separating them from their hard-earned savings.
Lord Henley: My Lords, the noble Lord is right in his first statement about the ombudsman. As regards what has been done, the noble Lord will be aware that in December last year LAUTRO issued a further enforcement bulletin providing its members with additional guidance on how high income and similar products should be marketed. That is what I was making clear in my original Answer. I am afraid that I simply do not go down the line that the noble Lord would wish; that is, of bringing in a system of statutory regulation. I believe that self-regulation works and that radical changes to the current system would mean massive costs and prolonged uncertainty. Undoubtedly, too, investor protection would suffer.
Lord Ewing of Kirkford: My Lords, does the Minister agree that if self-regulation works and the ombudsman has criticised the advertisements, the logical follow-on is that the advertisements should be withdrawn? Can the noble Lord tell the House, with confidence, that that is exactly what will happen?
Lord Henley: My Lords, what has happened is that the appropriate regulatory authorities have issued guidance on advertisements. They have said that appropriate remedial action should be taken if those advertisements are misleading. As I made clear, I myself am not prepared to comment as to whether or not any particular advertisement is misleading. I also made clear that LAUTRO has the power, where it is necessary and where people have lost out, to insist that those who have caused the loss should provide appropriate compensa-tion to investors.
Lord Eatwell: My Lords, the noble Lord says that the institution of statutory regulation would cause massive costs. Massive costs to whom? Is it not clear that the current voluntary system is causing massive costs to this country's savers, particularly our pensioners?
Lord Henley: No, my Lords, it is not. What I said was that radical changes would mean massive costs and would bring prolonged uncertainty. I said that undoubtedly investor protection would suffer. We believe that self-regulation works, and we will continue with self-regulation. That is why LAUTRO, in this case, dealing with fixed income investments, issued the advice that it did and made it clear that appropriate action had to be taken where some people had suffered.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, surely it is not simply a matter of self-regulation? The Government are loath, I see, to interfere. But they interfere with tobacco advertising. Agreement was obtained with the Government as to what constitutes good advertising practice in relation to tobacco. Will the noble Lord confirm that there is no reason why the Government should not intervene in the area we are discussing? Undoubtedly, people are being misled by advertisements which say in large print, "9 per cent. interest every year", and in small print, "This may involve the loss of your original capital". That is the kind of advertisement we are worried about. We believe that the Government should take action.
Lord Henley: My Lords, I honestly fail to see how tobacco advertising comes into this. As regards the substantive part of the noble Lord's question, I have made clear that LAUTRO issued further guidance on advertising. It said that advertising should not be misleading. It should, however, be made clear to the noble Lord that merely responding to the advertisement on the coupon does not itself represent a commitment to invest. The product literature sent out as a result of that kind of advertising is also subject to fairly firm rules laid down by the regulators. In addition, new product disclosure rules for life insurance-based products, which become mandatory in January next year, will include the requirement to include both risk warnings and cooling off periods.

Environmental Education
3.7 p.m.
Baroness Nicol Baroness Nicol asked Her Majesty's Government:
What plans they have to co-ordinate and disseminate the facets of environmental education necessary to underpin commitments on sustainable development and biodiversity made at the Rio summit.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (The Earl of Arran): My Lords, the two publications: The UK Strategy on-Sustainable Development and Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan both recognise the importance of environmental education, which is one of the issues being examined by the Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group and the Scottish Advisory Group on Sustainable Development.
Baroness Nicol: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. Will he accept that I welcome the positive statements made in both those documents? However,
860
can he explain to me how the teaching of environmental education is to achieve sufficient emphasis, since it is a cross-curricular theme and, as such, requires a great deal of effort on the part of those who wish to teach it to pull together the various strands? Will the Government issue guidelines to make sure that the proper emphasis is given?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I can tell the noble Baroness that following the Dealing Review, of which she is probably aware, the consultation questionnaire on the revised national curriculum asked for opinions on the issuing of guidance in order to supplement the statutory content of the revised national curriculum. Indeed, the noble Baroness may wish to take advantage of that to make her views known to the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority as the consultation process does not end until the end of July.
Lord Monkswell: My Lords, can the Minister tell us what sums of money are being made available by the Government to enable environmental education in teacher training colleges to be ensured, and what sums of money are being made available by the Government to local education authorities to enable in-service teacher training to go ahead on this subject?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I can certainly tell the noble Lord that the Council for Environmental Education has been funded to the extent of some £400,000 over the past three years. I would have thought that that was proof in itself of how seriously we take education on the environment.
Baroness Hilton of Eggardon: My Lords, the European Commission has set aside 1 million ecus for teacher training in environmental education. The closing date for applications under that fund is today. Can the Minister tell us how many applications have been made for funding under that particular European fund?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I cannot give the noble Baroness that information at this time. The closing date is today; I do not think that she would expect me to give that answer without prior notice.
Lord Elis-Thomas: My Lords, will the noble Earl discuss with his colleagues in the Welsh Office the issue of environmental education in Wales to ensure that both the voluntary bodies and the curriculum council are spending the required sums on the development of environmental education and the concept of sustainable development within the Welsh context?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, not only in the Welsh context, but in the Scottish context and the English context as well; environmental education is very important throughout the whole of the United Kingdom. The Government believe very firmly in it and are doing their best to promote it.
Viscount Addison: My Lords, the Prime Minister launched the United Kingdom strategy for sustainable

861
development as a cross-government initiative. Will my noble friend the Minister say what positive steps have been taken to ensure co-operation among departments?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I draw my noble friend's attention to two particular aspects. First, the Government's Panel on Sustainable Development, which is chaired by Sir Crispin Tickell, is a panel of individuals with wide knowledge and practical experience which will give the Government very authoritative and independent advice on strategic issues. Secondly, there is the Round Table on Sustainable Development. Here, the proposed round table will bring together representatives of business, local government, industry and other sectors to discuss major issues of sustainable development with Ministers.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, is the Minister aware that we debated this matter on 2nd March when we had our debate on sustainable development and that at the time the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, emphasised the importance of education, as I did in my wind-up speech? Will the noble Earl tell us precisely how the Department for Education plans to take this forward, as it is the lead department in this matter?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, the Department for Education is the formal department in this matter. We believe that environmental education is best dealt with and best promoted through individual subjects such as geography, science and technology. As the noble Lord will know well, environmental education is a compulsory element of the geography curriculum.
Baroness Nicol: My Lords, the Minister mentioned two advisory bodies which will help the Government in reaching their targets. I believe that there are two or three others in the offing. Can he say which of those bodies, if any, has the task of focusing on environmental education as such and offering advice as such?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, both those bodies will look at the possibility of discussing and observing carefully environmental education. As the noble Baroness pointed out, there are several other initiatives. One is called Going for Green; another is the Green Brigade, which is an excellent initiative to get young people interested in environmental issues.
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, how does my noble friend define "environmental education"?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I would say to my noble friend that, very simply, it is the Government's duty and responsibility to promote the education of everybody in this country in the importance of the conservation of nature and on biodiversity and sustainable development from the cradle to the grave in order to protect this planet and all that we love upon it.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, following on the noble Earl's question, can the Minister say what he means—I believe I heard him correctly—when he says that there are government bodies looking at the possibility of discussing initiatives?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I made clear to the noble Lord (perhaps he does not think that I did make it clear) that we consider—and I do not think that he particularly agrees with this, because I suspect he may want the subject to be part of the national curriculum —that it is best promoted on a sectoral basis.

Iraq: Release of Kuwaiti Detainees
3.16 p.m.
Lord Molloy Lord Molloy asked Her Majesty's Government:
What progress has been made in the United Nations to secure the release of civilians taken prisoner by Iraq during the Gulf war.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey): My Lords, as the noble Lord is aware, we raise the plight of Kuwaiti and other detainees at the United Nations at every suitable opportunity, including in the Security Council on 17th May. We will continue to do so until Iraq complies with its Security Council obligations to co-operate with the International Committee of the Red Cross in its attempts to gather information on Kuwaiti and other nationals missing in Iraq.
Lord Molloy: My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for that very encouraging reply, which will also encourage so very many Kuwaiti people. I know that she is aware that after United: Kingdom forces and our allies, the United States, drove out Saddam Hussein's forces, those Iraqi forces took with them many hundreds of men, women and children, about whom nothing has since been heard. I acknowledge what the British Government have tried to do, and they are well in the fore in their endeavours. Will the Minister agree that other countries must help this country to secure the release of those prisoners—children, women and men —who are now held in Iraq so that they are returned to their home country and that the endeavours of the British Government should now receive the full support of all members of the United Nations?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, the International Committee of the Red Cross is the key organisation in dealing with Iraq over detainees. We fully support its efforts, as we have done all through, and we keep in close touch. A British representative attends the meetings of the tripartite commission—that is, the ICRC, the coalition countries and Iraq—and went to both meetings in July and November last year. Iraq failed to send a representative. But there is to be a further meeting tomorrow; we shall have to see whether Iraq will attend this time, and then decide what next must be done.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, does not the failure of Iraq to comply with United Nations resolutions perhaps cast some doubt on the safety and indeed continued life of some of these persons?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: Indeed, my Lords, my noble and learned friend is absolutely right. There is considerable doubt as to whether some of these persons are still alive and, if they are alive, in what condition of health they may be. But we can only work through the ICRC in this matter. We have urged the ICRC, not only through our regular meetings but also through correspondence with us, to tell us if there is anything that we, as an interested nation, can do to help the ICRC to find these poor people.
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, given that the Gulf War ended in 1991, is it not now a matter of the utmost urgency that this issue is pursued? I ask the Minister: is it right to leave this matter to the International Committee of the Red Cross? While recognising the enormously valuable work that that organisation does on these matters, surely it is now a matter for governments to put pressure on the Government of Iraq.
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, I sympathise greatly with the noble Baroness when she speaks of the urgency of the matter. But there is some difficulty here. This is not a job for the UN. It is part of the ICRC Charter. It is a task which has been undertaken throughout by the International Committee of the Red Cross. That is really the key organisation and it has had some considerable success.
The difficulty in dealing with someone like Saddam Hussein is that if he decides not to co-operate, it makes it very difficult even for the in-country teams who have done such good work to obtain that kind of information. But we shall make sure that the Red Cross gets every support, as we have done in the past. I believe that we can only pursue this matter in such a way. There is no room for the United Nations to follow it. The ICRC has an excellent track record in finding people, if they are to be found.
Lord Bonham-Carter: My Lords, further to the question put by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham, can the Minister say how many of these people there are, where they are and in what conditions they are being kept?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: No, my Lords. I regret to say that we do not know. Various estimates have been given to us about the numbers of missing people which vary between a few hundred and over 1,000.I believe that there is nothing accurate in the way of the information asked for by the noble Lord.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, will the Minister look again at the question put by my noble friend? She rightly said that the Red Cross has a very good record. At the same time, she said that some of those people may be dead or living in ill health. Does she agree that that means on this occasion that the Red Cross has been unsuccessful? Will she accept the point made by my noble friend that the Government should now step in, do what they can and use their diplomacy?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, the Red Cross under its charter has the responsibility for tracking down detainees and finding missing persons. I believe that there is no single government or
864
combination of governments that would have better skills than the Red Cross. The very people to whom governments turn and who have the best expertise in this matter are indeed the Red Cross. In all the international meetings of the Red Cross that I have attended, it is clear that its expertise is the best available.
Lord Mayhew: My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that, for all the splendid skills of the Red Cross, this is not at all a question of skill but of political pressure of the strongest kind? Will she accept that it is plain, since no one knows who these people are, how many of them there are and Iraq declines to come to meetings, that this is a political matter and should be dealt with in a political way?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, this is a political matter. But, like all similar matters such as Iranian prisoners of war in Iraq or Iraqi prisoners of war in Iran, it has been put to the Red Cross, whose responsibility it is to find them. I shall note what your Lordships have said. There is a genuine concern among us all that these people should be released and repatriated. But there is no way in which a government can positively do that when the people cannot be found: we do not know ourselves where they are, and the real tracking procedure, which has worked successfully in allowing some people to get out of Iraq, is that of the ICRC.
Lord Molloy: My Lords, is the noble Baroness prepared to consider also the submission, which I believe was made first by Mr. Norman Hogg in the other place, to the effect that part of the agony is that those who are in Kuwait have seen their men, women and children taken away forcibly by Saddam Hussein? They must be living a life of sheer agony. Will she accept that that too should be taken into consideration by the world's international organisations? Will she submit that point as she continues the excellent work that she has been doing up to now?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, I note what the noble Lord said. Of course that point is one that is uppermost in the consideration of those in the Red Cross who are trying to pursue this work. But this is no simple matter. We give as much help as we can—and help has been given by the Americans, the French and everybody else who was involved in releasing Kuwait from Saddam Hussein's clutches. We shall go on doing that. We cannot do more.
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, further to the question put by my noble friend Lord Ashley, is the Minister saying that despite the failure so far of the International Committee of the Red Cross there is absolutely nothing that Western governments can do about these prisoners? If so, I find it quite astounding. Are we washing our hands of these people?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, the noble Baroness must be realistic. We are not washing our hands of these people. I should like to know where the noble Baroness thinks they are to be found.

865
Obviously she has some information that she has not yet given to the Government. Perhaps she will give it to us and we shall pass it to the Red Cross.

Genetically Modified Viruses: Control and Liability
3.25 p.m.
Lord Kennet Lord Kennet asked Her Majesty's Government:
Who in law is responsible and therefore liable for damages if the genetically modified virus containing a scorpion gene escapes from the field at Wytham near Oxford into the general environment and affects organisms other than those intended.
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, Part VI of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 provides the basis for legislation controlling the release of genetically modified organisms. If an organism were released in such a manner that a criminal offence was committed under the Act, the Secretary of State has powers to take reasonable steps towards remedying any harm caused, where possible, and to recover the cost incurred from the person convicted of the offence. Liability and damages would depend on the circumstances of any escape and the nature of the damage caused.
Lord Kennet: My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for his most informative and rather complicated answer. Will he confirm that we are dealing with the release into a field of a virus, which is a native of California and tends to kill moth caterpillars, and that this virus has been genetically engineered in this country so as to make it more likely to kill the caterpillar of the cabbage looper, having been laced for good measure with a section of genetic material which produces scorpion venom when it is at home,? That being the case, if anything were to go wrong, would not it be a singularly conspicuous matter? If the Secretary of State has the power to recover the cost, what will he do with it when he has recovered it? Will he pay it out again to those who have suffered? If so, does that mean that it will come to rest with the taxpayer, or is there an alternative route in this era of private enterprise?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I cannot say precisely what the Secretary of State will do in particular circumstances because such circumstances have not yet arisen. We very much hope that they will not arise. Certainly, the noble Lord was right. This particular virus in the Oxford institute naturally infects caterpillars; but it has been modified with the scorpion toxin gene, which means that the target insect is killed faster and before it can damage crops. Similar GMOs have been released —I believe there have been approximately six in the past seven years. Every possible precaution has been taken on releases to the environment by the advisory committee, which in turn informs the Secretary of State.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, will my noble friend make sure that those who have
866
released this scorpion gene into a field are aware of the decision in Rylands v. Fletcher, and their possible liability under that doctrine?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, I am sure that my noble and learned friend has a very good point. I shall make sure that it is carried out.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, does an employer who disseminates this or any other substance over a field have a general obligation under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act to take all steps which are reasonably practicable to protect the health and safety of the public? Would such an employer be liable for proceedings if harm came to the public and it was found that he had not taken every step reasonably practicable to prevent that harm?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, as I said in my original Answer, every possible precaution is taken. Certainly the HSC is very much aware of these particular circumstances. It is bounden to take into very serious consideration any such possible harm should any particular release go wrong. As I said, every possible precaution has been taken that nothing should go wrong.
Lord Elton: My Lords, my noble friend and other contributors to the debate are talking of grave and dangerous effects. Can my noble friend tell those of his noble friends and others who are baffled by what was said what the real danger is, and whether it is cabbages or caterpillars or the whole of Oxford that we should now avoid?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, there is no specific danger in relation to this release because it was extremely carefully controlled. The press coverage on this matter over the past few weeks grossly over-exaggerated the situation. The real worry is that there are some rather rare butterflies several hundred yards from where the experiment is being carried out.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham, raised an important point Are those responsible for releasing this and any other virus described by noble Lords aware of their responsibilities which may well be both criminal—as I understand it from the noble Lord's Answer—and also civil? Are they aware, and who are they?
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, of course they are aware. All the 19 stations across the country are aware of the sensitivity of such releases, particularly this well-renowned institute in Oxfordshire. It is well aware of the precautions it must take and how it must deal with the Department of the Environment and the Secretary of State in order to obtain his agreement, through advice from the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment for specific releases to take place.
Lord Kennet: My Lords, will the noble Earl agree that the criticism reported in the press, which has been extensive, came largely from what scientists call the "peers" of those who are doing the work? They are other experts in the field who reacted with extraordinary

867
alarm despite the approval given by the committee called ACRE; and, indeed, it is an alarm I cannot remember seeing in any similar case.
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, some experts contended that this release perhaps should not take place. But ACRE was consulted a second time and agreed that it was perfectly in order for the release to proceed.

Local Government (Wales) Bill [H.L.]
3.32 p.m.
The Lord Advocate (Lord Rodger of Earlsferry): My Lords, I beg to move that the Commons amendments be now considered.
Moved, That the Commons amendments be now considered.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, before the House agrees the Motion I wish to raise a matter of importance in relation to the Bill and upon which we believe the House is entitled to a full explanation from the Government. I informed the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate yesterday of my intention to raise the matter today.
We want to know why the Welsh Office failed to issue before 16th June—a critical date because that is the date when the Bill was given its Third Reading in another place—the document entitled Consultation Paper on Proposed Arrangements for Costs of Local Government Reorganisation in Wales. The Government repeatedly enunciated one of the main objects of Welsh local government reform as being to ensure improved value for money in the provision of services. The consultation document is therefore very relevant. It contains information which could be relevant to whether or not new amendments should have been tabled in another place or whether relevant undertakings should have been sought from Welsh Office Ministers there.
The document contains indications that the Welsh local authorities' share of the costs of the transitional arrangements is likely to be much higher than the authorities were led to believe would be the case. It also contains other relevant material such as the suggestion that the cost of financing pensions may have to be borne by increasing the contributions of employers and employees in Wales.
The contents of the consultation paper were not known to the Members of another place on 16th June when the Bill was given its Third Reading. All that gives grave cause for suspicion that the publication of the document was delayed in order to deny Members of another place relevant information before the Third Reading debate. I therefore ask the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate to tell the House how the Welsh Office justifies or explains the delay in publication of a document of that kind. Further, can the noble and learned Lord allay the fears of local authorities that their share of the transitional costs of reorganisation may well be greater than they were led to believe was the case?
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos: My Lords, I support my noble friend; we should be grateful to him for raising this important point. A document of such importance deserves careful scrutiny in advance of the final passage of a Bill of this kind. The other place was given an inadequate opportunity to study it. I cannot understand why the Welsh Office or the Government generally failed to give Parliament that opportunity. We must be told why the matter was dealt with so inadequately.
Lord Hooson: My Lords, from these Benches our view is that the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, raises a point of substance. As the Bill was introduced in your Lordships' House, the Welsh Office must have known that there would be no chance of discussing in this Chamber matters contained in the document published on 16th June. The point raised is therefore one of real substance in regard to procedures to be followed when a Bill of this kind is introduced into your Lordships' House. The other place, which carries the prime responsibility, had no opportunity of considering the impingement of the contents of the document on the Bill and deciding its reaction. The noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate, apprised of the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, was to raise this matter, has an important duty to discharge in explaining the situation.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, raised this matter with me yesterday. The consultation paper to which he refers is dated 15th June and concerns arrangements for the cost of local government reorganisation in Wales. It is a consultation paper, and to be a proper consultation paper it had to put forward adequate information in relation to the matters upon which consultation was to take place. Up until 14th June the proposals for compensation for redundancy in connection with this matter had not been determined. That was for the Department of the Environment. On 14th June the Department of the Environment issued a letter setting out the proposals in relation to compensation for redundancy on which representations are to be made by 13th July. Once those proposals were available it was then possible for the first time to complete the consultation paper.
Noble Lords will have seen, for example, in paragraph 5.4 of the Welsh Office consultation paper reference made to the fact that on 14th June the Government announced their proposals for the severance scheme upon reorganisation. Until those proposals were made available it would not have been possible to issue any meaningful document for consultation. There would have been, in effect, a large hole in the middle of any consultation document on the costs of the reorganisation. For that reason, therefore, as soon as the compensation proposals were available the document was issued on the following day. That is what determined the date upon which it was actually issued.
Of course, it is only a consultation paper. Noble Lords will have seen that there is now to be a period of consultation with comments submitted to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State by 16th August. The final form of the package will be determined by my right honourable friend in the light of the representations made.

869
As to the question of the share of the costs, at no time previously had any firm indication been given to local authorities as to who should take responsibility for exactly what. Quite deliberately, no undertakings had been given. Therefore, if the local authorities had an impression that the arrangements would be somewhat different, it was not one based on any representations made by the Welsh Office—because, for the very reasons I have given, it was not possible for that to be done earlier. Those are the reasons why the document was issued when it was.
Lord Elis-Thomas: My Lords, when the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, raised this issue it was not entirely clear to me what its import was. It now appears from the response of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate that this is a very important issue for the internal workings of government and in particular for the statutory responsibility and position of the Welsh Office. Do I understand from the noble and learned Lord who speaks for the Welsh Office on these matters that, because of a delay on the part of the Department of the Environment in preparing the relevant information, it was not possible for another place to be aware of the redundancy implications of a Bill presented to this House by the Government—presented by the Welsh Office? Is that not an indication of the failure of government departments to collaborate? Is it not time therefore that the Welsh Office led the Department of the Environment by the nose in these matters? Where there is legislation relevant to Wales which has an effect on the livelihood of our people involved in local government and information is not available in a timely way so that it can be debated by another place, the Welsh Office should tell the Department of the Environment where to get off.
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos: My Lords, the noble and learned Lord says that the consultation will be completed in mid-August. What action will the Government take following that? Parliament will, it is to be hoped, be in recess at that time. Will a document be published and will a statement be made to both Houses in order to enable Members in another place and in this House to pursue the matter, to question the Government, and to satisfy themselves that the result is a satisfactory one?
Baroness White: My Lords, can the Lord Advocate explain why it has taken so long to make these proposed arrangements? We were discussing the Bill in this House in the last week of February and the first week in March. Why were the Welsh Office and the Department of the Environment not getting on and making sure that at least those in another place representing Welsh constituencies had an opportunity of knowing in reasonable time the Government's intentions? This kind of situation causes a great deal of indignation.
Lord Monkswell: My Lords, I wish to approach the question in a slightly different way. We have two major Bills going through Parliament at the moment: the Local Government (Wales) Bill and the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill. The Local Government (Wales) Bill is further along the road than the Local Government etc.
870
(Scotland) Bill. In the process of deliberating on those Bills the cost of the reorganisation of local government is a significant item of information which Parliament needs to take into account.
From what the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate has said today it appears that the determination of a major element of cost has been made by the Government only after the major stages in this House and in another place of the Local Government (Wales) Bill have been completed. The noble and learned Lord will be aware that we had a debate only the other day about the cost of the reorganisation of local government in Scotland. The Government refused to accept an amendment that called for the Treasury to identify costs and report them to Parliament. During that debate a range of cost estimates were made. Are we to understand that the situation that we now see with the Local Government (Wales) Bill is likely to occur with the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill and that after deliberation by Parliament the Government will come up with firm costs and then go through a consultation process as to how those costs are to be allocated between central and local government? We are talking about a totality of costs that will have to be borne by the public purse. It is only sensible that Parliament, in determining its view on these Bills, should have before it the costs that will have to be borne by the public purse either centrally or locally prior to making very significant decisions.
I have a question which the noble and learned Lord may not be able to answer at this stage. What constitutional mechanism does Parliament have to reconsider the Local Government (Wales) Bill in the light of this cost determination and what steps will the Government take to ensure that Parliament's deliberations on the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill are arranged in such a way that the costs of local government reorganisation in Scotland are in front of Parliament prior to significant deliberations on that Bill?
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, in general terms, as your Lordships know, it has been the position of the Government throughout the Bill's progress that it was not possible and never would be possible to predict precisely what the cost of the local government reorganisation would be as it would depend to a great extent on the decisions taken ultimately by the new authorities, for example, as to whether they require or desire new accommodation and so on. We have said that all along. Although there were estimates in the Touche Ross. report, referred to on several occasions in your Lordships' House, we have said that we are not in a position to say exactly what the cost will be. So in general terms the matter has been debated.
As regards this particular issue the question of compensation for redundancy was a matter on which the Department of the Environment was, so to speak, in the lead. It was the department dealing with the matter. Since local government was being reorganised not only in Wales, but also in England and Scotland, it was necessary that the proposals should be ones applying not only in the Principality but also in England and Scotland

871
so as to achieve equality throughout Great Britain among all those affected. It is for that reason that the proposals have taken some time to work out.
We have debated these issues on a number of occasions. They are matters of great importance to the people concerned. For that reason they have been the subject of representation and consideration over a considerable period of time. Had they been rushed out earlier I have no doubt that there would have been criticism to the effect that not enough time had been taken to consider them. As it happens, it did take a considerable amount of time. But the proposals are now published. They are for consideration first by the local authorities and in due course by the Secretary of State in the light of representations which will be made to him.
Eventually, the Secretary of State's determination of these matters will form part of the 1995–96 expenditure settlements for local government in the normal way. That will be reflected in the figures. There will be the usual kind of scrutiny applying to proposals in relation to local government expenditure. Therefore, in that respect the position will be exactly the same as that for other local government expenditure proposals, subject to the control which Parliament has in respect of them. I believe that the matter has been dealt with appropriately, and that your Lordships should accept that.
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, I thank the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate for replying to the two specific questions I addressed to him. As to the first question, his answer merely illustrates once again that the Welsh Office, in relationship to a London-based department, stands as a very junior partner. We have been told by Ministers that this is a Bill designed to meet Welsh circumstances: it would be "a Welsh Bill". We fail to see why it is necessary for the Welsh Office to be so dependent on guidance, steering, initiative and leadership from the Department of the Environment.
As regards the noble and learned Lords's reply to my second question, I never alleged that there had been an undertaking given by the Government that the costs of reorganisation would be at a certain figure. I never made that allegation: we would not expect the Government to give such an undertaking. However, the local authorities will say that in discussions with Ministers and officials they were led to believe that their share of the costs would be at a certain ratio but that they now understand from the document that it is likely to be very much higher. The noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate has not denied that.
If it transpires that the costs are higher than anticipated, can the noble and learned Lord say whether at the end of the day those additional costs will be borne by the Welsh authorities or by central government?
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, one can see from the document which parts will be borne by whom. The question as regards what the final figures will be. as I say, depends on decisions taken by the local authorities. Therefore, to some extent the final figures depend on their actions. In those circumstances I cannot say other than that the amount they will have to bear can
872
be calculated by reference to the document in relation to what, at the end of the day, the final figures turn out to be. The proportion they will bear is seen from the document.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
[References are to Bill 68 as first printed for the Commons.]
1 Clause 2, page 2, line 45, after 'Council'" insert 'or the word "Council"'.
2 Page 2, line 45, leave out 'Anglesey' and insert 'Cardiganshire'.
3 Page 2, line 46, after 'Council'" insert 'or "Cardiganshire Council'".
4 Page 3, line 6, after 'Council'" insert 'or the word "Council"'.
5 Page 3, line 7, after 'Council'" insert 'or "Caerphilly Council'".
6 Page 3, line 9, after 'Sirol'" insert "or the word "Cyngor"'.
7 Page 3, line 10, after 'Caerffili'" insert 'or "Cyngor Caerffili'".
8 Page 3, line 11, leave out 'Caerdydd, Powys and Abertawe' and insert 'Abertawe, Caerdydd and Powys'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 1 to 8 en bloc. At the same time, and with your Lordships' leave, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 64 to 71 and 132.
Amendments Nos. 1 to 8 fulfil an undertaking given in the other place to allow the new authorities greater flexibility in determining their titles. All of the unitary authorities will be either counties or county boroughs, but they will have the option of describing themselves as, for example, "Monmouthshire Council" instead of "Monmouthshire County Council". We believe that this is a suitable matter for local determination.
Amendments Nos. 64 to 71 create two new authorities, Merthyr Tydfil and Blaenau Gwent, in place of the proposed Heads of the Valleys authority and include all of the Rhymney Valley district in the Caerphilly authority. These changes recognise the historic status of Merthyr as a county borough and the lack of common interest with Blaenau Gwent. Those are matters on which I think many of your Lordships spoke with a great deal of feeling during the Committee stage of the Bill. We are also proposing to place the Llanelly community in Monmouthshire rather than in Powys. This reflects the results of a locally organised referendum.
Finally, in keeping with a commitment I gave to your Lordships in the spring, we are proposing, through Amendment No. 132, to reduce the period during which the new authorities will have to seek the Secretary of State's agreement to any change of name. As noble Lords will see, they will now be free to change their names from 1st October 1996.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 1 to 8.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
[Amendment No. 8A not moved.]

COMMONS AMENDMENT
9 Clause 10, page 8, line 3, at end insert:
'( ) An order under this section shall make such provision as appears to the council making it to be necessary for the application to the communities included in the group of all or any of the provisions of section 79 of the Charities Act 1993 (parochial charities) and of any of the provisions of this Act with respect to the custody of community documents, so as to preserve the separate rights of each community.'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 9. This is a technical amendment to correct an oversight when translating the provisions of the existing Section 29 of the Local Government Act 1972—which deals with the orders for grouping of communities and their dissolution—when that was translated into the new Section 29 to be inserted by Clause 10. The existing Section 29(3) (c) ensures that in making an order grouping communities under a common council, necessary provision is made to preserve the rights of each community to be included in the group with regard to parochial charities or to documents relating to the individual community.
This amendment ensures that future grouping orders under Clause 10 will preserve those separate rights.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 9.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
10 Clause 17, page 13, line 20, leave out 'to the contrary'.
11 Page 13, line 22, leave out 'express'.
12 Page 13, line 27, leave out 'the appropriate' and insert 'a'.
13 Page 13, line 32, leave out 'the appropriate' and insert 'a'.
14 Page 13, line 34, leave out from 'Where' to 'that', in line 36, and insert 'in relation to any relevant legislative provision, any question arises as to which new principal area is the appropriate new principal area for the purposes of that provision'.
4 p.m.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 10 to 14 en bloc.
These are purely technical amendments, designed to improve the operation of this clause, providing for the transfer of local government functions from the old to the new authorities.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 10 to 14. —(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
15 Clause 20, page 15, line 39, leave out 'one or more National Parks' and insert 'an area prescribed under section 23B(2) in relation to a National Park'.
16 Page 15, line 44, leave out 'as the case may be,' and insert 'if there is more than one,'.
17 Page 16, line 2, after 'in' insert 'any of the following sections of'.
18 Page 16, line 5, leave out from 'to' to 'Park' in line 6 and insert 'any'.
19 Page 16, line 9, leave out 'the remaining' and insert 'that'.
20 Page 16, line 13, leave out 'National Park' and insert 'area prescribed under section 23B(2) in relation to that Park'.
21 Page 16, line 16, after 'within' insert 'the area so prescribed in relation to'.
22 Page 16, line 41, after 'alteration' insert 'or replacement'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 15 to 22 en bloc. I should like to speak also to Amendments Nos. 77 to 106 and 202 to 204.
Clause 20 and Schedule 5 provide for the operation of unitary development plans in Wales. There will be separate UDPs for each national park, as well as for the non-park land within each unitary authority.
The amendments are designed to clarify and simplify the provisions both in terms of their interpretation and their implementation. In brief, they provide for development plans covering national parks to include portions of non-park land, for example, in areas such as Snowdonia. They also have the effect of making "replacement" plans continue in the same way as alterations are allowed to continue under the unamended clause. They also ensure that different provision is to be made between UDPs for the metropolitan counties in England and for the system as it is to be applied in Wales. They also carry forward, with the Secretary of State's approval, any revision work to local plans and structure plans which is in progress at the time of reorganisation. Finally, they safeguard the position of landowners who may be served with blight notices in respect of draft structure and local plan proposals which may exist in the transitional period before UDPs are prepared.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 1.5 to 22.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
Lord Elis-Thomas: My Lords, I should like briefly to welcome the provisions, particularly as they relate to unitary development plans for the national parks and will ensure that the system that has been developed in areas such as Snowdonia, to which the noble and learned Lord referred, will be continued. This is an opportunity also to ask the Minister for an assurance that these provisions in the Bill will be fully implemented, with independent authorities being established for the Welsh parks, regardless of the regrettable incident in another place when the Bill of the noble Lord, Lord Norrie, fell.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I welcome the opportunity to give the House the assurance for which the noble Lord asks.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
23 Clause 23, page 17, line 39, leave out from beginning to end of line 1 on page 18 and insert:

875
'(4) Where the Secretary of State proposes to make such a combination scheme—

(a) subsection (2) of section 6 of the Act of 1947 shall until 1st April 1996 be taken to require him to give notice to—

(i) any existing fire authority whose area lies wholly or partly within the proposed combined area; and

(ii) each of the new principal councils concerned; and

(b) the requirement in that subsection with respect to public local inquiries shall not apply if—

(i) the proposed scheme relates only to new principal areas; and

(ii) the notice is given before 1st April 1996'.

24 Page 18, line 6, leave out from 'him' to end of line 7 and insert 'before the end of the specified period by any body to whom notice was given.'.
25 Clause 24, page 18, line 24, leave out from beginning to end of line 30 and insert:
'(5) Where the Secretary of State proposes to make such an amalgamation scheme—

(a)paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 3 to the Act of 1964 shall until 1st April 1996 be taken to require him to give notice—

(i) to any existing police authority whose area lies wholly or partly within the area of the proposed combined police authority;

(ii) where that police authority is a combined authority, to the councils of each of the counties comprised in the combined area; and

(iii) to each of the new principal councils concerned; and

(b) the requirement in paragraph 3 of that Schedule with respect to public local inquiries shall not apply if—

(i) the proposed scheme relates only to new principal areas; and

(ii) the notice is given before 1st April 1996.'.

26 Page 18, line 35, leave out from 'him' to end of line 36 and insert 'by any body to whom notice was given.'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 23 to 26 en bloc.
These amendments fulfil undertakings given to your Lordships, as well as in another place, that we would consider further the scope of the requirement for the Home Secretary to consult local authorities before making any new fire combination schemes or police amalgamation schemes.
Having considered the matter further, we believe it is desirable for the existing fire and police authorities, as well as the new principal councils, to be expressly given an opportunity to comment on the arrangements for their own locality.
Accordingly, the amendments would require the Home Secretary to give notice of his proposals for fire service combination schemes or police amalgamation schemes in Wales not only to the shadow unitary authorities (whose area lies wholly or partly within the area of the proposed combined fire or police authority), but also to the existing fire or police authorities. The giving of the notice would carry with it a duty on the Home Secretary to consider the representations which result.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 23 to 26.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, I merely wish to support the amendments. Obviously, they do not go as far as we would wish but nevertheless they place a duty on the Secretary of State to consider representations received from anybody who has received notice of a proposed scheme. We welcome the amendments.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
27 Clause 27, page 26, line 33, leave out 'one or more committees' and insert 'a committee'.
28 Clause 28, page 21, line 28, leave out ' one year" and insert 'six moons'.
29 Page 21, line 33, at end insert:
'( ) Where he proposes not to approve the scheme as submitted, the Secretary of State shall notify the council concerned, before the end of that six month period, of the modifications which he proposes to make to the scheme, or (as the case may be) that he proposes to reject the scheme.
( ) Before he approves a scheme subject to modifications, or rejects a scheme, the Secretary of State shall have regard to any representation which have been made to him by the council concerned.'.
30 Page 22, line 5, leave out from beginning to end of line 30.
31 After Clause 28, insert the following clause:
Area committees: safeguards: '.—
'. — (1) Where an area committee has been established by a council in accordance with an approved decentralisation scheme—

(a) the council shall not, except with the agreement of the committee, abolish the committee or alter any arrangements in force with respect to the committee which were made in accordance with the scheme as originally approved or which have subsequently been agreed with the committee. and

(b) nothing in section 101(4) of the 1972 Act (power of local authority to exercise functions otherwise discharged by committee) shall lie takes to authorise the council to exercise any functions which are to be discharged by the committee, except as provided for by the scheme.

(2) Every decentralisation scheme shall include provision, to be given effect to by the standing orders of the council concerned, for the majority required in order for any suspending resolution to be passed to be such majority greater man a simple majority as may be specified by the scheme.
(3) In subsection (2) "suspending resolution", in relation to a decentralisation scheme, means a resolution to suspend any of the arrangements to force with respect to an area committee established in accordance with the scheme.'.
32 After Clause 28, insert the following clause:
Area committees: membership etc '.
'. — (1) This section applies where an area committee has been established by a council in accordance with an approved decentralisation scheme.
(2) The provisions of the 1972 Act with respect to arrangements for the discharge of functions by committees of local authorities and sub-committees, and the appointment of such committees and sub-committees, shall be subject to this section and section (Sub-committees of area committees).
(3) Every person who is a member of the council for an electoral division which falls within the area for which the committee is established shall be entitled to be appointed to the committee at his request.
(4) The committee may appoint additional persons, including members of the council who are not entitled to membership of the committee under subsection (3), as members of the committee.
(5) No other persons shall be eligible for appointment to the committee.
(6) In this section, in relation to an area committee, "co-opted member" means any member appointed by the committee under subsection (4).
(7) Where the Secretary of State has given a direction under section 297 of the Education Act 1993 (power to direct appointment of members of certain committees) which applies to the committee and can only be complied with by the appointment of one or more additional members to the committee, it shall be the duty of the committee to exercise its powers of appointment to secure compliance with the direction.
(8) A co-opted member of an area committee shall not be entitled to vote at any meeting of the committee on any question which falls to be decided at that meeting.
(9) Nothing in subsection (8) shall prevent the appointment of a person, in compliance with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993, as a voting member of an area committee.
(10) In the application of section 101 of the 1972 Act (arrangement for discharge of functions by local authorities) in relation to the committee—

(a) subsection (1) shall have effect as if it gave power to the committee, if authorised to do so by the decentralisation scheme, to arrange for the discharge of any of its functions by a local authority other than the authority who made the scheme;

(b) subsection (2) shall have effect with the omission of the words "unless the local authority otherwise direct" and (in the second place where they occur) the words "the local authority or".

(11) Sections 102(3) of the 1972 Act (power to include persons who are not members of the local authority concerned) and 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (political balance on committees) shall not apply in relation to membership of the committee.
(12) The term of office of each of the co-opted members of an area committee shall be fixed by the committee.
(13) Section 102(2) of the 1972 Act (number of members of committee and terms of office) shall not apply in relation to the committee.
(14) In the case of an appointment made in order to comply with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993, the committee shall exercise its powers under subsection (12) subject to any provision of the direction relating to terms of office.'.
33 After Clause 28, insert the following clause:
Sub-committees of area committees
'. — (1) In this section "sub-committee" means a sub-committee of an area committee.
(2) The members of a sub-committee shall be appointed by the area committee from among persons who are—

(a) members of the area committee appointed under subsection (3) of section (Area committees: membership etc.); or

(b) entitled to be members of the area committee by virtue of that subsection.

(3) Subject to subsection (10), a sub-committee may appoint additional persons, including persons who are not members of the area committee concerned, as members of the sub-committee.
(4) No other persons shall be eligible for appointment to a sub-committee.
(5) In this section, in relation to a sub-committee, "co-opted member" means any member of the sub-committee appointed under subsection (3).
(6) Where the Secretary of State has given a direction under section 297 of the Education Act 1993 (power to direct appointment of members of certain committees) which applies to a sub-committee, it shall be the duty of the area committee concerned and the sub-committee to secure compliance with the direction.
(7) A co-opted member of a sub-committee shall not be entitled to vote at any meeting of the sub-committee on any question which falls to be decided at that meeting.
(8) Nothing in subsection (7) shall prevent the appointment of a person in compliance with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993 as a voting member of a subcommittee.
(9) Sections 102(3) of the 1972 Act (power to include persons who are not members of the local authority concerned) and 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (political balance on committees) shall not apply in relation to membership of a sub-committee.
(10) The number of members of a sub-committee and their terms of office shall be fixed by the area committee concerned.
(11) Section 102(2) of the 1972 Act (number of members of committee and terms of office) shall not apply in relation to the sub-committee.
(12) In the case of an appointment made in order to comply with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993, the area committee shall exercise its powers under subsection (10) subject to any provision of the direction relating to terms of office.'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 27 to 33 en bloc
The decentralisation provisions in the Bill provide for the setting up of area committees in areas where there is a strong sense of local community wedded to a tradition of local government at a principal authority level. These amendments are technical and take account of concerns expressed in both Houses. In particular, they simplify and curtail the process by which the Secretary of State considers a decentralisation scheme application. They also provide separate clauses to highlight the provisions relating to safeguards, membership of committees and the setting-up of sub-committees.
Your Lordships will have noticed that the new clauses also provide for co-option of additional persons to serve as members of committees and sub-committees, a matter which was mentioned previously by your Lordships. Those co-opted will generally be non-voting members.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 27 to 33.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
Lord Elis-Thomas: My Lords, I welcome the amendments which, as the noble and learned Lord said, relate to some of the issues that were raised previously by those of us concerned particularly about the Mid Wales decentralisation measures. The concept of the sub-committee of the area committees and the co-option is new. It would be helpful if the noble and learned Lord could give us some indication of what is in his department's mind as regards the kind of people who might be co-opted. Are we in the process of creating new nominated bodies—albeit nominated by local councils in this context? What kind of persons would the department expect to fulfil the role of an appointed member of a sub-committee of an area committee in Mid Wales, for example?
Baroness White: My Lords, can the Minister also explain whether the provisions will include people representing community councils? We discussed that when the Bill was before the House previously.
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, perhaps I too may ask a number of questions for clarification. I suggest that Amendment No. 29 may require clarification—not amendment, but clarification. Could the noble and learned Lord confirm whether the six-month period could be extended to enable the council to comment on any material issue which the Secretary of State may raise or whether the entire exercise has to be completed within the period of six months from the date of the submission of the scheme?
If there is no discretion to extend the six-month period—I assume that there is not—does the noble and learned Lord agree that the Secretary of State and his advisers should not be seeking representation from a principal council at the fag end of the period, particularly if the fag end of the period fell in the months of December or July?
Perhaps I may turn to Amendment No. 31. Will the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate be good enough to clarify the connection between subsections (1) (a) and (3)? Both subsections have one thing in common. They both refer to:
"arrangements in force with respect to the committee".
Subsection (1) (a) provides that the arrangements in force cannot be altered except with the agreement of the area committee. However, that seems to be modified by subsection (3) which provides that the arrangements in force can be altered by the principal council after the passing of a suspending resolution.
That being so, it would be helpful if the noble and learned Lord could give an indication of what percentage of the membership of the principal council voting for the suspending resolution will constitute a majority for that purpose. Will that percentage be the same for all principal councils in Wales where there is a delegation scheme or will it vary from council to council depending upon the Secretary of State's discretion?
I turn to the last point which relates to Amendment No. 32. We welcome subsection (4) which was included in response to a valid point made in Committee by my noble friend Lord Williams of Elvel. Can we have a further explanation of subsections (8) and (9)? As I understand it, a co-opted member will have no voting rights unless he is a member appointed under Section 297 of the Education Act 1993. Will the noble and learned Lord confirm that if he is an appointed member under the 1993 Act, he will have a voting power but only in connection with the functions contained in the Education Act 1993? I shall be grateful to have clarification of those points of detail.
Lord Hooson: My Lords, I suppose the safeguards proposed in the amendments are, as the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, said, to be preferred to the original proposals, but I am still concerned that these proposals for area committees will be the source of great mischief in Wales. I am sorry to say this, but I should have preferred the voluntary system which is proposed for Scotland rather than the area committee set-up proposed in these amendments for Wales.
It seems to me, and perhaps the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate will deal with this point, to be
880
a source of confusion regarding accountability and legal responsibility as between the unitary authority itself and the area committees under this rather rigid system. It would be much better, for example, in the area of Powys, which unfortunately is now inflicted upon us, if the people of Powys themselves could have worked out a voluntary system between Powys and the three areas of Montgomery, Radnorshire and Breconshire. It should have been left to the local people to work it out.
4.15 p.m.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I shall start with the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Hooson, since it is the most general one. We touched upon it on a number of occasions at earlier stages of the Bill. The position is, as I emphasised previously, that in some senses the powers given in Clause 28 and the other clauses that follow it are supplementary to the powers for local councils to appoint committees, which already exist under the Local Government Act 1972.
If the people of Powys wish to enter into their own kinds of arrangements—nothing to do with the provisions enshrined in these clauses—and have their own area committees, but area committees without the particular characteristics—I used the word on a previous occasion—of rigidity (the statutory locks on these committees which mean that they cannot be abolished easily), and do not wish to go down that route, but agree among themselves to set up area committees, there is nothing to prevent them from doing so. As we discussed on a previous occasion, in one sense the critical point in the Scottish clause is not that it gives a new power but that it imposes a positive duty upon all councils to examine decentralisation schemes. But the actual powers are powers which already exist in the legislation both in Scotland and in England and Wales.
Here we are dealing with something rather different —where people in Powys, or in other parts of Wales, wish to set up these particular area committees which will then be in position unless the area committees themselves agree to their abolition. That gives them a certain status within the council because they cannot be abolished by a decision of the council. If they wish to go down that route, they will use the mechanism of this scheme, which has the advantage of giving the powers to the local committee, which means that they cannot be abolished, for example. If enough people come forward they will put forward such a proposal, and the Secretary of State will consider it. If in due course it goes through, then this particular form of area committee will come into existence. If they do not wish to do that, and they wish to have their own form of area committee, there is nothing to prevent them from having a form which does not attract these characteristics but just uses the normal committee provisions of local government legislation. There is a great measure of flexibility.
Within the clauses one sees that there is plenty of room for the schemes to be tailored to the requirements of the areas to which they relate. There is no question of this matter being imposed undesirably upon Wales. It is a mechanism which exists for those areas in Wales which wish to take advantage of it.

881
The noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, rightly drew attention to the matter of co-opted members, which is new. It arose from some of the things said in your Lordships' House and in another place about it being desirable for the area committees to have co-opted members. I remember the telling point made by the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel, about it being desirable, if one had a local area committee dealing with a planning matter, for that committee to be able to co-opt the chairman of the main council's planning committee, thereby getting his advice, views and so on about the matter. That is an example of the kind of person who might be co-opted. But, as your Lordships will see, the terms of subsection (4) are wide. It just says, "additional persons". If it were desired to appoint a member of a community council to bring a particular point of view to the debates of the area committee, it would be possible to do so.
Under subsection (8), a co-opted member of an area committee is not entitled to vote at any meeting of the committee. I am sure that your Lordships will see why that should be the case. However, that provision is subject to subsection (9), which is limited in scope. It refers to the Secretary of State giving a direction under Section 297 of the Education Act 1993. That subsection relates to representations on an education sub-committee, for example, of persons who appoint foundation governors for voluntary schools in the area. That is what Section 297 of the Act refers to. The provision in subsection (8) is, in effect, without prejudice to the Secretary of State being able to appoint a person under the limited provision of Section 297 as a voting member in that connection. It is only a small issue but, that apart, the people co-opted will not have a vote.
I turn to the issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies. He mentioned the relationship between subsections (1) and (3) of the new clause in Amendment No. 31. Subsection (1) (a) states that:
"the council shall not, except with the agreement of the committee, abolish the committee or alter any arrangements in force with respect to the committee which were made in accordance with the scheme as originally approved".
That is what gives stability and protection to the area committee. Where the scheme is approved under these arrangements the council shall not, except with the agreement of the committee, alter or abolish it. That provision embraces subsections (2) and (3). Subsection (2) states:
"Every decentralisation scheme shall include provision, to be given effect to by the standing orders of the council concerned, for the majority required in order for any suspending resolution to be passed".
It would be possible for a council to pass a suspending resolution, which would suspend the arrangements in force in respect of a particular matter. We have previously given as an example planning decisions that have been delegated. A particular planning issue might arise which, although prima facie is within the delegated range, raises a strategic issue which is thought to be more appropriate for decision by the whole council. In that situation, it would be possible in advance for a suspending resolution to be passed.
882
The noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, asked about the majority required for such a suspending resolution. Your Lordships may know that draft guidance on decentralisation has been issued by the Welsh Office. It was circulated to local authorities in January this year. It states, among other things:
'The Secretary of State considers that the majority to be specified in the decentralisation scheme should be different for each committee and should be fixed at such a level that if all the members of the council were to vote on the resolution at least one member of the area committee should vote for it in order to secure the necessary majority".
If a full council had 60 members, for example, 20 of whom formed an area committee, the number of votes required to suspend any standing order in respect of the area would be 41. That figure would apply regardless of the number of members present or voting on the resolution. The point of that is to ensure that there is no suspension of the order unless at least one person on the area committee supports it. It would not be appropriate to go beyond that because it is desired to keep the flexibility for the various proposals, which will depend on the areas concerned.
The noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, asked about the situation in which the Secretary of State proposes to modify a scheme. The amendments reduce the time which the Secretary of State may take to consider such a scheme. I believe that your Lordships will consider it desirable that the matter should be concluded as; quickly as possible. Nonetheless, I recognised that if it were left too late there might be a danger that no proper consultation could take place.
Certainly the Secretary of State would wish to take account of representation which an authority would make during the consultations. It is inconceivable that the Secretary of State would proceed with proposals for a modification without first having had a form of consultation on the proposals and without having given sufficient time for representations to be submitted. For that reason, it is unlikely that the Secretary of State will seek formal views on a proposal to modify before Christmas, say, and in that situation offer only one month in which views must be submitted. If time were short, it might be possible for him to reject an application but making it perfectly clear that he was inviting the authority to submit revised proposals, for which there is machinery in the Bill.
I hope that I have reassured your Lordships as regards the points that were raised.
Lord Geraint: My Lords, after listening to the reply of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate, I still believe that a two-tier system will operate in some of the counties in Wales, especially as regards planning. I am worried by what the Minister said about planning. It is a major problem in Wales. If both the local authority and the area committee discuss planning matters more problems may be created. I believe that the matter should be left entirely to one authority.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, we have discussed the matter on a number of occasions. The Government believe that the ability to set up area

883
committees may well be welcome, in particular as regards certain aspects of local planning in various parts of Wales.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
34 Clause 32, page 24, line 37, leave out Clause 32.
35 Clause 33, page 25, line 36, leave out Clause 33.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 34 and 35 en bloc. I shall speak also to Amendments No. 57 and 58. These clauses were intended to allow the new authorities in Wales the opportunity to experiment with alternative forms of political management within a framework provided by the existing system.
Nevertheless, we have noted the anxieties expressed by Members of the other place in Standing Committee and we have concluded that further consideration would be beneficial before any legislation on such changes. Accordingly, we decided that the introduction of a completely new unitary structure is not appropriate now and have decided to remove those clauses from the Bill.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 34 and 35.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
4.30 p.m.
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos: My Lords, I warmly welcome Amendment No. 34. The House will recall that in Committee and on Report we were extremely concerned that the social services statutory committee could have been dispensed with under Clause 34. Given the importance of the social services for the people of Wales for very many years to come, we regard the statutory social services committee as an essential committee if we are to ensure continuity of care.
The co-ordination of social and health services in the community and the improvement of services for children, the handicapped and the elderly are very important and I am extremely pleased that the future of the committee is now assured.
I feel sure that the late Lord Seebohm, whom we miss greatly and who first recommended the concept of statutory social service committees, would have been gratified that the concept has been retained within the Welsh local government structure.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
36 Clause 38, page 30, line 42, leave out Clause 38.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 36.
Again, this is a question of deleting a clause. It was decided to delete this clause because it duplicated what was available by virtue of the order-making power in Clause 53 which provides for transfer of property, rights and liabilities in subsection (2) (c).
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 36.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
37 Clause 44, page 34, line 1, leave out from '(1)' to end of line 11 and insert 'In determining the effect of any provision of—

(a) Part IV, V or VI of the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978, or

(b) Chapter II of Part IV of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992,

in relation to a person whose contract of employment is terminated as a result of this Act, it shall be assumed that he was dismissed by the old authority concerned by reason of redundancy immediately before 1st April 1996 and that his dismissal was proposed by the authority.

(1A) For the purposes of this section—

(a) a person's contract of employment is terminated as a result of this Act if—

(i) immediately before 1st April 1996 he was in the service of an old authority under a contract of employment which would have continued in force if that authority had not been abolished; and

(ii) his contract of employment is not transferred to a new principal council or to the Residuary Body; and

(b) a contract of employment is transferred—

(i) to a new principal council, if it is treated by any provision made by this Act, or by or under any other enactment, as continued in force with that council on 1st April 1996; or

(ii) to the Residuary Body, if it is so treated as continued in force with the Residuary Body on that date.'.

38 Page 34, line 13, leave out 'such'.
39 Page 34, line 13, after 'payment' insert 'under Part VI of the Act of 1978'.
40 Clause 45, page 34, line 20, leave out from '(1)' to end of line 24 and insert 'This section applies where any contract of employment made before 1st December 1993 is terminated as a result of this Act.
(1A) Subsection (1A) of section 44 applies for the purposes of this section as it applies for the purposes of that section.'.
41 Page 34, line 47, at end insert:
'( ) The Secretary of State may by regulations exclude the operation of this section in prescribed circumstances (and, in particular, in cases of engagement by new principal councils).'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 37 to 41 en bloc.
The amendments give effect to the undertaking which the Secretary of State made in another place at Second Reading to reassure staff that they will have their full rights under employment protection legislation, including rights to consultation with representatives of staff and trade unions about prospective redundancies and notice of redundancy—matters which caused your Lordships considerable anxiety when the discussion took place both in Committee and on Report.
Amendment No. 41 closes a loophole in Clause 45 by giving the Secretary of State power to stop the unnecessary payment of compensation to individuals on a fixed term contract with an old authority who, but for the amendment, would have been able to secure a job by competition in one of the new authorities but, although

885
they would be paid a full salary for that, would be able to claim compensation for loss of office under the existing contract.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 37 to 41.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, we are comforted in the thought mat the new Clause 44 is a great improvement upon the original clause. The new clause no longer deems a contract of employment as having been frustrated by reorganisation.
The noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate is quite right to remind the House that we were extremely concerned about the original Clause 44, and we welcome this amendment. Will the noble and learned Lord confirm that local government employees who are made redundant or suffer loss or detriment as a result of the reorganisation on 1st April 1996 are entitled to the benefit of all existing employment rights, including those in respect of consultation and notice?
Secondly, perhaps I may refer to the words:
"or by or under any other enactment".
They are inserted in the penultimate paragraph of Clause 44. Do those words mean that the provisions of the Bill, in the words of the Minister of State at the Welsh Office,
"cannot override the requirements of European legislation, such at. the TUPE regulations, which implement the acquired rights directive"?—(Official Report, Commons, 1676/94; col. 789.]
Having listened carefully to the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate, it seems to me mat there may remain one area of concern for the staff; and I agree that in practice it affects only a small number of senior and middle management staff. They are anxious because as yet the Welsh Office has not formally stated in clear terms mat it agrees with the proposal of the Assembly of Welsh Counties, the Council of Welsh Districts and the Local Government Management Board (Welsh Region) that an employee who has not voluntarily agreed the terms of redundancy with his existing authority but wishes to be included in the staff transfer order to a new authority will be so transferred. Is that question still being considered by the Government or have they made up their minds about it?
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, as your Lordships will see, the position under Clause 34 is mat, if the contract of employment of a person who is in service immediately before 1st April 1996 with one of the old authorities is not transferred to a new principal council or the residuary body on that date, it is treated as terminated-In mat situation, by virtue of Clause 44(1), he becomes entitled to all the rights under Parts IV, V and VI of the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 and under Chapter II, Part IV of me Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. Those include the right to consultation and notice to which the noble Lord referred.
As has been indicated on previous occasions, the Government do not intend that all employees will transfer. We believe that the vast majority of employees, in practice, will transfer because most of the services will be carried on. If teachers were required before
886
reorganisation, they will be required after reorganisaion. Therefore, we believe that most, but not all, will transfer. As we have indicated on a previous occasion, at the end of the day we do not believe that it would be sensible or kind to the officials concerned to provide for some kind of notional transfer on 1st April 1996 which would mean only the postponement of the decision as to whether employment with the new authority would be continued. We believe that it is better that the matter should be considered as soon as possible so that everyone knows what will be the position.
By virtue of the fact that large numbers of people will transfer, coupled with those who will transfer by virtue of TUPE—though we hope that among those who will not transfer there may be people who will opt for taking voluntary redundancy—we hope, in that way, that the numbers of people who will be affected will be small. However, the Government do not intend mat all will do so.
Moved, that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 37 to 41 en bloc.—(Lord Rodger of Earisferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
42 Clause 47, page 35, line 33, leave out' 1,' and insert' 1(1).
Lord lodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 42,. At the same time, I should like to speak to Amendments Nos. 60 to 62.
At present, the whole of Clause 1 is due to come into force on Royal Assent On examination, that has proved to be unnecessary. The amendments would ensure that only subsections (1), (2) and (7) come into force on that date. They introduce the new Section 20 and Parts I and II of Schedule 4 to the Local Government Act 1972; that is to say, the new county and county borough areas which will exist from 1st April, 1996.
Moved, that the House do agree with the Common in their Amendment No. 42.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
43 Clause SO, page 36, line 43, after 'councils' insert 'in relation to such areas in Wales'.
44 Page 37, line 6, after 'whose' insert 'designated'.
45 Page 37, line 8, after 'whose' insert 'designated'.
46 Page 37, leave out line 24 and insert "designated" means'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons on their Amendments Nos. 43 to 46 en bloc. Clause SO provides the mechanism for the transfer of property held by the existing county councils in Wales and is required to be applied in accordance with the scheme under Section 19 of the Welsh Church Act 1914. As we debated on previous occasions, in order to avoid a division of the property into 22 funds—that: is, one for each council—the property is to be invested instead in

887
eight lead authorities. These are minor technical changes which are being made in order to clarify the provisions for apportionment of the funds.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 43 to 46 en bloc'.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
47 After Clause 51, insert the following clause:
Application of Part I of the Local Government Act 1988 during transitional period
''.— (1) Sections 9 to 16 of the Local Government Act 1988 (accounts, reports and other information in relation to defined activities) shall apply in relation to work—

(a) carried out by a Welsh authority in the transitional period (whether or not before the passing of this Act), and

(b) falling within an exempt activity, even though (as a result of its falling within that activity) sections 4 to 8 of that Act (restrictions in relation to works contracts and functional work) do not apply.

(2) An activity is an exempt activity if—

(a) on 31st March 1994, it was a defined activity for the purposes of the Act of 1988 and not the subject of an order under section 2(9) of the Act of 1988; and

(b) it is treated, by an exempting order having effect in relation to a period beginning after that date, as not being a defined activity.

(3) In this section—
"exempting order" means an order under section 2(9) of the Act of 1988 which specifies, as the period during which an activity is to be treated as not being a defined activity, a period ending on a date earlier than 1st April 1997;
"transitional period", in relation to an exempt activity, means the period specified in the exempting order; and
"Welsh authority" means a county or district council, a new principal council or a combined fire authority for an area in Wales.
(4) The Secretary of State may by order (an "extension order") provide that, in relation to a particular order under section 2(9) of the Act of 1988, subsection (3) is to have effect as if the date mentioned in the definition of "exempting order" were such date later than 1st April 1997 as may be specified in the extension order.
(5) Where sections 9 to 16 of the Act of 1988 apply by virtue of this section they shall be read with the following omissions—

(a) in section 9 (keeping of accounts), subsection (4), and the references to subsection (4) in subsections (5) and (6);

(b) in section 11 (reporting for financial year), subsections (2) (c) and (e);

(c) in section 12 (providing information), subsections (1) and (2); and

(d) in section 13 (serving of notices for purpose of getting information), paragraphs (a), (b) and (ba) of subsection (1).

(6) In the application of section 9,10 or 11 of the Act of 1988 by virtue of this section, any condition which is required to have been fulfilled for that section to apply shall be taken to have been fulfilled.'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 47.
The Government have taken account of the anxieties expressed by local government about the practicability of applying the requirements of compulsory competitive
888
tendering (CCT) during the period of transition from the existing local government structure to the one provided for in the Bill. Accordingly, using powers conferred upon the Secretary of State by existing legislation, we have made provision for an extensive suspension of the CCT requirements for a three-year period from 1st April 1994.
Nonetheless, it is thought to be desirable to maintain during that period the requirement for the accounting regime which is already in place in relation to compulsory competitive tendering, so that when the requirement for CCT comes into place again after the suspension, the figures, and so on, will be available. Therefore, the amendment provides for the maintenance of accounting during that period.
Moved, that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 47.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
48 Clause 53, page 40, line 21, leave out from 'council' to end of line 22 and insert 'or other public body or to the Residuary Body;'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 48. At the same time, I should like to speak also to Amendments Nos. 125 to 131. The amendments concern provisions relating to the residuary body and the, transfer of property to it. Amendment No. 48 clarifies Clause 53(2) (c) so that property transfer orders can be made only to the new principal councils, the residuary body or to other public bodies such as National Parks.
The original drafting included provision for transfers to,
"such other persons as may be prescribed".
I believe that questions were raised on the matter in debates in this House. Accordingly, that provision has now been deleted and made more specific. Amendments Nos. 125 to 131 correct minor technical numbering errors to Schedule 13 which deals with the powers and administrative arrangements of the residuary body.
Moved, that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 48.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
4.45 p.m.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
49 Clause 53, page 40, line 47, leave out from beginning to end of line 11 on page 41.
50 After Clause 53, insert the following clause:
Magistrates' courts, justices of the peace etc
''.— (1) The Lord Chancellor may ' by order make, with respect to any matters mentioned in subsection (2), such incidental, consequential, transitional or supplemental provision as he thinks necessary or expedient in consequence of any of the provisions of this Act.
(2) The matters are—

889

(a) the functions or areas of jurisdiction of any justice of the peace, stipendiary magistrate, magistrates' court or keeper of the rolls for a commission area (within the meaning of the Justices of the Peace Act 1979); and

(b) commission areas, petty sessions areas and areas to which magistrates' courts committees relate.

(3) The Lord Chancellor may by order alter, in such manner as appears to him expedient in connection with the alteration in any local government area made by this Act, any of—

(a) the commission areas in Wales specified in section 1 of the Act of 1979,

(b) the areas in Wales which constitute petty sessions areas under section 4 of that Act, or

(c) the areas in Wales to which magistrates' courts committees relate under section 19 of that Act.

(4) Any order under this section may, in particular—

(a) make provision with respect to the costs and expenses of any persons with respect to whom provision is made by the order;

(b) apply (with or without modifications) or amend or repeal or revoke (with or without savings) any provision of an Act passed before this Act or in the same Session, or an instrument made under such an Act before 1st April 1996.

(5) Subsections (7) and (9) of section 53 apply in relation to this section as they apply in relation to that section.'.
51 Clause 55, page 42, line 19, after ' 53' insert 'or (Magistrates' courts, justices of the peace etc.)'.
52 Clause 56, page 43, line 11, after ' 53' insert 'or (Magistrates' courts, justices of the peace etc.) (a "modifying order")'.
53 Page 43, line 12, leave out 'section 53' and insert 'modifying'.
54 Page 43, line 33, after ' 53,' insert '(Magistrates' courts, justices of the peace etc.)'.
55 Page 43, line 44, leave out 'an order under section 53' and insert 'a modifying order'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 49 to 55 en bloc. At the same time, I should like to speak also to Amendment No. 59.
The amendments clarify provisions in respect of the Lord Chancellor and functions in connection with magistrates' courts, justices of the peace, and so on, in order to take account of the provisions of the Police and Magistrates' Courts Bill currently being considered in Committee in another place.
The current provisions in relation to the Lord Chancellor and related functions are found in Clause 53(4) and (5) together with paragraph 10 to Schedule 2. The effect of the amendments is to take subsections (4) and (5) out of Clause 53 and to provide a separate clause in respect of the Lord Chancellor. Noble Lords will also have noted that Schedule 2 will also be expanded. The new Clause 13 provides the Lord Chancellor with the equivalent powers that the Secretary of State has in Clause 53—subsection (3) of the new clause will provide the Lord Chancellor with the ability to make future orders with respect to commission areas, petty sessions areas, and magistrates courts' committees as a consequence of any alterations made in local government areas by the Bill. I must stress the fact that it is only in consequence of those alterations in local government areas.
The need for the provision was identified by parliamentary counsel who felt that specific provision was necessary because of the provision which is now
890
made clear in Schedule 2; namely, that the status quo is, by and large, to be preserved. In order to make clear that, despite the general policy of maintaining the status quo, there could, where necessary, be alterations by order, it was thought desirable to separate it in that way.
Moved, that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 49 to 55 en bloc.—(Lord Rodgers of Earlsferry.)
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, I have a few words to say about Amendment No. 50 and one question to put to the Minister. The noble and learned Lord will know mat the amendment, especially subsection (2) (a), caused a great deal of anxiety on Report in another place. I believe that the noble and learned Lord has explained how it is that that power is to be found in this Bill rather than in the Criminal Justice Bill. However, perhaps he will be good enough to give the House about half a dozen examples of the functions that can be effected by the exercise of the power in Amendment No. 53. That would be most helpful.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, the noble Lord was kind enough to raise the matter with me yesterday when he indicated that he would like half a dozen examples. However, I am not sure mat I shall be able to oblige him in quite that way. The reason why the provision is in its present form is to some extent, one might say, a belt-and-braces operation. As noble Lords will see—and, indeed, as I have already stressed—the power is one which is concerned with the making of incidental, consequential, transitional or supplementary provision by the Lord Chancellor in relation to the purposes of the legislation.
As noble Lords will see, the matters in question are the functions or areas of jurisdiction of any justice of the peace, stipendiary magistrate, and so on. It is stated that the Lord Chancellor may "by order" alter such matters. It is not intended that the Lord Chancellor should, so to speak, change the functions of the magistrates' courts in a wide sense. It is designed to ensure that the Lord Chancellor has all the necessary powers to adjust-purely as a result of the change in local boundary areas —the functions and areas of jurisdiction of the justices of the peace.
Your Lordships can see, for example, that it may be required to redraw the boundary so that one area which was formerly in one area of jurisdiction of a justice of the peace is now in the area of another justice of the peace. All that is desired by that is to make sure—it is not known exactly how this will work out—that when the area of jurisdiction is changed, at the same time the order will transfer the functions of these magistrates, justices of the peace, and so on, in respect of that area. It is not a case of changing functions but simply altering them in the sense of transferring them from one magistrate to another. That is all that is desired. This is in some respects simply part of the same question of jurisdiction; it is not intended to go further than that.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
56 Before Clause 58, insert the following clause:
Records
'.— (1) Bach new principal council shall make and maintain a scheme setting out their arrangements for (he proper care, preservation and management of their records.
(2) Each scheme shall include details of any relevant shared arrangements which the council concerned have made.
(3) The council by whom a scheme has been made shall keep the scheme under review and, where they consider that it should be modified, make such adjustments to it as they consider appropriate.
(4) Before making, or modifying, their scheme a new principal council shall consult the Secretary of State and have regard to any advice that be may give.
(5) Where the records of a new principal council relate to the area, or pan of the area, of another such council, that other council shall have the right—

(a) to inspect those records at all reasonable times (without payment of any fee); and

(b) to take copies of any of them, in such manner as carries no risk of damage.

(6) The right conferred by subsection (3) is subject to any shared arrangements which affect the records concerned.
(7) In this section—
"documents" includes records, of whatever form and in whatever medium, which convey or are capable of conveying information;
"records", in relation to a council, means any documents which—

(a) belong to the council or of which they have custody; and

(b) have been retained for reference and research purposes or because of their likely historical interest; and

"shared arrangements", in relation to a council, means any arrangements which the council have made with any other authority under section 25 of this Act or section 101 of the 1972 Act (arrangements for the discharge of functions by other local authorities).'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move mat the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 56.
A similar amendment was tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, at Third Reading in this House. I think at mat time I was able to indicate to the House that the Government welcomed that proposal in principle but wished to take it away to consider the drafting with a view to returning with their own proposal.
The clause which is before your Lordships is the product of that consideration. In drawing it up, the Government consulted with the Public Record Office. I hope that it meets the anxieties of those who expressed a great deal of interest in the matter when it came before your Lordships. As your Lordships will see, the new clause requires authorities to draw up schemes setting out their arrangements for the care, preservation and management of their records. The schemes are required to describe any shared arrangements which an authority may have entered into regarding custody of its records, and the schemes must make provision for the authorities holding custody of the records to allow the owning authority to inspect its own records and to take copies of them.
Before making—or indeed before modifying—a scheme, an authority will be required to consult the Secretary of State and he will wish to consider whether the arrangements described in the scheme are
892
satisfactory and comply with any statutory requirements. As your Lordships will see, the authorities will be required to have regard to any advice which he may give.
Moved, That the House do agree with the commons in their Amendment No. 56.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhes: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his constructive and helpful remarks.
Throughout every stage of the Bill in this House we have had a great deal of discussion about the need to safeguard the records which are now in the care of the county repositories. I remember that your Lordships were very patient with me when I spoke in support of the three different amendments which I tabled at the different stages. Your Lordships were also supportive of the general case which I sought to make.
The amendment to which the noble and learned Lord has referred, and which I moved at Third Reading, had been carefully drafted in the light of the best advice which was available to me at that time. It was based on the precedent in the Scottish local authority Bill which is now in Committee. It had the support of Lords Lieutenant in Wales —who have a responsibility for some of the public records —historians and the professional bodies with a special interest in archives. The Secretary of State for Wales confirmed to me mat the amendment was acceptable, subject to advice from the draftsman. So the matter was left on the basis tint the Government would table their own amendment which would reflect the principles of the amendment which was before the House at Third Reading.
The Government have now produced that amendment, as they promised they would do—I appreciate that very much—and it has of course been passed in another place. I must confess one dung; namely, mat I and those who have been advising me would have preferred the more precise text of the amendment which was tabled at Third Reading. But I believe that this achieves the same end. I would nevertheless ask the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate whether he can confirm that Amendment No. 56 achieves the same end as the amendment tabled at Third Reading.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I am happy to confirm that. I think to some extent the difference between the two texts is accounted for by the fact—I believe I referred to this on the previous occasion—that, for example, whereas the Scottish Bill requires local authorities to make proper arrangements for the; preservation and management of their records, that provision is inserted because there is no equivalent, provision elsewhere in the legislation for Scotland, whereas, even now, there is, in Section 224 of the local government Act applying to Wales, a provision that authorities should indeed make proper arrangements with respect to documents. Therefore, although there are slight differences between the two texts, the amendment has the effect which the noble Lord's amendment had.
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos: My Lords, I am obliged to the noble and learned Lord.
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, I welcome this amendment. It at least inserts into the Bill a clause on archives. The noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate has given my noble friend Lord Cledwyn the assurance that he has asked for—that this amendment will achieve the same end as the amendment tabled at Third Reading. There is just one other point that I should like the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate to confirm. In practice will the Secretary of State, when exercising his powers under this amendment, be consulting with the Lord Chancellor or the Public Record Office before he issues advice under subsection (4) of the amendment? Finally, I am sure that I must place on the record the appreciation of Welsh historians and archivists for the tremendous effort which the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, has made on their behalf, and for what he has successfully achieved.
Baroness White: My Lords, I think we would all wish to echo—
Viscount Ullwater: My Lords, I believe the noble Lord and now the noble Baroness are out of order. This is consideration of Commons amendments and I think it is not considered proper to speak after the Minister has spoken.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
57 Clause 60, page 47, line 11, leave out '32(1) or 33(1)'.
58 Page 47, line 15, leave out ' 32(1), 33(1),'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 57 and 58 en bloc. These amendments have already been spoken to.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 57 and 58 en bloc.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
59 Clause 60, page 47, line 21, after 'State' insert 'or (as the case may be) the Lord Chancellor'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 59. Again this amendment has been spoken to.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 59.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
60 Clause 63, page 48, line 26, leave out ' 1,' and insert ' 1(1), (2) and (7),'.
61 Page 48, line 26, after ' 53' insert '(Magistrates' courts, justices of the peace etc.),'.
62 Page 48, line 27, after second '1,' insert '3A,'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 60, 61 and 62 en bloc. Again these amendments have been spoken to.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 60, 61 and 62 en bloc. — (Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
63 Clause 63, page 49, leave out lines 1 to 4.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 63, the effect of which is simply to remove the words which were inserted by this House in order to avoid questions of privilege with the other place.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 63.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
64 Schedule 1, page SO, line 38, column 2, after 'Monmouth' insert 'together with (from the district of Blaenau Gwent) the community of Llanelly'.
65 Page 51, line 3, column 2, leave out from 'with' to '(from' in line 5.
66 Page 51, line 21, at end insert:

'Blaenau Gwent

GwentBlaenau

The district of Blaenau Gwent (excluding the community of Llanelly).'.

67 Page 51, column 2, leave out lines 25 to 32 and insert:

"The districts of Islwyn and Rhymney Valley.'.

68 Page 51, leave out lines 33 to 39 and insert:
'Merthyr TydfilMerthyr Tudful The district of Merthyr Tydfil.'.
69 Page 52, line 10, leave out 'Castellnedd' and insert'Castell-nedd'.
70 Schedule 1, page 52, line 30, column 2, leave out 'but excluding the community of Llanelly'.
71 Page 52, line 41, column 2, leave out 'and the community of Llanelly from the county of Gwent'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 64 to 71 en bloc. These amendments have already been spoken to.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 64 to 71 en bloc.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, I want guidance on this matter. I am sorry that I broke one of the rules of the House when I spoke after the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, earlier. I wish very much to speak to Amendments Nos. 68 and 69, and I hope that I am correct in my understanding that I can now speak to

895
them. First, I welcome Amendment No. 68 which largely reflects amendments moved by these Benches when the Bill was in Committee in this House. It is right that I should thank the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate. We thought that he was very receptive to the thrust of the arguments in favour of Merthyr Tydfil that we advanced in Committee. We might not have been successful in re-establishing Merthyr Tydfil and Blaenau Gwent as principal councils had it not been for the Lord Advocate's appraisal of the debate in your Lordships' House.
I turn to Amendment No. 69. I support this amendment because it corrects the slight mis-spelling of the Welsh place name Castell-nedd. I believe that this amendment enables me to return to an issue that I raised when the Bill left this House a few months ago. I then asked the Government to publish a Welsh text of this Bill. I pointed out that the first local government measure, the Local Government Act 1888, had been produced in Welsh. I happen to know that that was paid for by the Home Office. I believe that a Welsh text of this Bill for Wales is important for two reasons. I am very glad to see that the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, is in his place. I happen to know that he has expressed support for a Welsh version of this legislation.
After a gap of about 450 years the Welsh language is once again beginning to be used widely in the drafting of legal documents, the teaching of law subjects (in at least one of the law schools in Wales) and the drafting of delegated legislation. Much good work is being done. However, there are difficulties. Sometimes there is no direct match of meaning when translating. Indeed, this Bill is speckled with clauses that will not be easy to translate. Nevertheless, I believe that a Welsh version would be extremely valuable in developing acceptable Welsh language terminology in a field that has been relatively neglected for centuries. A Welsh language text will help the Government to carry out the policy that they enunciated during the passage of the Welsh Language Bill in 1993. That measure is now in force and the Welsh language is an official language in Wales. I would be grateful if the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate could tell us whether the Government had made up their mind to produce a Welsh text of the Bill.
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos: My Lords, I rise briefly to support what my noble friend has said. Given the underlying policy of the Welsh Language Act 1993, in presenting the Welsh language as an official language in Wales on the basis of equality with English it would be helpful if the Government published a Welsh language version of this important Bill. I strongly urge the Government to think very carefully about their attitude to the publication of a Welsh language text. I believe that it is a mistake for them to maintain a negative attitude to what is in my view a very reasonable request. The Government have shown an important measure of sympathy towards the language in the course of this debate, and I urge them to be positive on this point as well.
Lord Elis-Thomas: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, has today excelled at his usual achieve-ment of being able to tie a major issue of principle onto the smallest possible piece of legislation, and I congratulate him. We are, I believe, discussing the insertion of a hyphen in the place name Castell-nedd.
The issue is a substantive one. As the noble Lord very kindly said, I raised this matter by letter with the Secretary of State for Wales and did not receive an entirely negative reply. Therefore, I hope that the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate will not be too negative in his reply and will leave open the door for the department to produce an authorised translation. Although I am not able in this place to speak on behalf of the authority that I chair, I can certainly say that we will provide assistance in this matter.
Lord Hooson: My Lords, I am amazed by and admire the infinite resource of the three previous speakers who, in considering an amendment that concerns merely a hyphen, have been able to put forward an emotional and entirely justified appeal for a Welsh version of this Bill.
Lord Swinfen: My Lords, I hope that when my noble and learned friend replies he will say whether, if such a version of the Bill is produced when it becomes an Act it will have any status in a court of law, or whether it will be a work only for guidance.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I believe that the hyphen has proved to be a useful device on this occasion. Unfortunately,' I have to inform your Lordships that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State has decided that the Bill should not be published in Welsh as well as English, although it is a matter to which he has given the most careful consideration. Essentially the reasons are technical and are not to do with a lack of appreciation of the kinds of matters about which your Lordships have spoken. As your Lordships have realised throughout the debates on this Bill, this legislation is by no means free standing but in effect operates by amendment of the existing Local Government Act 1972. Therefore, no Welsh user of this legislation could proceed entirely on the basis of this Act. He would in effect have to use a Welsh translation of this Act and the Local Government Act 1972. This Bill amends the 1972 Act, and to understand what is going on one has to read the two together. For that reason, it does not seem to the Government that the user can rely on the Welsh text. Although this is a very wide issue, I believe that my noble friend has drawn attention to another important matter. The text which Parliament approves, and which at the end of the day the courts will consider, is the English text. That is the text that goes out from Parliament. Although that is a wider issue, that is also the case.
Nonetheless, having been negative, I can tell your Lordships that the Secretary of State is considering other ways in which the Bill may be rendered more accessible to the Welsh-speaking public, for example by the production of summaries of its provisions. The noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, raised this matter with me in advance. I was struck by the point that he made

897
to me about the desirability of getting standardisation in relation to technical terms and so forth. That is an example of an area where it may be possible for the Welsh Office to assist. Although it does not go as far as noble Lords may wish, nonetheless it may prove of advantage to Welsh users of the legislation.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
72 Schedule 2, page S3, line 18, at end insert:
'The Licensing Act 1964 (c. 26)
>— (1) In sections 85 (parties organised for gain) and 188 (closing of licensed premises in case of riot) of the Licensing Act 1964, in each case at the end add—
"(4) In subsection (1) above "county", in relation to Wales, means a preserved county (as defined by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994)."
(2) In section 193 of that Act (disqualification of justices), at the end add—
"(9) In subsections (1) and (2) above "county", in relation to Wales, means a preserved county (as defined by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994).".
The Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act 1967 (c. 83)
'. The provisions of section 10 of the Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act 1967 (jurisdiction in relation to fishery) shall be subsection (1) of that section and at the end add—
"(2) In the application of this section in relation to Wales, the reference to a county in subsection (1) of this section includes a reference to a preserved county (as defined by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994)."'.
73 Page 54, line 14, leave out "The provisions of and insert 'In'.
74 Page 54, line 15, leave out from 'areas)' to end of line 18 and insert ', in paragraph (a), after 'county' insert 'in England' and after that paragraph insert:
"(aa) every preserved county in Wales;".
(2) In section 4 of that Act (petty sessions areas), after subsection (1) insert—
"(1A) In subsection (1) above, any reference to a non-metropolitan county is to be construed, in relation to Wales, as a reference to a preserved county."
(3) In section 19 of that Act (general provisions as to magistrates' courts committees), in subsection (2), in paragraph (a), after "county" insert "in England", and after paragraph (b) insert—
"(bb) every preserved county in Wales;".
(4) In section 70 of that Act (interpretation), after the definition of "prescribed" insert—
""preserved county" has the meaning given by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994;".
The Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (c. 43)
'.— (1) In section 1 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (issue of summons to accused or warrant for his arrest), in subsection (8) after "county" insert "in England, any preserved county in Wales".
(2) In section 2 of that Act (jurisdiction to deal with charges), in subsections (1) and (3) after first "county" insert "in England, a preserved county in Wales" and after second "county" insert ", the preserved county".
(3) In section 3 of that Act (offences committed on boundaries etc.), in subsection (4) after "county" insert "in England, any preserved county in Wales".
(4) In section 150(1) of that Act (interpretation), after the definition of "prescribed" insert—
""preserved county" has the meaning given by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994;".'.
75 Page 54, line 18, at end insert:
The Representation of the People Act 1983 (c. 2)
'.—(1) The provisions of section 177 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (local election offence punishable summarily) shall be subsection (1) of that section and at the end add—
"(2) In subsection (1) above "county", in relation to Wales, means a preserved county (as defined by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994)."
(2) In Schedule 1 to that Act (parliamentary election rules), in the Appendix, in the entry relating to the form of the certificate to be endorsed on the writ, insert the following—
"Note: in relation to any constituency in Wales, "county" in this form refers to a preserved county (as defined by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994)."'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 72 to 75 en bloc. The amendments insert additional provisions into Schedule 2 which provides for consequential changes to existing legislation so that particular provisions identified in that schedule apply to the preserved counties in Wales.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 72 to 75.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
76 Schedule 3, page 56, line 20, leave out from beginning to end of line 31 and insert:
9>—(1) In this paragraph "council" means a county or district council which ceases to exist on 1st April 1996 by virtue of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994.
(1A) No election of councillors of a council shall be held after 31st December 1994, except—

(a) to fill a casual vacancy in the office of councilor of that council where before 31st December 1994—

(i) the office has been declared to be vacant; or

(ii) notice of the vacancy has been given under section 89(1) of this Act; or

(b) where the number of casual vacancies in the office of councillor of a council occurring after 31st December 1994 exceeds half of the total number of such offices.

(2) Any such councillor holding office immediately before 31 st December 1994, or elected after that date to fill a casual vacancy, shall, unless he resigns his office or it otherwise becomes vacant, continue to hold office until 1st April 1996.
(2A) It shall not be necessary—

(a) to fill any casual vacancy in the office of councillor of a council occurring after 31st December 1994; and accordingly section 89 of this Act shall have effect with the necessary modifications in relation to any such vacancy; or

(b) to fill any casual vacancy occurring during March 1996 in the office of chairman or vice-chairman of a council.'.

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 76. This amendment provides for the suspension of elections to the councils of existing district and county councils after 31st December 1994 except for the filling of casual vacancies in the circumstances described in the amendment.
The amendment also suspends the county council elections due in 1995 and prolongs to 1st April 1996 the mandates of county councillors serving at 31st December 1994.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 76.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
77 Schedule 5, page 59, line 38, at end insert:
''. In section 12 (preparation of unitary development plan), at the end add—
"(11) Any provision made by regulations under this section in its application by virtue of section 10 may differ from that made under this section in its application by virtue of section 10A.'".
78 Page 59, line 47, leave out from 'Wales' to end of line 6 on page 60 and insert:
'for their areas if—

(a) each of those areas adjoins each of the others; or

(b) the Secretary of State has given his approval.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in relation to a joint plan for any area which consists of or includes a National Park.'.
79 Page 60, line 35, leave out from beginning to end of line 5 on page 61 and insert:
'National Parks in Wales Unitary development plans for National Parks in Wales.
23B'.—(1) A unitary development plan shall be prepared for each National Park in Wales.
(2) A Welsh National Park development plan shall relate to an area prescribed in relation to the National Park in question by order made by the Secretary of State.
(3)The prescribed area in relation to a National Park which falls wholly within, but does not comprise the whole of, the area of a single local planning authority shall be—

(a)where the local planning authority have so elected, the whole of the area of the local planning authority; and

(b)in any other case—

(i) the whole of the area of the National Park; or

(ii) a composite area.

(4) The prescribed area in relation to any other Welsh National Park shall be—

(a)the whole of the area of the National Park; or

(b)a composite area.

(5) For the purposes of this section and section23C, "composite area", in relation to a National Park, means an area which consists of the whole of the Park together with any one or more other areas in Wales.
(6) The Secretary of State shall not under subsection (2) prescribe an area which is a composite area except with the consent of every local planning authority in whose area the prescribed area or any part of it would fall.
(7)Any order made by the Secretary of State under subsection (2) may make such saving or transitional provision as he considers appropriate.
(8)Where, by an order under subsection (2), the Secretary of State prescribes a composite area which comprises or includes part only of the area of a local planning authority, the provisions of this Chapter shall apply in relation to—

(a) the Welsh National Park development plan in question, or

(b) any proposals for its alteration or replacement, subject to such modifications, if any, as may be prescribed by the order.

(9) Subsections (3) and (4) of section 10A do not apply for the purposes of—

(a)subsection (3) or (8) of this section, or

(b)section 23C(1), (2) or (4).

(10) For the purposes of this Act, "Welsh National Park development plan" means a unitary development plan prepared for a National Park in Wales.
Joint unitary development plans for National Parks in Wales.
23C'.—(1) A Welsh National Park development plan for a National Park which neither coincides with nor falls wholly within the area of a single local planning authority shall be a joint unitary development plan.
(2)A Welsh National Park development plan for any other National Park shall be a joint unitary development plan if it relates to a composite area unless the composite area coincides with or falls wholly within the area of a single local planning authority.
(3)Any Welsh National Park development plan which is required to be a joint plan shall be prepared by the authorities who will be the appropriate authorities in relation to the plan.
(4)For the purposes of this section, an authority are an appropriate authority in relation to a joint plan if—

(a)they are a local planning authority; and

(b)their area or any part of their area falls within the area to which the plan relates.

(5)Any proposals prepared under section 21 for the alteration or replacement of a joint plan of a kind mentioned in subsection (1) or (2) shall be joint proposals prepared by the appropriate authorities in relation to that plan, and any direction given by the Secretary of State under that section in relation to that plan shall be given jointly to those authorities.
(6)Subsections (3) to (6) and (8) of section 23A apply in relation to any joint plan or proposals of a kind mentioned in subsection (1), (2) or (5) as they apply in relation to any joint plan or proposals of a kind mentioned in section 23A(1).'".
80 Page 61, line 5, at end insert:
'In section 26 (regulations and directions), after subsection (3) insert—
"(3A) Any provision made by regulations under this section in its application by virtue of section 10 may differ from that made under this section in its application by virtue of section 10A."'.
81 Page 62, line 21, after 'to' insert 'or replacement of.
82 Page 63, line 39, leave out 'when'.
83 Page 63, line 40, after '(a)' insert 'when'.
84 Page 63, line 45, leave out 'one or more National Parks' and insert 'an area prescribed under section 23B(2) of the planning Act in relation to a National Park'.
85 Page 63, line 48, leave out 'as the case may be,' and insert 'if there is more than one,'.
86 Page 64, line 5, leave out 'the Park or, as the case may be, each' and insert 'any'.
87 Page 64, line 7, leave out from 'reference to' to 'area' in line 8 and insert 'that'.
88 Page 64, line 11, leave out 'National Park' and insert 'area prescribed under section 23B(2) of the planning Act in relation to that Park'.
89 Page 64, line 14, after 'within' insert 'an area so prescribed in relation to'.
90 Page 64, line 28, after second 'alteration' insert 'or replacement'.
91 Page 65, line 13, at end insert:
'and for this purpose a plan which was permitted to be prepared jointly is not to be treated on that ground alone as not being required to be prepared'.
92 Page 65, line 17, after second 'alteration' insert 'or replacement'.
93 Page 65, line 19, leave out '32(1) (a)' and insert '32(1)'.
94 Page 65, line 22, leave out '32(2) (a)' and insert '32(2)'.
95 Page 65, line 33, leave out from beginning to end of line 38 on page 69 and insert:
'Preparation of modified schemes
10'. —(1) Where any planning scheme war previously in course of preparation, any relevant authority may submit to the Secretary of State a request for approval to prepare a modified scheme for the affected area.
(2) The Secretary of State may approve any such request if he is satisfied that the planning scheme was previously in course of preparation in relation to the 'affected area, and that—

(a) it is expedient that preparation of the planning scheme fee continued in the preparation of the modified scheme;

(b) continued preparation of the planning scheme in relation to the affected area is likely to be of assistance to the new planning authority in preparing the unitary development plan for their area; or

(c) the adoption or approval of a modified scheme is otherwise expedient or desirable.

(3) Any approval under sub-paragraph (2)—

(a) may be given subject to such conditions as the Secretary of State drinks fit, including conditions as to the period within which the Modified scheme is to be prepared and a copy of it submitted to him;

(b) may be accompanied by a direction modifying in such manner, and for such period, as the Secretary of State thinks fit the duty of the new planning authority to prepare a unitary development plan under Chapter I of Part II of the planning Act

(4)Where the Secretary of State gives a direction under sub-paragraph (3) (b). Chapter I of Part II of the planning Act shall have effect in relation to the new planning authority subject to that direction.
(5)Where a planning scheme for any area in Wales had previously been prepared but not adopted or approved under Chapter II of Part II of the planning Act, the Secretary of State may, on an application made to him by a relevant authority, give permission to prepare a modified scheme for the affected area.
(6)The Secretary of State shall, whenever he gives any approval under sub-paragraph (2) or permission under sub-paragraph (5), direct that such of—

(a)the provisions of Chapter II of Part II of the planning Act, and

(b)any regulations made under any provision of that Chapter.

as may be specified in the direction shall apply for the purpose of the preparation, adoption or approval of the modified scheme in relation to the affected area.

(7) The provisions applied by a direction under sub-paragraph (6)—

(a) may include any requirement with respect to a modified scheme (or its preparation) corresponding to one already satisfied with respect to the planning scheme;

(b) may be applied subject to such modifications as may be specified in the direction; and

(c) may be applied for such limited period (if any) as may be specified in the direction.

(8) For the purposes of this paragraph—
"planning scheme" means a required plan, alteration proposals or structure plan alteration proposals; and
"modified scheme", in relation to a planning scheme—

(a) which is a required plan, means a modified plan,

(b) which consists of alteration proposals, means modified proposals,

(c) which consists of structure plan alteration proposals, means modified structure plan proposals.'.

96 Page 69, line 41, after 'approval' insert 'or permission'.
97 Page 69, line 41, at end insert' or (5)'.
98 Page 69, leave out line 42.
99 Page 69, line 44, after 'proposals' insert 'or modified structure plan proposals'.
100 Page 69, line 44, leave out from 'him' to 'or' in line 48.
101 Page 70, line 10, leave out '12(2) or 16(2)'
102 Page 70, line 11, leave out from 'proposals' to 'within' in line 12.
103 Page 72, line 48, leave out from 'if,' to end of line 52 and insert 'after paragraph (b). there were inserted— or
"or
(c) copies of the unitary development plan for the area in which the land is situated have been nude available under section 13(2).".'.
104 Page 73, line 20, after 'and' insert 'until copies of the unitary development plan for the area in which the land is situated have been made available under section 13(2),'.
105 Page 73, line 30, leave out from 'if to 'in' in line 36.
106 Page 74, line 12, after 'alteration' insert 'or replacement'.
Lord Rodger of Earlferry: My Lords, I beg to move that me House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 77 to 106 en bloc. I have already spoken to the amendments.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 77 to 106. —(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
107 Schedule 6, page 74, line 31, leave out '3' and insert '2A'.
108 Page 74, line 31, at end insert:
'2A. In paragraph 2 (functions which may be conferred on joint board), after "National Park" insert "in England".'.
109 Page 74, line 44, at end insert:
''. In paragraph 19, after "Countryside Commission and" insert ", in the case of a National Park in England,".'.
110 Page 75, line 29, at end insert:
"The Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980 (c.65)
'.— (1) In section 148 of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980 (planning control), in subsection (4) for "References" substitute "Except in relation to land in Wales, references".
(2) In Schedule 28 to that Act (powers of urban development corporations), in paragraph 11(2) (i), after "district planning authority" insert "or, in Wales, the local planning authority".'.
111 Page 76, line 44, at end insert:
'The Electricity Act 1989 (c. 29)
'.In Schedule 8 to the Electricity Act 1989 (consents for generating stations and overhead lines), in paragraph 2(6), in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in relation to Wales, means a local planning authority;".'.
112 Page 77, line 36, leave out '188' and insert '188(1)'.
113 Page 77, leave out line 37 and insert '"planning authority" insert ", every local planning authority for an area in Wales".'.
114 Page 78, line 13, after '(1)' insert '—(a)"..
115 Page 78, line 15, leave out 'after that subsection insert-' and insert:
'(b) in the definition of "development plan", for "27" substitute "27, 27A"; and
(c) in the definition of "mineral planning authority", for "1(4)" substitute "1".
( ) After section 336(1) of that Act insert-'.
116 Page 78, line 35, at end insert:

903
'( ) In Part I of Schedule 16 to that Act (provisions referred to in sections 314 to 319 of that Act), for "Section 1(1), (2), (3) and (5)" substitute "Section 1(1) to (3), (5) and (6)".'.
117 Page 78, line SO, at end insert:
'( ) In section 3 of that Act (temporary listing: building preservation notices), in subsection (1), for ", other than" substitute "in Wales, or to a local planning authority in England who are not".'.
118 Page 79, line 29, leave out from beginning to 'local'.
119 Page 79, line 36, at end insert:
'The Planning (Consequential Provisions) Act 1990 (c. 11)
'. In Schedule 3 to the Planning (Consequential Provisions) Act 1990 (transitional provisions and savings), in paragraph 8(1), after "district planning authority" insert "or, in Wales, the local planning authority".'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 107 to 119 en bloc. These amendments amend Part I of Schedule 6, which makes minor and consequential amendments to the Local Government Act 1972 and to various planning enactments so that the provisions accommodate the changes in the structure of local government in Wales.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 107 to 119. —(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
120 Schedule 7, page 83, line 28, at end insert:
''. In section 232 of that Act (power to treat as a private street land designated by development plan), in subsection (9), for "27" substitute "27, 27A".'.
121 Schedule 10, page 96, line 44, at end insert:
'( ) In Schedule 7 to that Act (Community Health Councils), in paragraph 7, in the definition of "local authority", for "of a county or district mentioned in section 20(3) of that Act (which relates to Wales)" substitute "the council of a Welsh county or county borough".'.
122 Schedule 11, page 98, line 22, leave out from beginning to end of line 25.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 120 to 122 en bloc. These are minor amendments to the schedules transferring specific functions to the new authorities.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 120 to 122.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
123 Schedule 12, page 100, line 21, at end insert:
'( ) After subsection (3) insert—
"(3A) In the case of any billing authority in Wales, subsection (3) (a) above does not require the estimation of sums payable into their council fund in respect of council tax or non-domestic rates.'".
124 Page 101, line 12, at end insert:
'(5) Expenses of a billing authority are not to be treated as its special expenses for the purposes of subsection (1) above if they are expenses of meeting a levy issued to it by, or anticipated by it from—
904

(a) a Welsh joint planning board constituted under section 2(1B) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for a united district which comprises or includes the whole or part of the area of a National Park; or

(b) a special planning board constituted under paragraph 3A of Schedule 17 to the Local Government Act 1972.'".

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 123 and 124 en bloc. The amendments make technical changes to Schedule 12 which makes amendments with respect to funds as a result of the introduction of council funds under Clause 37.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 123 and 124.—(LordRodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
125 Schedule 13, page 105, line 36, leave out from '17.' to end of line 38 and insert 'The Residuary Body shall be included among the authorities to which the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 applies.'.
126 Page 106, line 48, leave out 'enactments to' and insert 'circumstances in'.
127 Page 107, line 28, leave out from '(1) (b))' to 'and' in line 30 and insert 'and 443 local authority contributions to mortgage costs);'.
128 Page 107, line 32, at end insert:
''. The Residuary Body shall be treated as a housing authority for the purposes of sections 444,452 and 453 of the Housing Act 1985 (provision in connection with local authority mortgages).'.
129 Page 107, line 43, leave out from '88)' to end of line 44 and insert '(retention or resumption of land required for public purposes)'.
130 Page 108, line 9, leave out 'Section 64A of and insert 'Paragraph 64A of Schedule 2 to'.
131 Page 108, line 9, after '1971' insert '(official pensions)'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 125 to 131 en bloc. I have already spoken to the amendments.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 125 to 131. —(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
132 Schedule 15, page 115, line 9, leave out '1st April 2000' and insert '1st October 1996'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 132.I have already spoken to the amendment.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 132.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
133 Schedule 15, page 116, line 1, leave out from beginning to end of line 2.
134 Page 117, line 33, leave out from 'for' to 'whom' and insert "council of the district" substitute "local authority to'.
135 Page 119, line 4, at end insert:
'. In section 255(1) (transfer of officers), for "27, 28 or 29" substitute "28, 29 or 29A".'.
136 Page 119, line 26, at end insert:
'.— (1) Schedule 26 (cemeteries and crematoria) is amended as follows.
(2) In paragraph 4, in paragraph (a) omit "or communities" in both places, and after paragraph (a) insert—
"(aa) where those authorities are the councils of communities or groups of communities situated in the same principal area, by the council of that principal area;".
(3) In paragraph 7, after "district council" insert "or Welsh principal council" and after second "district" insert "or Welsh principal area".
(4) In paragraph 8, after "district council" insert "or Welsh principal council" and after second "district" insert "or (as the case may be) principal area".
(5) In paragraph 11, in sub-paragraph (1) omit "or community" and after that sub-paragraph insert—
"(1A) Subject to the provisions of any order made under section 214(3) above, a Welsh principal council may make byelaws with respect to the management of any cemetery provided by them and a community council may adopt for any cemetery provided by them any byelaws made under this paragraph by the principal council and duly confirmed.'".
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 133 to 136 en bloc. These are minor technical amendments to the Local Government Act 1972. Amendment No. 133 is necessitated by the Police and Magistrates' Courts Bill. Amendments Nos. 134 to 136 clarify the wording of the schedule.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 133 to 136.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
137 Schedule 16, page 120, line 12, at end insert:
'The Welsh Church Act 1914 (c. 91)
'. In section 19 of the Welsh Church Act 1914 (application of residue of property)—

(a) in subsection (1) (a), for the words from "The property" to "council either" substitute "Property vested in a Welsh county council or county borough council by virtue of a designation made under section 50 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994 shall be applied, in accordance with one or more schemes made by a Welsh county council or county borough council either"; and

(b) in subsection (1) (b), after "county" insert "or county borough".'.

138 Page 120, line 43, at end insert:
The Shops Act 1950 (c. 28)
'. In section 73 of the Shops Act 1950 (local authorities), in subsection (1), after "the borough;" insert "as respects any county or county borough in Wales, the council of that area;".'.
139 Page 120, line 43, at end insert:
'The Registration Service Act 1953 (c. 37)
'. In section 21 of the Registration Service Act 1953 (interpretation), in subsection (2) (b), at the end add "and any reference to a non-metropolitan county includes a reference to a county borough".'.
140 Page 120, line 43, at end insert:
'The Trading Representations (Disabled Persons) Act 1958 (c. 49)
'. In section 1(5) of the Trading Representations (Disabled Persons) Act 1958 (definition of "local authority" for purposes of registration of sellers of certain goods), after "means" insert ", in relation to England," and after "City of London," insert "in relation to Wales, the council of a county or county borough,".'.
141 Page 121, line 6, at end insert:
'The Weeds Act 1959 (c 54)
'. In section 5 of the Weeds Act 1959 (exercise of powers by local authority), after "county" insert ", county borough" (in both places).'.
142 Page 121, line 24, leave out from 'powers'" to end of line 25 and insert 'for "or county council" substitute ", county council or county borough council".'.
143 Page 121, line 25, at end insert:
'The Factories Act 1961 (c. 34)
'.In section 176 of the Factories Act 1961 (general interpretation), after subsection (8) insert—
"(8A) In the application of this Act in relation to Wales—

(a) any reference to a district council shall be construed as a reference to a county council or (as the case may be) county borough council; and

(b) any reference to the district of a district council shall be construed as a reference to a county or county borough."'.

144 Page 121, line 25, at end insert:
'The Trustee Investments Act 1961 (c. 62)
'.— (1) In section 11 of the Trustee Investments Act 1961 (local authority investment schemes), in subsection (4) (a), after "county," insert "a county borough,".
(2) In Part IV of Schedule 1 to that Act (manner of investment), in paragraph 4, in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", after "county," insert "a county borough,".'.
145 Page 121, line 30, at end insert:
'The Pipe-lines Act 1962 (c. 58)
'. In section 35 of the Pipe-lines Act 1962 (deposit of maps of pipe-lines with local authorities)., in subsection (6), omit "and Wales" and after "City of London," insert "for the purpose of the application of this section to Wales, that expression means the council of a county or county borough,".'.
146 Page 121, line 30, at end insert:
'The Licensing Act 1964 (c. 26)
'.— (1) In section 58(1) (a) of the Licensing Act 1964 (meaning of "local authority"), after "district," insert" or, in Wales, the council of the county or county borough,".
(2) In section 66 of that Act (Sunday closing in Wales)—

(a) in subsection (1), for "district" substitute "county or county borough";

(b) omit subsection (2);

(c) in subsection (3), for the first and third "district" substitute "county or county borough" (in each case), and for the second and fourth "district" substitute "county or, as the case may be, county borough" (in each case);

(d) in subsection (4)—

(i) for "district council" substitute "county council or, as the case may be, county borough council";

(ii) for "district", in every other case, substitute "county or county borough"; and

(iii) for "1975" substitute "1996";

(e) in subsection (5), for "districts" substitute "counties and county boroughs"; and

(f) in subsection (7), for "district council" substitute "county council or county borough council" and for second "district" substitute "county or county borough".

(3) In section 67 of that Act (Welsh Sunday polls)—

(a) in subsection (2) (a), for the first "district" substitute "county or county borough" and for "district councillors" substitute "councillors of the county or (as the case may be) county borough";

(b) in subsection (3), for the first "district" substitute "county or county borough", and for "district council" substitute (in both places) "county council or (as the case may be) county borough council";

(c)in subsection (4), for "district" substitute "county or county borough"; and

(d) in subsection (5), for "district councillors" substitute "councillors of the county or county borough".

(4) In section 98 of that Act (grounds for refusing applications for Part IV licences), in subsection (5) (a) after "district" insert "or, in Wales, the council of the county or county borough".
(5)In section 180 of that Act (consent to grant of occasional licence), in subsection (1) (a), for "a district or part thereof substitute "any area".
(6) In Schedule 2 to that Act (applications for justices' licences), in paragraph 5, in paragraph (a), after "licensed are" insert 'in England but" and, after paragraph (a) insert—
"(aa) if the premises to be licensed are in Wales, to the proper officer of the county council or county borough council; and".
(7) In Schedule 8 to that Act (Sunday polls in Wales), in paragraph 6—

(a) in sub-paragraph (1), omit the first "district", for the second "district" substitute "county or county borough" and for the third "district" substitute "county or (as the case may be) county borough";

(b) in sub-paragraph (2), for the first "district" substitute "county or county borough" and omit "district" in both other places;

(c)in sub-paragraph (3), omit the first "district" and for the second "district" substitute "county or county borough";

(d) in sub-paragraph (4), for the first "district" substitute "county or county borough", omit the second "district" and for "district council" substitute "county council or (as the case may be) county borough council".

(8)In paragraph 7 of Schedule 8 to that Act—

(a) in sub-paragraph (1), for the first "district" substitute "county or county borough", for the second "district" substitute "county or (as the case may be) county borough", omit the third "district" and for "councillor for the district" substitute "councillor of the county or (as the case may be) county borough"; and

(b) in sub-paragraphs (2), (3) and (4) omit "district".

(9) After paragraph 7 of Schedule 8 to that Act insert—
"(7A) In paragraphs 6 and 7 above "returning officer", in relation to a county or county borough, means the returning officer for elections of councillors of the county or county borough."
(10) In the Appendix to Schedule 8 to that Act—

(a) in form A, for "[district of]" substitute "[county/county borough of]";

(b)in form B, for "[district of]", substitute, in each place, "[county/county borough of]";

(c)in form D, for "[ward of the district of]" substitute, in each place, "[division of the county/county borough of]" and for "said district" substitute "said [county/county borough]"; and

(d)in form E, for "[district of]" substitute, in each place, "[county/county borough of]".'.

147 121, line 30, at end insert:
'The Harbours Act 1964 (c. 40)
'. In Schedule 3 to the Harbours Act 1964 (procedure for making harbour orders), in paragraph 3(ba)—

(a)omit "and Wales" and "or community"; and

(b) after "parish council" insert", in Wales, a county council, a county borough council and a community council".'.

148 Page 121, line 37, at end insert:
'( ) in section 10 (default powers of Secretary of State), in subsection (2)—

(i) paragraph (a);

(ii) in paragraph (b), in sub-paragraph (i) the words "other than any council of a district in Wales" and sub-paragraph (ii);'.

149 Page 121, line 40, at end insert:
'( ) section 21 (expenses of county councils in Wales)'.
150 Page 121, line 47,. at end insert:
'( ) In Schedule 2 to that Act (management of funds for purchase of exhibits), in paragraphs 2 and 5 after "county fund" insert (in each place) "council fund".'.
151 Page 121, line 47, at end insert:
'The Gas Act 1965 (c. 36)
'. In section 28 of the Gas Act 196S (interpretation of Part II), in the definition of "local authority" in subsection (1), omit "and Wales" and after "City of London," insert "in Wales, the council of a county or county borough,".'.
152 Page 121, line 47, at end insert:
'The Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1966 (c. 38)
'.— (1) In section 1 of the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1966 (sea fisheries districts and local fisheries committees), in subsection (1), for "county" substitute "county, county borough" (in both places).
(2) In section 2 of that Act (constitution of local fisheries committee), in subsection (1), for "county" substitute "county, county borough" (in both places).
(3) In section 3 of that Act (application by inhabitants in case of refusal by council), for "county" substitute "county, county borough" (in both places).
(4) In section 19 of that Act (contributions to river authority's expenses), for "county" substitute "county, county borough".'.
153 Page 122, line 3, at end insert:
'The Plant Health Act 1967 (c. 8)
'. In section 5 of the Plant Health Act 1967 (execution of Act by local authorities), in subsection (3), at the end add "but, in relation to Wales, shall be the councils of counties and county boroughs".'.
154 Page 122, line 9, at end insert:
'The Agriculture Act 1967 (c. 22)
'. In section 75(2) of the Agriculture Act 1967 (interpretation), in the definition of "local authority", omit "and Wales" and, immediately before "and, in Scotland", insert "in Wales, the council of a county or county borough".
'The Slaughter of Poultry Act 1967 (c. 24)
'. In section 8 of the Slaughter of Poultry Act 1967 (interpretation), in the definition of "local authority" in subsection (1), omit "and Wales" and, after "City of London" insert ", as respects Wales, the council of a county or county borough".'.
155 Page 122, leave out lines 10 to 47.
156 Page 122, line 47, at end insert:
'The Theatres Act 1968 (c. 54) '.
'. In section 18 of the Theatres Act 1968 (interpretation), in subsection (1), in paragraph (b) of the definition of "licensing authority" omit "and Wales" and at the end of that paragraph insert—
"(bb) as respects premises in a county or county borough in Wales, the council of that area;".
The Medicines Act 1968 (c. 67)
'. In section 108 of the Medicines Act 1968 (enforcement)—

(a)in subsection (8), after "county" insert "or county borough"; and

(b)in subsection (12) (a), after "district" insert ", county borough" (in both places).'.

157 Page 123, line 5, at end insert:
'The Post Office Act 1969 (c. 48)
'. In section 86(1) of the Post Office Act 1969 (interpretation), in the definition of "local authority", in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in relation to Wales, means the council of a county or county borough;".'.
158 Page 123, line 9, at end insert:
'The Employers' Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 (c. 57)
'. In section 3 of the Employers' Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 (employers exempted from insurance), in subsection (2) (b), for "or Wales" substitute "the council of a county or county borough in Wales,".'.
159 Page 123, line 9, at end insert:
'The Agriculture Act 1970 (c. 40)
'.— (1) In section 38 of the Agriculture Act 1970 (smallholdings authorities), in paragraph (b) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(bb) the council of every county or county borough in Wales;".
(2)In section 48 of that Act (acquisition of land for purpose of smallholdings), in subsection (1), after "county" insert "or county borough".
(3)In section 60 of that Act (cottage holdings), in subsection (1), after "county council" insert ", a county borough council".
(4)In section 62 of that Act (provisions as to Wales), in subsection (1) (a), after "county" insert "or county borough".
(5)In section 67 of that Act (enforcement authorities), in subsection (1) omit "and Wales" and after that subsection insert—
"(1A) In Wales it shall be the duty of each county council and each county borough council to enforce this Part of this Act within its area.'".
160 Page 123, line 9, at end insert:
'The Poisons Act 1972 (c. 66)
'. In section 11 of the Poisons Act 1972 (interpretation), in subsection (2) in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority" omit "and Wales" and after "City of London," insert—
"(aa) in relation to Wales, the council of a county or county borough,".'.
161 Page 123, line 13, at end insert:
'( ) In section 19 of that Act (interpretation of Part I), in the definition of "the appropriate highway authority" in subsection (1)—

(a) in paragraph (a), after "1985" insert "or the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994"; and

(b) in paragraph (b), after "that Act" insert "either of those Acts".

( ) In section 52 of that Act (right to advance payment of compensation), in subsection (8), after "London borough" insert "or Welsh county or county borough".'.
162 Page 123, line 13, at end insert:
'The Employment Agencies Act 1973 (c. 35)
'. In section 13 of the Employment Agencies Act 1973 (interpretation), in subsection (1), in the definition of "local authority", omit "and Wales" and after "London borough council" insert "and in relation to Wales, means a county council or a county borough council,".'.
163 Page 123, line 13, at end insert:
'The Breeding of Dogs Act 1973 (c. 60)
'. In section 5(2) of the Breeding of Dogs Act 1973 (interpretation), in the definition of "local authority", omit "and Wales", and after "City of London" insert "and in Wales the council of a county or county borough".
The Slaughterhouses Act 1974 (c. 3)
'.— (1) In section 27 of the Slaughterhouses Act 1974 (local authorities for purposes of licensing slaughter-houses), omit "and" immediately before paragraph (c) and, in that paragraph, after first "district" insert "in England" and after second "district" add— "and
(d) as respects any county or county borough in Wales, the council of the county or county borough."
(2)In section 34 of that Act (interpretation of Part I), in the definition of "district", at the end add—
"and, in relation to—

(a) a local authority who are the council of a welsh count}' or county borough, and

(b) the officers of such an authority, means that county or county borough;".

(3)In section 45 of that Act (interpretation of Part II)—

(a)after the definition of "contravention" insert—""district", in relation to a local authority who are the council of a Welsh county or county borough, means that county or county borough;"; and

(b) in the definition of "local authority", after first council" insert "of a Welsh county or county borough or".'.

164 Page 123, line 17, at end insert:
'The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (c. 39)
'. In section 189(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (interpretation), in the definition of "local authority" omit "and Wales" and after "Scilly," insert "in relation to Wales means a county council or a county borough council,".'.
165 Page 123, line 17, at end insert:
The Guard Dogs Act 1975 (c. 50)
'. In section 7 of the Guard Dogs Act 1975 (interpretation), in the definition of "local authority" omit "and Wales", and after "City of London," insert "in relation to Wales, a county council or county borough council,".'.
166 Page 123, line 17, at end insert:
'The Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975 (c. 52)
'.— (1) In the following provisions of the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975, after "where the local authority is in" insert (in each place) "Wales,"—

(a) section 3(3) (applications for certificates);

(b) in section 4 (amendment etc of certificates), subsections (7) and (8);

(c)section 5(5) (d) (interested parties for purposes of appeals);

(d) section 10(8) (b) (copies of prohibition notices);

(e) section 10A(7) (d) (appeals against orders relating to prohibition notices); and

(f) section ll(c) (powers of entry and inspection).

(2) In section 17(1) of that Act (interpretation)—

(a)in the definition of "building authority", in paragraph (a) omit "or in Wales,"; and

(b)in the definition of "local authority", in paragraph (c) omit "or in Wales," and, after that paragraph insert—

"(cc) in Wales, the county council or county borough council;".'.

167 Page 123, line 26, at end insert:
'The Lotteries and Amusements Act 1976 (c. 32)
'.— (1) In section 23(1) of the Lotteries and Amusements Act 1976 (interpretation), in paragraph (b) of the definition of "local authority", for "district" substitute "county borough".
(2) In Schedule 1 to that Act (registration of societies), in paragraph 1(2) (b), for "district" substitute "county council or county borough".
(3) In paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 3 to that Act (permits for commercial provision of amusements with prizes: interpretation), in paragraph (b) of the definition of "local authority", for "district" substitute "county council or county borough".'.
168 Page 123, line 26, at end insert:
'The Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 (c. 38)
'. In section 7 of the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 (interpretation), in subsection (4), in the definition of "local authority", omit "and Wales" and after "City of London," insert "in relation to Wales, a county council or county borough council,".'.
169 Page 123, line 26, at end insert:
'The Race Relations Act 1976 (c. 74)
'. In section 19A of the Race Relations Act 1976 (discrimination by planning authorities), in subsection (2) (a), after "county," insert "county borough,".'.
170 Page 124, line 2, at end insert:
'The European Parliamentary Elections Act 1978 (c.10)
'.— (1) In paragraph 4 of Schedule 1 to the European Parliamentary Elections Act 1978 (returning officers etc.), in sub-paragraph (5) (a) omit "and Wales" and at the end insert—
"(aa) in Wales, a county or county borough;".
(2) In paragraph 5A of Schedule 2 to that Act (local inquiries held by Boundary Commission), in sub-paragraph (4) (a) omit "and Wales" and after "district" insert—
"(aa) in Wales, the council of a county or county borough;".'.
171 Page 124, line 15, leave out 'first "district"' and insert '"district" in the first and last places where it occurs'.
172 Page 124, line 15, after 'borough",' insert '(in each place)'.
173 Page 124, line 21, at end insert:
'( ) In section 17 of that Act (interpretation), in the definition of "designated district" in subsection (1), after "any district" insert "or Welsh county or county borough".'.
174 Page 124, line 39, at end insert:
'The Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980 (c. 65)
'.— (1) In section 2 of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980 (duty of authorities to publish information), in subsection (1) after paragraph (a) insert—
"(aa) a county borough council;".
(2) In section 4 of that Act (bodies which may be directed to publish information)—

(a)in subsection (4) (g), after "councils" insert "or Welsh county councils or county borough councils"; and

(b)in subsection (7), omit "district".

(3) In section 20(1) of that Act (interpretation of Part III), in the definition of "local authority", in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in relation to Wales, a county council or county borough council or a police authority established under section 3 of the Police Act 1964;".
(4) In section 98 of that Act (disposal of land at direction of Secretary of State), in subsection (8A) after paragraph (a) insert—
"(aa) a county borough council;".
(5) In section 99 of that Act (provisions supplementing section 98), in subsection (4) after paragraph (a) insert—
"(aa) a county borough council;".
(6) In section 100 of that Act (interpretation of Part X), in subsection (1) (a) after "county council," insert" county borough council,".
'.—(1) Section 103 of that Act (functions of the Land Authority for Wales), is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (2) (c), for "county and district councils in whose area the land is situated" substitute: —

(i) the council of any county or county borough in which the land, or any part of the land, is situated, and

(ii) the joint planning board (if any) for the area in which the land, or any part of the land, is situated,".

(3) For subsection (6), substitute—
"(6) The council of a county or county borough in Wales which makes an assessment of land in its area which is, in its opinion, available and suitable for development may be assisted by the Authority in making that assessment.
(6A) A joint planning board in Wales which makes an assessment of land in its district which is, in its opinion, available and suitable for development may be assisted by the Authority in making that assessment."
(4) In subsection (7), for "or (6)" substitute "(6) or (6A)".
(5) In subsection (8), for "or district council" substitute "council, county borough council or joint planning board" and after "the council" insert "or board".
'.—(1)'. —In section 116 of that Act (assessment of development land), in subsection (4), in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) (in the application of the section to Wales) the councils of counties and county boroughs;".
(2) In section 162 of that Act (inner urban areas)—

(a) in subsection (5)—

(i) in paragraph (a) after "district" insert "or Welsh county or county borough"; and

(ii) in paragraph (b) after "district" insert "or (as the case may be) Welsh county or county borough"; and

(b) in subsection (6) (b), after "(a)" insert "or (aa)".

(3) In section 165 of that Act (power to transfer undertaking), in subsection (9) in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) (in the application of the sections to Wales) a county council or county borough council;".
(4) In section 185 of that Act (pleasure boat byelaws) in subsection (1) after "London" insert—
"(iv) the council of a Welsh county or county borough,".
(5) In Schedule 16 to that Act (bodies to whom Part X applies), after paragraph 1 insert—
"1A. A county borough council.".
(6) In Schedule 19 to that Act (public authorities who may seek advice from the Land Authority for Wales), in paragraph 1 after sub-paragraph (a) insert—
"(aa) a county borough council,
(ab) a joint planning board in Wales,".
(7) In Schedule 20 to that Act (Land Authority for Wales: acquisition of land), after paragraph 4 insert—
"4A. Where the compulsory purchase order was made by the Authority and the land is situated in the district of a joint planning board in Wales—

(a) a notice under section 12 shall also be served on the board,

(b) the board shall have a right to object in accordance with the notice,

(c) the references in section 13 to objections made by an owner, lessee or occupier shall also include references to an objection made by the board."

(8) In Schedule 21 to that Act (further functions of the Land Authority for Wales)—

(a) in paragraph 9(1), after "local authority" insert "and joint planning board"; and

(b) in paragraph 9(2) for "district council" substitute "local planning authority" and for "the council" substitute "the local planning authority".

(9) In Schedule 32 to that Act (enterprise zones)—

(a) in paragraph 1(1) insert, after paragraph (a)—"(aa) the council of a Welsh county or county borough;"

(b)in sub-paragraph (3) after the first "district" insert "county, county borough"; and

(c)in paragraph 2(2) (a) (ii) omit "or Wales" and after "situated" insert—

913
"(iia) if the area for which the scheme is to be prepared is in Wales, adequate publicity is given to its provisions in the county or county borough in which the area is situated;".'.
175 Page 124, line 39, at end insert:
'The Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 (c. 18)
'. In the Schedule to the Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 (disposal of human remains and tombstones, monuments or other memorials), in paragraph 10(1) (a), after "district," insert "or Welsh county or county borough,".
The Animal Health Act 1981 (c. 22)
'. In section 50 of the Animal Health Act 1981 (local authorities), in subsection (2), after paragraph (b) insert—
"(bb) as respects a county borough, the county borough council,".'.
176 Page 124, line 39, at end insert:
'The Zoo Licensing Act 1981 (c. 37)
'.— (1) In section 1 of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981 (licensing of zoos by local authorities), in subsection (3), in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in Wales, the councils of counties and county boroughs;".
(2) In section 3(2) of that Act (persons whose representations are to be taken into account in consideration of applications for licences), in paragraph (e), after "the licence" insert"—(i)" and at the end of that paragraph insert—
"or
(ii) if the part is situated in Wales, the local planning authority for the area in which it is situated;".'.
177 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Civil Aviation Act 1982 (c. 16)
'.—(1) In section 79 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 (grants towards cost of sound-proofing buildings), in subsection (7), omit "and Wales".
(2) In section 105(1) of that Act (interpretation), in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority" omit "and Wales" and, after that paragraph, insert—
"(aa) in relation to Wales, means a county council or a county borough council;".
The Aviation Security Act 1982 (c. 36)
'. In section 30 of the Aviation Security Act 1982 (supplementary orders), in subsection (3) (c), after "a county" insert "in England".'.
178 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Representation of the People Act 1983 (c. 2)
'.— (1) In section 8 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (registration officers), in subsection (2) omit "and Wales" and after subsection (2) insert—
"(2A) In Wales, the council of every county or county borough shall appoint an officer of the council to be registration officer for any constituency or part of a constituency coterminous with or situated in the area of the council."
(2)In section 18(2) of that Act (polling districts), omit "and Wales" and after "borough" insert ", and in Wales it is the duty of the council of each county or county borough,".
(3)In section 24(1) of that Act (returning officers), in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) after "constituency" insert, in each case, "in England" and insert the following paragraphs in the appropriate places—
"(aa) in the case of a county constituency in Wales which is coterminous with or wholly contained in a preserved county as defined by section 61 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994, the sheriff of the county;";
"(bb) in the case of a borough constituency in Wales which is coterminous with or wholly contained in a county or county borough, the chairman of the county or county borough council;";
914
"(cc) in the case of any other constituency in Wales, such sheriff or chairman of a county or county borough council as may be designated in an order by the Secretary of State so made;".
(4) In section 28(1) of that Act (discharge of returning officer's functions), in paragraph (a) after "constituency" insert "in England" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in the case of a constituency in Wales for which the chairman of a county or county borough council is returning officer by virtue of that section, by the registration officer appointed by that council;".
(5) In section 28(5) of that Act (power of acting returning officer to appoint deputies), after "and a" insert "Welsh county council or county borough council or a".
(6) In section 31 of that Act (polling; districts and stations at local government elections), in subsection(1) after "county councillors" insert "in England" and after that subsection insert—
"(1A) For elections of county or county borough councillors in Wales, the county or county borough council may divide an electoral division into polling districts and may alter any polling district."
(7) In section 35 of that Act (returning officers for local elections), in subsection (1) omit "and Wales" and "or communities" and after that subsection insert—
"(1A) In Wales the council of every county or county borough shall appoint—

(a) an officer of the council to be the returning officer for elections of councillors of the county or county borough; and

(b) an officer of the council to be the returning officer for elections of councillors of communities within the county or county borough."

(8) In section 36 of that Act (local elections), in subsection (3) omit "or community" in both places in paragraph (b) and after that subsection insert—
"(3AB) Where the polls at—

(a) the ordinary election of councillors for any electoral division of a Welsh county or county borough or an election to fill a casual vacancy occurring in the office of such a councillor, and

(b) the ordinary election of community councilors for any community or an election to fill a casual vacancy occurring in the office of such a councillor,?

are to be taken on the same day and the elections are for related electoral areas, the polls at those elections shall be taken together."

(9) In section 36(4) of that Act (payment of expenses), after "county" insert "a county borough".
(10) In section 36 of that Act, in subsection (5) omit "or community", in both places, and "or the community" and after that subsection insert—
"(5A) All the expenditure properly incurred by a returning officer in relation to the holding of an election of a community councillor shall, in so far as it does not, in cases where there is a scale fixed for the purposes of this section by the council of the county or county borough in which the community is situated ("the principal council"), exceed that scale, be paid by the principal council; and if the principal council so require, any expenditure so incurred shall be repaid to them by the community council."
(11) In section 39 of that Act (void local elections) —

(a) in subsections (4) and (6) (a), after "district council" insert, in each case, "or Welsh county or county borough council"; and

(b) in subsection (6) (b), omit "district".

(12) In section 52(4) of that Act (discharge of registration duties), in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and for second "and" substitute—
"(aa) in Wales, of a county or county borough council, and"
(13) In section 69(2) of that Act (location of offices of election agents and sub-agents), in paragraphs (a) and (b), in each case for "or in a London borough or district" substitute "or in a Welsh county or county borough, or London borough or district,".
(14) In section 82(4) of that Act (persons before whom declaration as to expenses may be made), in paragraph (a), after "county council" insert ", a county borough council".
(15) In section 159 of that Act (candidate reported guilty of corrupt or illegal practice), in the definition of "corporate office" in subsection (3) after "county" insert ", county borough".
(16) In section 203(1) of that Act (interpretation)—

(a) in the definition of "local authority", after "county council," insert "a county borough council,"; and

(b) in the definition of "local government area ",after "county," insert "county borough,".

(17) In Schedule 1 to that Act (parliamentary election rules), in paragraph 10(2) (c) after "district" insert "or Welsh county or county borough".
(18) In Schedule 2 to that Act (provisions which may be contained in regulations as to registration etc.), in paragraph 1(1) after "district" insert", Welsh county or county borough".
(19) In Schedule 3 to that Act (form of return and declaration), in the first passage in brackets in each form (which provides for an alternative in relation to a local government election), after "county of insert "county borough of.
(20) In Schedule 5 to that Act (use of certain rooms for parliamentary election meetings), in paragraph 3(1) after "council" insert "and every Welsh county and county borough council".'.
179 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Licensing (Occasional Permissions) Act 1983 (c. 24)
'. In section 1(5) of the Licensing (Occasional Permissions) Act 1983 (restriction on occasional permissions), for "district in Wales or Monmouthshire" substitute "locality".'.
180 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Value Added Tax Act 1983 (c. 55)
'. In section 20 of the Value Added Tax Act 1983 (refunds of tax to local authorities and other bodies), in subsection (6) after "county," insert "county borough,".'.
181 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Pastoral Measure 1983 (No. 1)
'. In section 87 of the Pastoral Measure 1983 (general interpretation), in the definition of "local planning authority" in subsection (1), after "(a)" insert "in England".'.
182 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Telecommunications Act 1984 (c. 12)
'. In section 97 of the Telecommunications Act 1984 (contributions by local authorities towards provision of facilities), in subsection (3)—

(a) in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales", after "City of London" insert "or" and omit "or a community council"; and

(b)after that paragraph insert—

"(aa) in relation to Wales, means a county council, a county borough council or a community council;".

The Cinemas Act 1985 (c. 13)
'. In section 21 of the Cinemas Act 1985 (interpretation), in subsection (1), in the definition of "local authority", in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in Wales, a county council or a county borough council;".
The Representation of the People Act 1985 (c. 50)
'.— (1) In the Representation of the People Act 1985, in sections 6(2A) (c) (absent vote at elections for an indefinite period) and 9(5) (c) (voting as proxy) after "county" insert, in each case, "or county borough".
(2) In section 21 of that Act (insufficient nominations at ordinary elections of community councils), in subsection (2) (b)—

(a) after "district council" insert "or, in the case of a community council, the county council or county borough council"; and

(b) omit "of district council".

The Weights and Measures Act 1985 (c. 72)
'. In section 69 of the Weights and Measures Act 1985 (local weights and measures authorities), in subsection (2), at the end add "and for each county borough shall be the county borough council".'.
183 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Health Service Joint Consultative Committees (Access to Information) Act 1986 (c. 24)
'. In section 1 of the Health Service Joint Consultative Committees (Access to Information) Act 1986 (interpretation), in subsection (1), in the definition of "local authority", after "county council," insert "a county borough council,".
The Airports Act 1986 (c. 31)
'. In section 12 of the Airports Act 1986 (interpretation of Part II), in the definition of "principal council" in subsection (1), in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales", and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in relation to Wales, means the council of a county or of a county borough;".'.
184 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Gas Act 1986 (c. 44)
'. In paragraph 5 of Schedule 7 to the Gas Act 1986 (modifications of the Pipe-lines Act 1962), in sub-paragraph (5), in the definition of "local authority", in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and after "City of London;" insert—
"(aa) in Wales, the council of a county or county borough;".'.
185 Page 126, line 20, at end insert:
'The Building Societies Act 1986 (c. 53)
'. In Schedule 8 to the Building Societies Act 1986 (powers to provide services) in paragraph 8 of Part IV, in the definition of "local authority in Great Britain", in paragraph (a) omit "and Wales" and "or community" and after that paragraph insert—
"(aa) in Wales, a county council, a county borough council and a community council;".'.
186 Page 126, line 23, at end insert:
'The Fire Safety and Safety of Places of Sport Act 1987 (c. 27)
'.— (1) In the following provisions of the Fire Safety and Safety of Places of Sport Act 1987, after "where the local authority is in" insert (in each place) "Wales,"—

(a) section 28(10) (copies of applications for safety certificates);

(b) in section 29 (amendment, cancellation etc of certificates), subsections (7) and (8);

(c) section 30(8) (d) (interested parties for purposes of appeals); and

(d) section 35(c) (powers of entry and inspection).

(2) In section 41 of that Act (interpretation), in paragraph (a) of the definition of "building authority" and paragraph (c) of the definition of "local authority" omit "or in Wales," and after paragraph (c) of the definition of "local authority" insert—
"(cc) in Wales, the county council or county borough council;".'.
187 Page 126, line 23, at end insert:
'The Coroners Act 1988 (c. 13)
'.— (1) In section 1 of the Coroners Act 1988 (appointment of coroners)—

(a) in subsection (1)—

(i) for "county or Greater London" substitute "county, Greater London or Wales";

917

(ii) after first "non-metropolitan county" insert "in England"; and

(iii) in paragraph (c), after first "county" insert "in England"; and

(b) in subsection (2), after second "(b)" insert "or (bb)".

(2) In section 1 of that Act, after subsection (1) (b) insert—
"(ba) to the case of a coroner's district consisting of or included in a Welsh principal area, the council of that area;
(bb) in the case of a coroner's district lying partly in each of two or more Welsh principal areas, such one of the councils of those areas as may be designated by an order made by the Secretary of State by statutory instrument;".
(3) In section 2 of that Act (qualifications for appointment as coroner), in subsection (3), after first "county" insert "in England", and after subsection (2) insert—
"(2A) A person shall, se long as be is a councilor of a Welsh principal area, and for six months after be ceéses to be one, be disqualified for being a coroner far a coroner's district which, or any part of which, falls within that area."
(4) in section 4 of that Act (coroners' districts), in subsections (2) and (4), after first "county" in each case insert "in England", and to subsection (5) (a). after "administrative area" insert "in England".
(5) After section 4 of that Act insert—
"Coroners' districts: Wales.
4A.—(1) The Secretary of State may by order divide, amalgamate or otherwise after—

(a) any coroner's district for the time being existing to Wales; or

(b) any such coroners' districts.

(2) Before making any order under subsection (1) above, the Secretary of State shall consult the councils and coroners appearing to him to be affected by the order and such other persons as be thinks appropriate.
(3) The Secretary of State may, in relation to any area in Wales (the "review area"), direct the council or councils for each Welsh principal area which, or any part of which, falls within the review area to consider any of me following questions—

(a) whether any alteration should be made in a boundary between coroners' districts which fails within the review area;

(b) whether a new coroner's district should be created for the whole or any part of the review area;

(c) whether a coroner's district which fails wholly within the review area should be abolished.

(4) The council or councils to whom such a direction is given shall submit their conclusions to the Secretary of State, together with a statement of" their reasons for reaching those conclusions.
(5) In making an order under subsection (1) above in a case where he has given a direction under subsection (3) above, the Secretary of State shall have regard to any proposals made to him under subsection (4) above.
(6) Where the Secretary of State intends to give effect to any such proposals without modification, subsection (2) above shall not require him to consult the council or councils who made nose proposals.
(7) An order made under subsection (1) above may make such incidental, consequential, transitional or supplemental provision as appears to the Secretary of State to be appropriate.
(8) Except as provided by this Act, a coroner: appointed for any coroner's district in Wales—

(a) shall for all purposes be regarded as a coroner for the whole of Wales; and

(b) shall have the same jurisdiction, rights, powers and authorities throughout Wales as if he had been appointed as coroner for the whole of Wales.

(9) The power to make orders under this section shall be execissble by statutory instrument.
(10) Any such statutory instrument shall be laid before each House of Parliament after being made."
(7) In section 27 of that Act (coroner's accounts), in subsection (3) (b), after "country council" insert "in England "and after "fund;" insert—
"(bb) in the case of the council of a Welsh principal area, out of the council fund;".
(8) In section 27(4) of that Act, far the words from "district consisting of' to "districts or boroughs" substitute—
"district—

(a) consisting of two or more metropolitan districts or London boroughs, or

(b) which lies partly in each of two or mare Welsh principal areas,

the expenses of the councils of those districts, boroughs or areas".

(9) In section 31 of mat Act (provision of accommodation), for "district or London borough" substitute "district, London borough or Welsh principal area".
(10) In section 35(1) of that Act (interpretation), in the definition of "administrative area", after "means" insert "Wales." and after "county" insert "in England", and after the definition of "relevant council" insert—
""Welsh principal area" means Welsh county or county borough"'.
188 Page 126, line 30, at end insert:
''.In section 88(2) of that Act (councils to whom transport giants may be paid), after paragraph (a) insert—
"(aa) a county borough council,".'
189 Page 126, line 32, at end insert:
'The Football Spectators Act 1989 (c. 37)
In section 13 of the Football Spectators Act 1989 ' (licensing authority's powers to relation to safety at football grounds), in subsection (3) after "is in" insert "Wales,".'.
190 Page 126. line 37, at end insert:
'The Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42)
In Part I of Schedule 2 to the Broadcasting Act 1990 (restrictions on the holding of licences), in paragraph 1(1), to me definition of "local authority", in paragraph (a) emit "and Wales" and after "Scilly;" insert—
"(aa) in relation to Wales, means a county council or county borough council;".'.
191 Page 157, line 9, at end insert:
'The Deer Act 1991 (c. 54)
In section 11 of the Deer Act 1991 (licensed game dealers to keep records), in the definition of "authorised officer" to subsection (9), after "council of a" insert "Welsh county or county borough,".'.
192 Page 127, line 29, leave out from 'subsection' to end of line 31 and insert '(2), after "subsection (3)" insert "or (3A)", in subsection (3), after "classes" insert ", in relation to England," and after subsection (3) insert:
"(3A) the classes, to relation to Wales, are—

(a) county councils and county borough councils; and

(b) police authorities established under section 3 of the Police Act 1964.'".

193 Page 127, line 31, at end insert:
'The Charities Act 1992 (c. 41)
In section 65 of the Charities Act 1992 (interpretation of Part III), in the definition of "local authority" to subsection (4), after "council of a" insert "Welsh county or county borough, of a".'.
194 Page 127, line 31, at end insert:
'The Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 (c. 8)
'. In section 21 of the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 (pensions payable to judicial officers etc. by local authorities), in subsection (4), in the definition of "local authority", after "county council," insert "county borough council,".'.
195 Page 127, line 31, at end insert:
'The Charities Act 1993 (c. 10)
'.—(1) In section 76 of the Charities Act 1993 (local authority's index of local charities), in subsection (1), after "county" insert "or county borough".
(2) In section 77 of that Act (reviews of local charities by local authority), in subsection (1), after "county" insert "or county borough", and after subsection (4) insert—
"(4A) Subsection (4) above does not apply in relation to Wales."
(3) In section 78(1) of that Act (co-operation between charities and local authorities), in the definition of "local council"—

(a) after "means" insert", in relation to England,";

(b) for "parish or (in Wales) community" substitute "or parish"; and

(c) at the end add "and, in relation to Wales, the council of a county, county borough or community".

(4) In section 79 of that Act (parochial charities), in subsection (7), in paragraphs (b) and (c), for "district council" substitute "council of the county or (as the case may be) county borough" (in each place).
(5) In Schedule 3 to that Act (enlargement of areas of local charities), after paragraph 3, insert—

"3A. A Welsh county or county borough

Any area comprising that county or county borough."

(6) In paragraph 4 of Schedule 3 to that Act, in paragraph (iv) in column 2, at the end add "or in any adjacent Welsh county or county borough" and after that paragraph insert—

"4A. Any area in a Welsh county or county borough

(i) Any area in the county or county borough;(ii) the county or county borough;(iii) any area comprising the county or county borough;(iv) any area partly in the county or county borough and partly in any adjacent Welsh county or county borough or in any adjacent district.'".

196 Page 127, line 38, at end insert:
'The Local Government (Overseas Assistance) Act 1993 (c. 25)
'. In section 1 (9) of the Local Government (Overseas Assistance) Act 1993 (definition of "local authority"), in paragraph (a), for "and" substitute ", the council of a county or county borough in".'.
197 Page 127, line 38, at end insert:
'The Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (c. 28)
'. In section 161 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (vesting of land by order in Urban Regeneration Agency), in subsection (7), in the definition of "local authority", after "county council," insert "a county borough council,".'.
198 Page 128, line 13, at end insert:
'The Railways Act 1993 (c. 43)
'. In section 151 of the Railways Act 1993 (general interpretation), in subsection (1), in the definition of "local authority", after "county council," insert "county borough council,".
The Health Service Commissioners Act 1993 (c. 46)
'. In section 19 of the Health Service Commissioners Act 1993 (interpretation), in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority" omit "and Wales" and after that paragraph insert—
920
"(aa) in relation to Wales, a county council or county borough council,".'.
199 Page 128, line 13, at end insert:
'The Probation Service Act 1993 (c. 47)
'.—(1) Section 29 of the Probation Service Act 1993 (responsible authorities) is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (1) (a), after second "probation area" insert—
"(aa) for any probation area in Wales, any county or county borough in whose area is situated the whole, or any part of, the probation area;".
(3) In subsection (2) after "county" insert "the council of a county borough".'.
200 Schedule 17, page 128, line 37, at end insert:
'Agricultural wages committees
3A. Subject to any provision made under section 53 which amends or modifies the Agricultural Wages Act 1948, "county" shall, in relation to Wales, have the same meaning for the purposes of that Act as it had for those purposes immediately before the passing of this Act.'.
201 Page 128, line 37, at end insert:
'Inner urban areas
'.—(1) The area of any district in Wales which, immediately before 1st April 1996, was a designated district for the purposes of the Inner Urban Areas Act 1978 by virtue of an order under section 1(1) of that Act shall, subject to any further provision made by or under that Act, continue to be a designated district for those purposes.
(2) The designated district authority in relation to any such designated district which comprises or falls wholly within a new principal area shall be the council of that area.
(3) Where any such designated district falls partly within the areas of two or more new principal councils, each of those councils shall be the designated district authority in relation to the part of the designated district that falls within their area.'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 137 to 201 en bloc. I shall also speak to Amendments Nos. 205 and 206 and 208 to 239.
These are extensive amendments which amend Schedule 16 (which makes consequential amendments to enactments other than the Local Government Act 1972) and Schedule 17 (which makes savings and transitional provisions). There are also a number of consequential repeals to various enactments in Schedule 18. Although there are a large number of amendments, they are technical. Their purpose is to facilitate the transfer of functions from the counties and the districts to the new authorities.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 137 to 201.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
202 Schedule 17, page 132, line 7, leave out from '(1)' to end of line 10 and insert 'Except as provided by section 287 of the planning Act (proceedings for questioning validity of development plans) as applied by this paragraph, the validity of—

(a) a modified plan, or

(b) any alteration made to or replacement of a local plan, a minerals local plan, a waste local plan or a structure plan under Part III of Schedule 5,

whether before or after the plan, alteration or replacement has been approved or adopted, shall not be questioned in any legal proceedings.'.

203 Page 132, line 11, leave out 'or alterations' and insert 'alteration or replacement'.
204 Page 132, line 14, leave out 'alterations made to' and insert 'any alteration made to or replacement of.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 202 to 204 en bloc. I have already spoken to the amendments.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 202 to 204. —(LordRodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
205 Schedule 17, page 132, leave out line 24 and insert:
'(6) Terms used in this paragraph have the same meanings as they have in Part III of Schedule 5.
'.—(1) In section 306 of the planning Act (contributions by local authorities and statutory undertakers), subsection (2) (a) applies—

(a) in relation to the preparation of a modified plan as it applies in relation to the preparation of a local plan; and

(b) as if the reference to Part II of the planning Act included a reference to Part III of Schedule 5.

(2) In section 324 of the planning Act (rights of entry), subsection (1) (a) applies—

(a) in relation to a modified plan as it applies in relation to a local plan; and

(b) as if any reference to Part II of the planning Act included a reference to Part III of Schedule 5.

(3) In this paragraph "modified plan" has the meaning given by paragraph 9 of Schedule 5.'.
206 Page 133, line 5, leave out 'that Act' and insert 'the Act of 1980".
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 205 and 206 en bloc.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 205 and 206. —(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT
207 Schedule 17, page 133, line 25, at end insert:
' Limitation of council tax
'.—(1) The Secretary of State may, in a report made by him in relation to the financial year beginning in 1996 and any Welsh county council or county borough council, specify a notional amount for the purposes of this paragraph.
(2) Any such report—

(a) shall contain such explanation as the Secretary of State considers desirable of the calculation by him of the notional amount;

(b) shall be laid before the House of Commons;

(c) may relate to two or more authorities; and

(d) may be amended by a subsequent report under this paragraph.

(3) If any such report is approved by resolution of the House of Commons, the Secretary of State may designate any authority to whom the report relates if in his opinion, taking any excess in the amount calculated by the authority as their budget requirement for the financial year beginning in 1996 over the notional amount as representing an increase, that increase is excessive.
(4) The Secretary of State may by order make such provision as he considers appropriate for the purpose of supplementing this paragraph.
(5) Subject to any such order, the provisions of Chapter V of Part I of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (limitation of council tax and precepts) shall have effect in relation to a designation under this paragraph as they have effect in relation to a designation under section 54(1) (b) of that Act.'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 207. The amendment relates to the matter of controlling the costs of local government reorganisation. The purpose is to make sure that advantage is not taken of reorganisation to make unjustified increases in local government expenditure.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 207.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
208 Schedule 17, page 133, line 35, leave out from beginning to end of line 44 and insert:
'19.—(1) Any person who, immediately before 1st April 1996, is a coroner assigned to a particular coroner's district in Wales ("an existing coroner") shall, on and after that date, be deemed to have been duly appointed for that district.
(2) Nothing in this: Act affects the validity of anything done before 1st April 1996 by an existing coroner.
(3) Anything done before 1st April 1996 by or in relation to an existing coroner shall, on and after that date, be deemed to have been done by or in relation to the coroner appointed for the coroner's district in question.
(4) Any person who, immediately before 1st April 1996 is a deputy coroner or assistant deputy coroner in relation to a particular coroner's district shall, on that date, be deemed to have been duly appointed as the deputy or assistant deputy of the coroner for that district.
(5) No order may be made under section 4A of the Coroners Act 1988 so as to have effect before 1st April 1996.
(6) Any person who, on or after 1st October 1995, ceases to be a councillor for a county in Wales which ceases to exist on 1st April 1996 ("the old county") shall, for six months after he ceases to be such a councillor, be disqualified for being a coroner for any district which, or any part of which, falls within the area of the old county.'.
209 Schedule 18, page 134, line 32, at end insert:
'1962 c. 58. Pipe-lines Act 1962. In section 35(6), the words "and Wales".'.
210 Page 134, line 32, at end insert:
'1964 c. 26. Licensing Act 1964. Section 66(2).In paragraphs 6 and 7 of Schedule 8, in the expression "district returning officer", the word "district" in each place.
1964 c. 40. Harbours Act 1964. In paragraph 3(ba) of Schedule 3, the words "and Wales" and "or community".'.
211 Page 134, line 38, column 3, at end insert:
'In section 10(2), paragraphs (a) and (b) (ii) and in paragraph (b) (i) the words "other than any council of a district in Wales".'.
212 Page 134, line 41, column 3, at end insert:
'Section 21.'.
213 Page 134, line 41, at end insert:
'1965 c. 36. Gas Act 1965. In section 28(1), in the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
214 Page 134, line 41, at end insert:

923
'1967 c. 22. Agriculture Act 1967. In section 75(2), in the definition of "local authority". the words "and Wales".
1967 c. 24. Slaughter of Poultry Apt 1967. In section 8(1), in (he definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
215 Page 134, line 41, at end insert:
'1968 c. 54. Theatres Act 1968. In section 18(1), in paragraph (b) of the definition of "licensing authority", the words "and Wales".'.
216 Page 134, line 43, at end insert:
1969 c. 48. Post Office Act 1969. In section S6(l), in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
217 Page 134, line 43, at end insert:
'1970 c. 40. Agriculture Act 1970. In section 38(b). the words "and Wales".
In section. 67(1), the words "and Wales".'.
218 Page 134, line 50, at end insert:
'1972 c. 66. Poisons Act 1972. In section 11(2), in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
219 Page 136, line 10, column 3, at end insert:
'In Schedule 26, in paragraph 4(a), the words "or Communities" in both places, and in paragraph 11(1), the words "or community".':
220 Page 136. line 10, at end insert:
'1973 c. 35. Employment Agencies Act 1973. In section 13(1). in the definition of "local authority". the words "and Wales".'.
221 Page 136, line 10, at end insert:
'1973 c. 60. Breeding of Dogs Act 1973. In section 5(2), in the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
222 Page 136, line 10, at end insert:
'1974 c. 3. Slaughterhouses Act 1974 In section 27, the word "and" immediately before paragraph (c).'.
223 Page 136, line 14, at end insert:
'1974 c. 39. Consumer Credit Act 1974. In section 189(1), in the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
224 Page 136, line 24, at end insert:
'1975 c. 50. Guard Dogs Act 1975. In section 7, in the definition of 'local authority", the words "and Wales".
1975 c. 52. Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975. In section 17(1), in paragraph (a) of the definition of "building authority", and in paragraph (c) of the definition of "local authority", the words "or in Wales,".
1976 c. 38. Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976. In section 7(4), in the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
225 Page 13, line 26, at end insert:
'1978 c. 19. Election Parliamentary Elections Act 1978. In Schedule 1, in paragraph 4(5) (a) the words "and Wales".
In Schedule 2, in paragraph 5A(4) (a) the words "and Wales".'.
226 Page 136, line 32, at end insert:
'1980 c. 65. Local Government, Planning and, Land Act 1980. In section 4(7). the word "district".
In section 20(1). in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".
In section 116(4) (a), the words "and Wales".
In section 165(9) (a), the words "and Wales".
In Schedule 32, in paragraph 2(2) (a) (ii), the words "or Wales".'.
227 Page 136. line 32, at end insert:
'1981 c. 37. Zoo Licensing Act 1981. In section 1(3) (a), the words "and Wales".'.
228 Page 136, line 46, at end insert:
'1982 c. 16. Civil Aviation Act 1982. In section 74(7), the words "and Wales".
In section 105(1), in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
229 Page 136, line 46, at end insert:
'1983 c. 2. Representation of the People Apt 1983. to section 8(2), the words "and Wales".
In section 18(2), the words "and Wales".
In section 35(1), the words "and Wales" and communities".
In section 36(3) (b). the words "or community' (in both places).
In section 36(5), the words "or community" (in both places) and the words "or the community".
In section 39(6) (b), the word "district".
In section 52(4) (a), the words "and Wales".
230 Page 136, line 50, at end insert:
'1984 c. 12. Telecommunications Act 1984. In section 97(3) (a), the words "and Wales" and the words "or a community council".'.
231 Page 137. line 18. at end insert:
'1985 c. 13. Cinemas Act 1985. In section 271(1), in tip definition of "local authority", in paragraph (a) the words "and Wales".'.
232 Page 137, line 18, at end insert:
' 1985 c. 50. Representation of the People Act 1985. fat section 21(2) (b). the words "of district council".'.
233 Page 137. line 22, at end insert:
'1986 c. 31. Airports Act 1986. In section 12(1). to the definition of "principal council" in paragraph (a) the words "and Wales".'.
234 Page 137, line 22, at end insert:
'1986 c. 44. Gas Act 1986. In paragraph 5(5) of Schedule 7, in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
235 Page 137, line 22, at end insert:
'1986 c. 53. Building Societies Act 1986. In paragraph 8 of Part IV of Schedule 8, in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority in Great Britain", the words "and Wales" and "or community".'.
236 Page 137, line 22, at end insert:
'1987 c. 27. Fire Safety and Safety of Places of Sport Act 1987. In section 41, in paragraph (a) of the definition of "building authority'', and in paragraph (c) of the definition of "local authority", the words "or in Wales,".'.
237 Page 137, line 28, at end insert:
1989 c. 29. Electricity Act 1989. In Schedule 8, in paragraph 2(6) (a) the words "and Wales".'.
238 Page 137, line 46. at end insert:
'1990 c. 42. Broadcasting Act 1990. In paragraph 1(1) of Part I of Schedule 2, in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
239 Page 138, line 41, at end insert:
'1993 c. 46. Health Service Commissioners Act i993. In section 19. in paragraph (a) of the definition of "local authority", the words "and Wales".'.
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 208 to 239 en bloc. I have already spoken to the amendments.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 208 to 239. —(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Merchant Shipping (Salvage and Pollution) Bill
5.17 p.m.
Read a third time.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish)The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish) moved Amendment No. 1:
Page 20, line 52, at end insert:
("; and
( ) in subsection (3), after the words "section 1" there shall be inserted the words "or 1A".").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move Amendment No. 1. The amendment corrects a small omission from Schedule 3 to the Bill. As the House is aware, Schedule 3 extends the regime of strict liability for oil pollution damage to all ships. The accidental omission of the phrase "or 1A" would in one respect have had the effect of providing a different regime for oil tankers than for other ships.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish moved Amendment No. 2:
Page 22, line 17, column 3, at end insert:

("in paragraph 6(1)(a), the words from "section 544" to "waters)".".

The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 2, it may be for the convenience of the House if I speak to Amendment No. 3 at the same time. The amendments make minor corrections to the table of repeals. Both amendments concern the removal of obsolete references from the Merchant Shipping (Registration, etc.) Act 1993. Amendment No. 2 would remove a redundant reference. Amendment No. 3 would correct the extent of one of the repeals. As currently drafted, that repeal would have removed a reference which should be retained. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish moved Amendment No. 3:
Page 22, line 20, column 3, leave out ("422") and insert ("6").
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Mustill: My Lords, I beg to move that the Bill do now pass.
On Question, Bill passed, and returned to the Commons with amendments.

Sunday Trading Bill
5.20 p.m.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers): My Lords, I beg to move that the Commons reason and amendment be now considered.
Moved, That the Commons reason and amendment be now considered.—(Earl Ferrers.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

CONSIDERATION OF COMMONS REASON AND AMENDMENT
[ The page and line refer to Bill 28 as first printed by the Lords.]

LORDS AMENDMENT
9 Page 4, line 46, at end insert:
("(bb ) any shop which is a nursery, garden centre or do-it-yourself home improvement shop, or a combination of these, and where the trade or business carried on consists wholly or mainly of the sale of any one or more of the following—

(i) plants,

(ii) garden supplies and accessories, and

(iii) materials and tools suitable for use in the construction, maintenance, repair or decoration of buildings,")

The Commons disagreed to this amendment for the following reason:
9A Because the Commons do not consider it desirable to exempt shops of the kind described in the amendment from restrictions on Sunday opening.
MOTION MOVED ON CONSIDERATION OF COMMONS REASON
9B The Lord Hacking to move, That this House do not insist on their amendment 9 to which the Commons have disagreed for their reason 9A, but propose the following amendment in lieu thereof:
9C ("(bb) any shop where the trade or business aimed on consists wholly or mainly of the sale of—

(i) trees, shrubs, plants, bulbs or seeds;

(ii) garden supplies or equipment;")

Lord Hacking: My Lords, I beg to move Motion 9B standing in my name.
The purpose of my Motion is to enable the other place for the first time to consider as a separate issue the status of nurseries and garden centres under the provisions of the Bill. The other Motion, Motion 12B, is purely consequential and deals with cross-referencing to other clauses.
Perhaps I may remind noble Lords of the history of the matter. At no time, until the Bill reached us, did either Chamber consider the status of garden centres and DIY stores. As noble Lords will recall, the debate was on the choice of options to be taken as the fundamental issue on the Bill. On 14th April we went into Committee and at that stage there were three amendments before the Committee relating to garden centres and DIY stores. The first of those sought exemption for garden centres and nurseries; the second sought exemption for DIY stores; and the third was a combined seeking of exemption for both DIY stores and garden centres.
During our debate, a clear preference was shown for the combined amendment. For that reason and because a number of entities combine the functions of a garden centre and a DIY store, I invited the Committee to agree the combined amendment. As noble Lords may also recall, on a Division it was agreed.
On 21st June, the other place considered our amendments and, while accepting all the other amendments, rejected the combined amendment concerning garden centres and DIY stores. However, in the debate in the other place, Members from all sides of the House complained that they had not been given an opportunity to consider separately garden centres and if

927
they had been given that opportunity, they would have looked favourably at a garden centres only amendment. Indeed, one Member in another place who was generally opposed to the relaxation of Sunday trading laws, urged the Commons to consider a separate garden centre amendment.
Therefore, my Motion is in response to the favourable view expressed in another place concerning garden centres and is in response to the invitation that the Commons should have an opportunity separately now to consider the position of garden centres.
I ask noble Lords to look at the terms of the amendment which, in my submission, have been precisely and carefully drafted. Your Lordships will see in subparagraph (i) that certain specific products of garden centres are identified: trees, shrubs, plants, bulbs or seeds. I do not think that noble Lords or anyone else reading the schedule would have any difficulty in understanding these definitions.
In the second part of my amendment there are identified in the schedule garden supplies or garden equipment. "Garden supplies" refers to such products as peat or fertilisers and other products that enhance the gardening process. "Garden equipment" refers to garden tools, lawn mowers and the like.
Under the schedule, the garden centre would not be prevented from offering for sale garden furniture or garden ornaments or the like, but should that garden centre attempt to sell any substantial quantity of items falling under the exempt products identified in the schedule, they would face the risk of prosecution and a fine of £50,000 under paragraph 7 of Schedule 1. Contrary to the advice of Mr. Charles Flint, of Counsel, the burden of proof under Section 101 of the Magistrates' Act 1980 would remain upon the defendant, the garden centre concerned.
We have already debated—perhaps too much—the words "wholly or mainly". I just remind noble Lords that the noble and learned Lords, Lord Hailsham and Lord Simon of Glaisdale, advised your Lordships that those words are fully justiciable. I also remind the House that in a case taken over 80 years ago in the Chancery Division by Mr. Justice Parker, the Hatschek patent case, the court firmly held that those two words "wholly or mainly"—the word used in this case was "exclusively" rather than "wholly", but nothing turns on that—should be construed in "close connection" one with the other, and that "disparity" between the contents of the goods in question had to be "substantial". The judge in that case, Mr. Justice Parker, specifically rejected the argument that a difference of 51 per cent. against 49 per cent. did not satisfy that test.
It is also important to take into account the current state of the law under which garden centres have been and are lawfully trading in their primary products of shrubs and plants under the proviso of Section 58 of the Shops Act 1950. That proviso permits the produce that has been produced at the garden centre to be sold lawfully under that Act. This applies to trees and shrubs that are dug from the land and it also applies to other products that have been cultivated: for example, in pots at the garden centre.
928
I therefore believe that it is a serious step in the Bill designed to clarify and relax Sunday trading law to take away existing rights relating to hours of trading and to trading on Easter Sunday. I remind noble Lords that the special position of garden centres was recognised by a number of organisations, including the Keep Sunday Special Campaign, who, in their option, gave specific exemption to the garden centres in a broader form, I have to tell your Lordships, than in the form in my amendment.
In summary, in moving the Motion, I do not seek any confrontation with the other place. On the contrary, I seek to provide a means for the other place to consider separately and favourably garden centres.
The other important point is that I must emphasise that it would be a retrograde step in my submission to take away existing rights. Therefore, I look with friendship towards the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, and my noble friend Lord Elton and others who participated in the debate and hope that that friendship will take the amendment through without discord.
Moved, That this House do not insist on their Amendment 9 to which the Commons have disagreed for their reason 9A, but propose Amendment No. 9C in lieu thereof.—(Lord Hacking.)
Lord Norrie: My Lords, at Committee stage I spoke about the real practicalities of the garden centre industry, having had 19 years' experience in the trade. At that time, this House accepted the principle that garden centres should be allowed to continue their existing trading pattern on Sundays. As the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, said, there is a great deal of sympathy for the position of nurseries and garden centres in relation to the Bill, as was shown in both debates in this House and the Commons. Again as my noble friend has just indicated, it was implied by Members of Parliament from all sides that they wished us to provide them with an amendment relating solely to garden centres.
Traditionally it has been accepted that nurseries and garden centres should trade on Sundays, even under the provisions of the Shops Act 1950. Without this amendment, garden centres will be worse off when the Bill becomes law. First, they will have restricted opening hours on Sundays; secondly, they will be forced to close altogether on Easter Sunday, probably the busiest day of their year. In practice neither of those restrictions exists at present.
Of the 2,000 garden centres in England and Wales the vast majority are family owned and run. Those are exactly the types of small businesses that we should be encouraging rather than hindering. Sunday is their busiest day, accounting for up to 40 per cent. of their weekly turnover. They have always opened early and closed late to allow supplies to be bought by gardeners when they need them most.
As garden centres have opened on Sunday for many years, I think that the public will be baffled and angry if we vote to restrict these well-established and accepted trading practices. The gardeners will not like it, the staff will not like it and the owners will not like it. If we do not pass this amendment tonight I believe that the

929
pressure from the public and the nursery trade when they realise what we have done will be so great that we shall soon have to return to this issue again.
5.30 p.m.
Baroness Nicol: My Lords, I want to add very little to what has been said already, but there are one or two points that I believe need to be covered. I support what was said by the noble Lords, Lord Hacking and Lord Norrie, about the institution that the opening of garden centres on a Sunday has become. I feel that, above all other trading activities, it provides a family outing of the kind that we should not seek to curtail.
Sunday, as we have heard, is the busiest day for garden centres. The workers who are in them have become used to that and have established their working patterns over many years. Fewer hours for them (as indeed it would mean for others) would mean less pay. In some cases there will be actual job losses—and not only on Sunday. As most of the trading profits of the garden centres are made on Sundays the knock-on effect of lower takings on Sundays could affect jobs on other days as businesses seek to cut costs.
Some anxieties were expressed in another place about problems of policing if garden shops or centres were deregulated. I find it very difficult to understand that particular argument. I cannot really see why policing under the terms of this amendment should be any more difficult than they will be in any case. I have not had a single objection or representation from any local authority that suggests that they would find it difficult to work with this amendment. The only objections that I have received have been from other traders who foresee the increased competition that they do not wish to have. This has become almost a British institution. I hope that noble Lords will support the amendment and let it go forward.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, I hope, too, that your Lordships will accept this amendment, first of all because it makes general good sense to separate it from the other part of the clause which another place understandably removed. But the practical point is surely this. It is not, as I understand it, the purpose of the present legislation to extend the scope of control of sales. It has only been a matter of argument as to the extent of the increase in permission to sell which should be enacted.
This particular subject matter has always been free. It was free even under the famous 1950 Act. It could only be a great error, at a time when we are rightly reducing the area of control and restriction, if suddenly we were to impose—I suggest, largely by accident—this control on garden centres. Therefore it seems to me that we have an admirable opportunity on this Motion to tidy up the whole matter, to secure that garden centres continue to have the freedom to operate that they have enjoyed for many years and to keep the pattern of the Bill logical and tidy. Therefore, I hope very much that noble Lords will support the Motion of my noble friend Lord Hacking.
Lord Jay: My Lords, I should also like briefly to support this Motion. Garden centres are one of our few
930
remaining expanding industries. Surely we do not want to kill anything of that species. Not merely are they expanding but they are expanding to the pleasure and benefit of almost everyone in the neighbourhood— certainly of the gardeners and the employees of the centres, and, judging by my experience, to the general welcome of those in the neighbourhood.
Their main selling days are Saturday and Sunday, and in particular Sunday. For Parliament to forbid centres to operate on Sundays is rather like forbidding footballers to play on Saturday, or indeed ministers of religion to carry out their services on Sunday. It would be absurd.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, I should also like to support the Motion, and I shall do so extremely briefly. Anyone who has studied the effect in another place, which rejected the amendment that had been passed in this House, will recognise, as the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, said in his very compelling speech, that a very clear distinction was drawn by the other place between the DIY centres and the problems of distinguishing between those and other shops that sell identical goods. There was mention, on the one hand, of the problems of deliveries on Sunday and disturbance to neighbourhoods, and, on the other hand, the garden centres. I believe that the other place would very much welcome an opportunity to reach a decision on garden centres alone.
None of the arguments that has applied to DIY centres really applies to garden centres. It is perfectly clear what a garden centre is. The drafting of the Motion is quite simple on that matter. Therefore we should accept the Commons amendment to the extent that is indicated and accept the six-hour restriction on DIY centres, but we should give the other place an opportunity to think again about garden centres.
Lord Simon of Glaisdale: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, and his supporters have shown an enormous, almost excessive, enthusiasm for this issue. I myself have always been a complete deregulator. I took some active part in that direction when the previous Bill was before your Lordships. I was also formerly a very keen gardener and user of garden centres. Therefore I should have every predilection in favour of this amendment if it stood alone and had no history. If it were a matter of a garden centre attached to the Garden of Eden with no history, no geography and nobody outside to complain of unfair competition, it would be very hard to resist. But that is not so.
The noble Lord, Lord Hacking, went back into history, but very recent history. One needs to go back to the former Bill. Your Lordships showed every inclination after a hard struggle to vindicate the principle of total deregulation. But the other place would not have that and the Bill was lost. We went back to the notorious 1950 Act. The result was, as everybody had prophesied, widespread and flagrant flouting of the law.
Nearly 50 years ago, the Gowers Committee said that the 1950 Act was bringing the law into disrepute; and a decade or so ago the Auld Committee repeated that in slightly different words: it was bringing the law into

931
contempt. So it was no surprise to find that immediately the big stores in London and elsewhere openly flouted the law and opened on Sunday whenever it was convenient.
If we lose this Bill, we shall be in danger of returning to that situation. It is far too late to go on pursuing this issue. At any rate, that is where one should start: with the 1950 Act and the loss of the Bill last time when it came before your Lordships.
But more recently, after that failure the Home Office did its best to reconcile the diverse interests. With every activity, every assistance and with vast experience, it failed entirely. In the end it was left to the group for which the noble Baroness, Lady Jay, speaks—the Shopping Hours Reform Council—with very great difficulty and careful balance, to find a compromise. We shall be in great danger if we go back on that compromise. We owe an immense amount to the noble Baroness and her colleagues. I hope that she will address your Lordships on this matter. No doubt your Lordships will pay great attention to what she says.
But there is more recent history to consider. It is very recent history—in fact it happened last night. With the deregulation Bill, last night your Lordships removed Section 1 of the 1950 Act. That means that a garden centre can open all day on Friday and all night as well if it so chooses; and it can open all day on Saturday and all night as well on Saturday.
The noble Lord, Lord Norrie, mentioned small businesses. But we are not concerned at all with small businesses. We are concerned with large garden centres. The small garden centres are not limited to six hours of opening. They can serve the public throughout the day and now throughout the night as well.
There is another point to raise on that issue. There are many large garden centres and adjacent small garden centres. The Shopping Hours Reform Council had to strike a compromise in two directions. In the first place it managed to reconcile the views of the Keep Sunday Special group with those who wanted complete deregulation. In the second place, it carefully balanced the interests of the small shopkeeper—and in this case the small garden centre—against the big stores. That was again a very careful compromise.
As to the other place, it was presented with a number of amendments proposed by your Lordships. It accepted all of them except one, which is this one. It was rejected by a massive majority. The voting was 160 to 293. It would be idle to speak of asking the other place to think again.
How it was presented to the other place was entirely up to those who moved the amendment in this House. Understandably, do-it-yourself stores and garden centres were lumped together—quite rightly and quite understandably, because they very largely overlap in their retail outlets. The other place did not consider the two establishments separately at all. It considered them as subject to the same arguments.
Those arguments were threefold. The first was that the provision was a derogation from a compact which had been agreed to over a wide field. The second was that garden centres, like do-it-yourself shops, could sell
932
a whole host of articles in competition, say, with departmental stores, hardware shops and so on. Garden centres do not deal only in plants, shrubs and so on. They also sell cement, brickwork and garden furniture. All those items are sold in competition with departmental stores and other retail outlets. As I read the debate, it was strongly felt in the other place that it was quite unfair to allow that competition. That was the point made in your Lordships' House by the noble Baroness, Lady Young, when we last considered the matter. I recall that the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, also raised that point. The third argument was an adjunct of the second; namely, that the words "wholly or mainly" opened the road further to unfair competition.
The noble Lord, Lord Hacking, after great research and with much care, found a Revenue case decided in the Chancery Division at the beginning of this century —or perhaps it was at the end of the last one.
5.45 p.m.
Lord Hacking: My Lords, it was not a Revenue case. It was a patent case and there is some significance in that.
Lord Simon of Glaisdale: At any rate, it was a long time ago and has nothing whatever to do with the issue before your Lordships. The noble Lord, Lord Hacking, was kind enough to refer to my concurrence with my noble and learned friend Lord Hailsham as to how the courts would approach the phrase "wholly or mainly". They would approach it in the way suggested by the noble Earl, Lord Ferrers: that in the end it was a question of fact for the jury or other tribunal of fact in which it would weigh a number of considerations such as the value of the stock, the rate of turnover of the stock, the price of individual items, the amount of showroom space that was taken up and the amount of warehouse space available—all those kinds of things. I say categorically that no sensible judge would bemuse the jury with the case found by the noble Lord, Lord Hacking.
So that is the position. The other place by a decisive majority on this amendment alone rejected the amendment as it was submitted by your Lordships' House, which obviously they considered raised the same point as regards do-it-yourself stores and garden centres.
There is another matter that weighed greatly with the other place and will no doubt weigh greatly with your Lordships. We are being invited to renege on a compromise, a compromise of which we as deregulators have taken advantage. It was argued earlier that individually we were not parties to the compromise. Of course we were not. It would be impossible to have over 1,500 parliamentarians of both Houses milling round trying to achieve the very difficult compromise that was achieved by the noble Baroness and her colleagues. But the important point is that we took advantage of that compromise.
At the moment Parliament is not held in high repute. It will be very much a matter for your Lordships to maintain the reputation of Parliament and this House particularly. It would be deplorable if it were thought

933
that your Lordships' House was behaving shabbily by taking advantage of a compromise and then going back on it. I hope that, in spite of the admirable arguments advanced with cogent thought, your Lordships will not accede to the proposal.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I rise to make only three points and I shall make them quickly. First, in case there is any doubt on the matter, I repeat that this is a free vote on this side of the House and therefore in anything I say I speak purely for myself. Secondly, when the original amendment was moved, I voted for it and have not been convinced by any arguments that the original amendment was wrong or that the proponents of this amendment are wrong in matters of fact or judgment. Like the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, I am a deregulator and I see this as a valuable extension of deregulation.
Thirdly, in our view—here I can say in "our" view rather than "my" view—there would need to be wholly exceptional circumstances for us to reject the considered view of another place on a second occasion. There would need to be some defect in the way that it considered the matter or some other constitutional reason which at present I cannot envisage. Therefore I cannot vote for the amendment.
Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank: My Lords, I did not think it would be necessary to speak in this short debate though I support the Motion in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Hacking. However, I find myself disagreeing with the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, on almost every point and for that reason I feel compelled to say something.
The arguments we heard from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, were clearly and firmly put, as always, on virtually all the amendments proposed both in Committee and on Report. The argument put forward by the noble and learned Lord —supported on both sides of the House—was mat a compromise had been reached by two bodies external to this House which, in so far as it had been supported in a vote on Second Reading, was not capable of further amendment.
I do not want to pursue that at greater length and have no wish to attract into the debate the noble Baroness, Lady Jay. We can now put those matters behind us and I mention them only because they were mentioned by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale. But we went through that argument and considered whether it was appropriate, in view of the compromise, were there such, and in light of the view the House of Commons took, mat we should introduce any amendments at all. I hope that I do not misrepresent the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, when I say mat he was against all the amendments which this House passed on the grounds that they either breached the compromise or would be offensive—I use that word only in a broad sense—to the House of Commons. But we have seen that for the most part they were not offensive to the House of Commons. Indeed, despite the commitment of the House of Commons to the compromise; despite the fact that it considered the Bill on Second Reading, in Committee and on Report;
934
despite the warnings that we were falling out of line and were in danger of losing the Bill, when it came to a discussion in the House of Commons, as the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, said, all our amendments which we were warned against making were accepted in the other place. One of them was accepted on a Division; some were accepted even without a Division.
I do not believe therefore that it is right for this House to take into account the fact that the matter has been thoroughly discussed in another place as well as here and that at the last discussion in another place exception was taken to the amendment from this House. As the noble Lords, Lord Jenkin of Roding and Lord Hacking, said, when the House of Commons considered the amendments your Lordships had made this was one that the Members felt they could not support because it was bifocal—if I may use a term from another language. It dealt with two different matters—DIY centres and garden centres. Anyone reading the debate—here again I disagree with the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale—and knowing the commitment of some of the speakers in it, cannot but see, unless the Members were telling less than the truth, that they would have supported garden centres where they do not support DIY stores.
I ask any Member of this House to refer to any part of that debate where anyone committed against the whole idea of deregulation did not concede that this was a special case. That was the view taken in the Commons.
I shall not discuss the merits of the case except for one final sentence. I say only this. Does this House imagine that at this late hour, considering all the trauma that there has been, considering the huge commitment to the principle of the Bill, the large measure of agreement, the wish by the Government to put'the matter behind them, that to pass this Motion in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, would put the Bill in danger? That is nonsense. It cannot conceivably put the Bill in danger.
My second point is also a simple one. We know that this is not the last word. It is the penultimate word. We are seeking to respond—and it is good that your Lordships' House should occasionally seek to respond —to the perceived wishes of another place. Of course, our perception may be wrong. Perhaps Members in another place do not want to support garden centres. It will be within the power of another place to say no to garden centres. So we get into no difficulty of any kind by doing other than judging the Motion on its merits and within the context referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Hacking.
On its merits I say only this. We all believe that gardens are a special part of England. I do not mean only the gardens attached to the broad acres that some noble Lords may be fortunate enough to possess, but also the small gardens in our towns, villages and suburbs. The Motion is our ultimate chance to help in a small way —I do not pretend any more than that—the gardeners of England. I can see no conceivable reason within the constitution or within our relationship with another place, that to help the gardeners of England in this simple way should be beyond the capacity of this House. I hope that your Lordships will support the Motion of the noble Lord, Lord Hacking.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, what I want to say has been said already so I shall be extremely brief. It is clear to me that the House of Commons disagreed on an exemption for DIY shops but did not come to a conclusion about garden centres. Rather like the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank, when they do I shall rest content.
One point has not yet been made. An argument produced by the Minister of State in another place and repeated by the Shopping Hours Reform Council brief, which many noble Lords received, is that it is not possible to separate garden centres and do-it-yourself stores. It is clear from the debate in another place and from many of the speeches we heard in this Chamber this afternoon, that one can indeed make such a distinction. As my noble friend Lord Norrie said on the last occasion, everyone knows a garden centre and home improvement store when they see one. I certainly agree with that. A garden centre has plants as its raison d'être, and DIY shops have products for improving buildings as their main business. Of course, some products are common to both. Yes, we all know that, but I suggest that there will be much more unfair competition, if that is what is worrying the House, between a garden centre with a shop of 250 square metres and an acre of outside display area which is allowed to trade all the hours it wants to on any Sunday and one of 300 square metres with a smaller outside area which, if we disagree with the Motion of my noble friend Lord Hacking, will be restricted to six hours of trading. That is an extra reason why the amendment should be supported.
6 p.m.
Lord Monson: My Lords, I thought at the time that it was a tactical mistake to link garden centres and DIY stores; and so it has proved. Luckily, it is not too late to put things right. What no one has so far mentioned are the wishes of the general public. There is no doubt whatever that the overwhelming majority of the general public want garden centres to be open all day Sunday. In fact, I would guess that there is more support for garden centres being open for 12 hours on Sunday than there is for supermarkets being open for six hours on Sunday. By agreeing to this Motion we will give honourable Members in another place another chance to respond to the deeply felt wishes of their constituents. So in that respect we shall be doing them a great favour if we agree to the Motion.
Viscount Montgomery of Alamein: My Lords, like many who have spoken, I have every sympathy with my noble friend Lord Hacking, but my concern is one of tactics. I question whether my noble friend Lord Jenkin is right when he said that the House of Commons is all agog and desperate to have a debate about garden centres. Would that it were so, but I very much doubt it. I rather support the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, when he implied that it would be dangerous at this stage to play ping-pong with a measure on which we have expended a huge amount of time and which is so near its conclusion. Therefore, with much regret, I think that the noble Lord, Lord Norrie, may well be right when he says that if we do not agree we shall have to come back
936
to it at a later stage. That may well be the case. I am sure that the Bill, when it is passed, will be further amended in the years to come—and that may be the time to do it —but I feel that now is not the time. Therefore, rather like the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, I feel that we must get on with it now while we can, and as soon as we can.
Viscount Brentford: My Lords, in urging your Lordships to reject this Motion I want to take up one point which was made by my noble friend Lord Jenkin of Roding. He said that it is always clear what a garden centre is. I do not agree with that statement and I think it is important that we realise that before we decide which way to vote on this Motion.
We are talking about only large garden centres which wholly or mainly sell garden produce. One Midlands town has three large garden centres. I am informed that one of them sells 52 per cent. non-garden produce; another 75 per cent; and a third 47 per cent. They are selling goods which are neither garden furniture nor garden produce. We are into big business. It is not clear and simple garden centres that we are talking about.
Lord Hacking: My Lords, I hesitate to intervene, but what on earth has that to do with our amendment?
Viscount Brentford: My Lords, it is a very good reason for rejecting the Motion that we should permit large garden centres to be open all the time. We are providing problems for local authorities which will have to vet them. I encourage noble Lords to vote against the Motion.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, challenged the noble Viscount, Lord Brentford, on what his speech had to do with the amendment. His speech had everything to do with the amendment. He was seeking to show that large garden centres in a large part of their shopping area sell goods which are clearly nothing to do with garden centres. What he was saying was entirely relevant. Indeed, John Lewis examined the position outside Nottingham and found that non-garden centre goods were being sold in large amounts and accounted for a very good percentage of the total sales of the garden centres in question. I believe that the noble Viscount, Lord Brentford, had a very good point and I am glad that he put it.
We are in this position because, whatever the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank, says, this House is attempting to override a consensus which had been reached not merely in the House of Commons and Parliament itself but also outside as to which way we should proceed. The consensus was that we should not have complete deregulation; we should have partial deregulation. That is the way it went. We made relevant amendments. There is nothing to stop the House of Lords making relevant amendments. But it must understand that that consensus did exist. If the House insists on undermining that consensus the Bill may very well be delayed. One cannot get away from that. We should remember that there are people outside who want to run their shops and run their businesses and other people who want to shop in them. In those

937
circumstances, and in the interests of good government, the sooner we get the Bill through in the agreed form the better it will be.
Lord Elton: My Lords, as one who still aches from spending a day and a half cutting his hedges last week, relieved only by those too frequent occasions when he cut the flex, perhaps I may remind your Lordships that we are not talking about shutting large garden centres altogether on Sunday; we are talking about whether they should open for six hours or for more than six hours.
As has already been said by the noble Lord opposite, there is a question of size and operation. I should like to make the point—because I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, will revert to it—that although my noble friend Lord Brentford was referring to cases in which the proportion was nearly or indeed over 50 per cent., there are many other cases where the figure is around 30 per cent. or 40 per cent. and the size of the operation means that it is a real and actual form of competition to people who are selling in the same market as that minority product. The fact that the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, says that this is a fully justiciable issue gives me no confidence. It merely means that the court will decide whether we are talking about 49 per cent. or 38 per cent. The noble Lord, Lord Hacking, shakes his head, but "justiciable" means that it is decided by the court. We have been told by a senior Law Lord that the court will consist of a jury in this respect — common-sense people applying common-sense rules of thumb. Your Lordships and I cannot decide in advance what that is. The fact is that it may well be, and probably will be, a substantial proportion.
I joined this argument somewhat reluctantly on the grounds of keeping Sunday special. That battle was lost long ago. I stayed in it because I believe that there is another aspect of English life that is also at risk. I refer to the survival of small units of retail trade. They will be at risk from this minority proportion of the trade—the very big garden centres—that the amendment would open up.
For those reasons, as well as those of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, and those of the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, I hope that your Lordships will reject the amendment. I have to say that the pleasure of voting with people on the other side with whom I agree is only outweighed by the regret that I have to disagree with so many of my noble friends on this side of the House.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, before coming to the substance of the debate, perhaps I may make clear one or two procedural points. The substance of what we are debating is in Amendment No. 9B. The amendment of another place, Amendment No. 12A, to Amendment No. 12 is purely technical and is consequential upon their rejection of Amendment No. 9. If my noble friend's Amendment No. 9C is not approved, and if your Lordships do not insist on Amendment No. 9, Amendment No. 12A should be approved. If either my noble friend's Amendment No. 9C were to be approved, or the House were to insist on Amendment No. 9, then my noble friend's Amendment No. 12B should be agreed to.
938
The original Amendment No. 9 which your Lordships added to the Bill at Committee stage sought to exempt garden centres and do-it-yourself shops from the six-hour limit which the Bill places on trading by large shops. Another place did not agree with the suggestion and it has asked your Lordships not to insist on the amendment.
However, my noble friend Lord Hacking now proposes to amend the amendment by in effect seeking to exempt garden centres and nurseries alone from the six-hour limit. I remind the House—as noble Lords will have become only too well aware with the passage of this Bill—that it is entirely a matter for your Lordships whether or not to agree with my noble friend in his amendment or indeed whether or not to insist on the original amendment. As I have frequently said, these are entirely matters for your Lordships.
Having said that, there are one or two points which I believe may assist in coming to a conclusion on these tricky matters. The reason which was given by another place for not agreeing with your Lordships in Amendment No. 9, is in Amendment No. 9A. Perhaps I may quote the words. Another place,
"do not consider it desirable to exempt shops of the kind described"
—that is, garden centres, nurseries and do-it-yourself shops—from the six-hour limit which the Bill places on trading by large shops.
Another place concluded this on a free vote by a majority of no fewer than 133. They did not seem to have too much doubt about that. I fancy that your Lordships might translate a majority of 133 on a free vote in another place as a pretty clear message that another place does not want to have Amendment No. 9 at any price, either. I thought that the argument of the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank, was a little curious. He said that all the amendments which your Lordships sent down to another place were accepted there other than this one, which was not wanted. Therefore, this amendment should go back again. That seemed to me to be the argument.
Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank: My Lords, I appreciate the noble Earl giving way. He misunderstood me, so I could not have been clear. I was not pursuing that line at all. I was seeking to argue with the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, that during our early debates it had been argued that all the amendments before your Lordships' House should not be passed because that would upset the compromise and make our relationship with another place more difficult—in other words, we were advised against them precisely on the same grounds as those advocated by the noble and learned Lord today. Yet we found out in practice that the Commons were willing to accept and were grateful for all your Lordships' amendments with this one exception. That was the argument. I am sorry that I did not make it clear. The noble Earl's remarks are therefore irrelevant in the context of my own.
6.15 p.m.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I apologise to the noble Lord if I misunderstood him. For all that, I do not believe that my remarks are irrelevant. The fact is that

939
the other place did accept all the amendments other than this one. The noble Lord, Lord Rodgers, among some of his friends, wishes to give the other place another opportunity to consider it. As some of your Lordships foresaw, another place saw this amendment as one departure too many from the six-hour compromise which, after blood, sweat and tears, it had finally reached and in which your Lordships—thank heavens —also concurred.
Another place considered that the amendment would make the Bill less enforceable because do-it-yourself shops and garden centres are not easily distinguished from other types of shop. They considered that the amendment would be unfair to retailers—like electrical and furniture shops and department stores—who sell many of the same products as do-it-yourself shops and garden centres but which would not enjoy the same exemption.
I believe that my noble friend Lord Hacking has accepted the fate which another place has decreed for do-it-yourself stores. But, with relentless ingenuity, he now says "All right, we will accept that do-it-yourself stores cannot be exempted; but let's have another shot at garden centres and nurseries". I am bound to say that I fancy that course will prove no more successful in another place than did the original amendment.
I say this for three reasons. First, while it is certainly the case that some of those who spoke in the debate in another place said that they would have agreed with an amendment if it had been restricted to garden centres, that was by no means the case in respect of all those who spoke in that debate. I fancy that a majority of 133 will not be easily overturned by the conversion of what one might call a few green-fingered, repentant souls.
Secondly, another place, in setting out their reason for objecting to your Lordships' amendment, drew no distinction between do-it-yourself stores on the one hand, and garden centres and nurseries on the other. Another place has said that they do not consider it desirable to exempt any of these shops from the six-hour rule. It would have been perfectly possible for a Member of another place to have moved an amendment there to distinguish between garden centres and do-it-yourself stores, but not one did.
Thirdly, and most importantly, it would in fact be neither workable nor sensible to try to distinguish between do-it-yourself stores and garden centres.
I would remind your Lordships that we are not talking about ordinary nurseries, where people like to browse on a Sunday. These can be open all day under the Bill. Even the big stores will be open on Sundays, but restricted to six hours. We are talking about these huge great garden centres whose covered area alone is greater than 3,000 square feet. These garden centres sell plants, but so do do-it-yourself stores. They sell other things, too. I have been advised that garden centres and do-it-yourself stores can have as much as 40 per cent. to 50 per cent. of their product lines entirely in common.
I do not want to irritate the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank, again. He did not irritate me. He said
940
that he wants to support this measure for the good gardens of England. He likes the gardens of England. I understand that.
When I was told that 40 per cent. to 50 per cent. of the product lines were entirely in common, I found that very surprising and I daresay that some of your Lordships do, too. Therefore, I made it my business to investigate a little as to what these large garden centres do commonly sell other than plants, shrubs and flowers. They sell books —not just gardening books but cookery books, travel books and story books, too. So much for the gardens of England! They sell garden furniture—but not just garden furniture, but book cases and dining room furniture too. So much for the gardens of England! They sell, barbecues, paving slabs and bricks. They sell lawnmowers and strimmers, creosote and paint; and sand and cement. They sell pictures, paintings and prints. So much for the gardens of England! They sell T-shirts; shoes and boots; anoraks and body warmers; trilbies and caps; toys, balloons and jigsaw puzzles; glassware and crockery; vases and earthenware jugs; china dogs and china cats; Christmas lights; even bean bags for dogs to sleep on. So much for the gardens of England! That is a funny kind of garden equipment. Even the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank, would find it difficult to believe that all that has to do with the gardens of England.
A garden centre of that size really cannot be considered to be on a par with a nursery just selling flowers or plants for the home gardening enthusiast. Indeed, that sort of nursery would not be affected by the six-hour restriction because it probably would not have a building of greater than 3,000 square feet.
My noble friend Lord Hacking said that garden centres are allowed to trade under Section 58 of the 1950 Act anyhow because they grow their own produce. That is perfectly true. Nurseries often do grow trees and shrubs, but some of them buy them in. By and large, garden centres do not and they hardly ever, so far as I know, grow their own lawnmowers, paving slabs and insecticides.
These large garden centres have become more like general stores which sell plants as well. I suggest to your Lordships that the reason why the sponsors of the original amendment linked garden centres and do-it-yourself stores together in the first place was because they knew that it would be impossible to draw any workable distinction between the two. Indeed, no less a person than the chairman of the Conservative parliamentary horticulture committee, the person who is the parliamentary consultant to the Horticultural Trades Association, the honourable Member for Broxbourne, Mrs. Marion Roe, agrees with this. She said in the debate on Amendment No. 9 in another place that she had been asked why DIY stores and garden centres were linked in the amendment. Her reply was that the answer was simple. It was her view that, in practice, there were inextricable links between the two types of store. Many garden centres sell DIY items and most DIY stores have garden centres. And that is it in a nutshell.
As I have said, this is entirely a matter for your Lordships and I would not seek to persuade you either way—
Noble Lords: No!
Earl Ferrers: I am merely trying to help your Lordships in coming to such conclusions as you may choose. But it does seem to me that my noble friend's amendment, Amendment No. 9C to Amendment No. 9, would in practice be no different from the original Amendment No. 9 itself. Both garden centres and DIY stores will seek to trade at any time on a Sunday by virtue of this exemption.
If the amendment were agreed to, local authorities may well decide not to go through the pain and anguish of trying to prove where a garden centre ends and where a do-it-yourself store begins. To do so would involve them seeking to show, for example, that a brick was a gardening supply when it was used for building a garden wall but it was a DIY product when it was used to build a bunker to contain coal.
I really think that Parliament has exhausted itself with this matter and with all the permutations and combinations in dealing with what was before an intractable problem. A decision has been arrived at; the Bill has been through both Houses of Parliament; your Lordships asked another place to think again; another place did think again, and another place rejected your Lordships' advice.
Now my noble friend Lord Hacking says, "Let's have another go". I agree with the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh of Haringey, and my noble friend Lord Montgomery. I do not think that garden centres are what one might call "ping-pong" territory, and I fancy that my noble friend would be chancing his arm, as soldiers would say, both from the point of view of success and of good will, by bringing this matter back again and if he were to choose to press his case. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, said, this would be an attractive amendment if it stood on its own, but it does not. Others will be affected by it.
Lord Hacking: My Lords, my noble friend the Minister has again entertained us with a witty, amusing and persuasive speech. It was not exactly marked with impartiality, but none the less all of your Lordships enjoyed it.
I have a sudden wonderment about the comments that have been made about the debate in another place. I shall not take your Lordships through the Hansard of another place, but time and time again leading speakers in another place, including Front Bench spokesmen for the Opposition, said in terms that they were not being given an opportunity to consider garden centres separately. That was repeated time and time again. In my submission, my noble friend Lord Jenkin of Roding presented the case correctly to your Lordships. The other place has given a clear indication of its interest in garden centres. Members there were not able to vote upon this—for whatever reason—and that is what I shall seek to invite your Lordships to do. As the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers, said, this is not the ultimate; it is the penultimate. All that I am asking your Lordships to do is to send the provisions back to another place so that Members there can reach a conclusion.
I am afraid that I did not find the name of the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, listed as one of those who
942
supported me in the Lobby on the last occasion that we debated this. His name was omitted from our Hansard, but if he was there, I am delighted to hear it The noble Lord spoke of exceptional circumstances. There are certainly exceptional circumstances. We are taking from our citizens rights that currently exist. That is an exceptional circumstance. It is also an exceptional circumstance to be invited by a Member of another place to place this issue before that place again. That is exactly what has happened and that is why I invite your Lordships to approve my Motion.
6.25 p.m.
On Question, Whether the Motion shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 32; Not-Contents, 80.

Division No.1

CONTENTS

Aberdare, L.

Malmesbury, E.

Addington, L.

McGregor of Durris, L.

Ailesbury, M.

Mersey, V.

Clanwilliam, E.

Monson, L.

Craigmyle, L.

Mountgarret, V.

Crickhowell, L.

Nicol, B. [Teller.]

Eden of Winton, L.

Norrie, L.

Erroll, E.

Pitt of Hampstead, L.

Greenway, L.

Rea, L.

Hacking, L.[Teller.]

Reay, L.

Halsbury, E.

Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.

Harding of Petherton, L.

Selborne, E.

Howie of Troon, L.

Skelmersdale, L.

Hylton-Foster, B.

Strathcarron, L.

Jay, L.

Tebbit, L.

Jenkin of Roding, L.

Trefgarne, L.

NOT-CONTENTS

Annaly, L.

Kinnoull, E.

Archer of Weston-Super-Mare, L.

Lauderdale, E.

Ashbourne, L.

Leigh, L.

Attlee, E.

Long, V.

Balfour, E.

Lucas of Chilworth, L.

Beaumont of Whitley, L.

Lucas, L.

Boyd-Carpenter, L.

Mackay of Ardbrecknish, L.

Brentford, V. [Teller.]

Mancroft, L.

Brougham and Vaux, L.

Massereene and Ferrard, V.

Bruce of Donington, L.

McIntosh of Haringey, L.

Burnham, L.

Merrivale, L.

Colville of Culross, V.

Meston, L.

Colwyn, L.

Milverton, L.

Constantine of Stanmore, L.

Montgomery of Alamein, V.

Cooke of Islandreagh, L.

Murton of Lindisfarne, L.

Courtown, E.

Northesk, E.

Craigavon, V.

Orkney, E.

Cumberlege, B.

Rankeillour, L.

Denton of Wakefield, B.

Renfrew of Kaimsthorn, L.

Diamond, L.

Renton, L.

Dixon-Smith, L.

Richard, L.

Elis-Thomas, L.

Rochester, L.

Elton, L.

Rodger of Earlsferry, L.

Falkland, V.

Romney, E.

Ferrers, E.

Seear, B.

Flather, B.

Serota, B.

Gallacher, L. [Teller.]

Shannon, E.

Goschen, V.

Simon of Glaisdale, L.

Graham of Edmonton, L.

St. Davids, V.

Hamwee, B.

Stallard, L.

HolmPatrick, L.

Stewartby, L.

Hughes, L.

Stoddart of Swindon, L.

Jay of Paddington, B.

Strafford, E.

Jeffreys, L.

Sudeley, L.

Jeger, B.

Tordoff, L.

Kenyon, L.

Torrington, V.

Kilbracken, L.

Trumpington, B.

943

Turner of Camden, B.

White, B.

Ullswater, V.

Williams of Mostyn, L.

Wakeham, L. [Lord Privy Seal.]

Wise, L.

Resolved in the negative, and Motion disagreed to accordingly.

LORDS AMENDMENT
9 Schedule 1, page 4, line 46, at end insert:
("(bb) any shop which is a nursery, garden centre or do-it-yourself home improvement shop, or a combination of these, and where the trade or business carried on consists wholly or mainly of the sale of any one or more of the following—

(i) plants,

(ii) garden supplies and accessories, and

(iii) materials and tools suitable for use in the construction, maintenance, repair or decoration of buildings,")

The Commons disagreed to this amendment for the following reason:
9A Because the Commons do not consider it desirable to exempt shops of the kind described in the amendment from restrictions on Sunday opening.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 9 to which the Commons have disagreed for the reason numbered 9A.
Moved, That the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 9 to which the Commons have disagreed for the reason numbered 9A.—(Earl Ferrers.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
6.33 p.m.

LORDS AMENDMENT
12 Page 5, line 13, leave out ("(1) (a)") and insert ("(1) (za), (a), (ba) or (bb)").
The Commons agreed to this amendment with the following amendment to it:
12A In line 1, to leave out the words '(ba) or (bb)' and insert the words 'or (ba)'.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 12A to Lords Amendment No. 12.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 12A to Lords Amendment No. 12.—(Earl Ferrers.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Northern Ireland Act 1974 (Interim Period Extension) Order 1994
6.34 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Baroness Denton of Wakefield)The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Baroness Denton of Wakefield) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 24th May be approved [21stReport from the Joint Committee].
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the purpose of the order is to renew the temporary provisions of the Northern Ireland Act 1974 by which means government by direct rule continues in Northern Ireland. Although this is the first occasion upon which I have stood before the House seeking to renew these provisions, I am aware
944
that it is the custom to give to your Lordships an account of the Government's stewardship in Northern Ireland over the previous year.
The Government's first priority is to bring terrorism to a permanent end. They will continue to exercise their responsibility for ensuring that the law effectively protects its citizens' rights including the right to life.
Terrorists continue to demonstrate their utter contempt for human life with continued attacks on all sections of society, be they members of the security forces, civilians going about their every day lives, the very young or the old and frail. Your Lordships I know will wish to join me in condemning the actions of all those who perpetrate terrorist acts, whichever side of the community they claim to represent. Those who plan and carry out these attacks will be sought out and brought before the courts.
Last year 84 people were killed in Northern Ireland as a result of the security situation—some 70 civilians, 8 soldiers and 6 RUC officers. In the same year 372 people were charged with terrorist-related offences including 58 with murder or attempted murder. The security forces are also achieving very significant successes in pre-empting terrorist action and hence saving many lives and protecting property and businesses from devastation. There is also success in disrupting terrorist racketeering.
Fortunately, terrorism is not the whole story of Northern Ireland. The Government continue to tackle the economic problems which exist there. We aim to increase job opportunities and prosperity across the whole of the community. We are particularly aware of the needs of the long-term unemployed in Northern Ireland. At the same time, we seek to achieve a widely acceptable political settlement. That co-ordinated approach of tackling terrorism, the economy and political settlement remains the basis of government policy. We do not believe that one aspect can be tackled in isolation. The Government's policy is founded upon the firm conviction that there is a need to promote a broad political settlement which will attract widespread support right across the community in Northern Ireland.
Your Lordships will know that talks began in 1991 and were constructed in three strands, according to their relevance to three key sets of relationships involved: those within Northern Ireland; those within the island of Ireland; and those between the two governments. It was agreed by all the parties that nothing would be agreed finally in any single strand until everything was agreed in the talks as a whole.
There are those who suggest that seeking an overall settlement in that way is too ambitious. It is suggested that we should take the process forward one strand at a time. However, our understanding is that the talks' participants themselves wish to achieve certain objectives and that those objectives do in fact involve all three sets of relationships.
The Government recognise that the talks process is not an easy one, but they are adamant that an internal solution, though it might have some short-term appeal, would not be sufficient to guarantee long-term peace and stability in Northern Ireland. Such a short cut would be sure to bring disappointments.
There are many doubts and anxieties on both sides of the community in Northern Ireland as to what the talks process might produce. I would like to repeat my right honourable friend the Secretary of State's reassurance that the future of Northern Ireland lies in the hands of its own citizens. There will be no change in the status of Northern Ireland without the consent of the majority of people who live there. There is no question of imposing a solution upon the people of Northern Ireland. Any new arrangements will work only if there is agreement.
Relations with the Government of the Republic of Ireland continue to be close, strong and practical. Co-operation over a whole range of economic and social issues continues. Perhaps the most significant development in Anglo-Irish co-operation over the past year has been the Joint Declaration. This represents public commitment of the two Governments to a shared understanding of political realities in Ireland today and to a common approach to the problems of Northern Ireland based on the principles of democracy and consent. It has the overwhelming endorsement of the people of Ireland, north and south, and strong support from the British public and our friends overseas.
Perhaps I may stress that a joint authority—that is, British and Irish Governments jointly running the affairs of Northern Ireland over the heads of the people—is not on the agenda of either Government. Neither believes that: it would be acceptable; neither is seeking it.
I would next like to share with your Lordships the good economic news in Northern Ireland. The recession has been weathered well in the Province and we have now seen a steady decline in the number of people out of work. In May 1994 unemployment fell by 5.2 per cent. to 13.1 per cent. That is the lowest level for three years. We are not satisfied with this level and will continue to work to reduce it.
The Industrial Development Board has had a successful year and two major projects have been announced offering jobs in Londonderry and Belfast, two cities with great need. The Northern Ireland Electricity Company has been successfully floated and has performed well.
Turning now to the Government's social policies, I can report on a number of positive developments. For example, total spending on the health and personal social services in Northern Ireland in 1994–95 will be £1.4 billion. That represents an increase in real terms of almost 3 per cent. on the previous year's outturn, and almost a 40 per cent. increase in real terms since 1980–81. The new £47 million Antrim Hospital was opened for business in April. A £7 million facelift for Altnagelvin Hospital in Londonderry is under way and will be completed in early 1996. The construction of a new £6.5 million regional facility on the Belfast City Hospital site for the Northern Ireland Blood Transfusion Service will be completed this financial year.
I can also report progress in reducing hospital waiting lists. Between September 1991 and March 1994 the number of patients waiting more than two years across all specialties fell from over 5,000 to 600. That means that there are still 600 who we must ensure come off the list. The expansion in the number of cardiac surgeons at the Royal Victoria Hospital has also considerably
946
reduced the waiting lists for heart surgery. Between December 1992 and March 1994 the numbers waiting for more than two years fell from 279 to 38. Over 1,000 cardiac operations were carried out in Northern Ireland in 1993 compared with 830 in the previous year. We are improving our service to the patients.
The implementation of the Government's new community care arrangements in Northern Ireland is proceeding well. In the nine months to the end of December last year, around 5,000 people benefited from the new community care management arrangements. An additional £29 million was allocated to the health and social services boards for community care in 1993–94. A further £41.2 million will also be made available this financial year.
In Northern Ireland we have health and social services combined. I believe that that gives us a very strong safety net. We should be able to produce the best community care programme in the whole United Kingdom.
On the education front, the Government remain committed to maintaining and improving education services in Northern Ireland. To that end, my honourable friend Michael Ancram published this month a strategic document, The Education Service in Northern Ireland: A Strategic Analysis. This document sets out our understanding of the key issues to be addressed in the education sector, and we have invited from interested parties comment on our plans and targets for the entire education service until the end of the decade. The document spells out the need for even greater partnership within the education service so that we can develop and promote the key aims of raising education standards and helping all individuals to reach their potential.
The Government remain committed to encouraging and facilitating the development of integrated education in response to parental demand from those who believe that children learning together will help foster understanding and reconciliation within a divided society. Substantive progress has already been made. We now have 21 integrated schools in Northern Ireland, with further proposals for new schools coming forward this year and next.
The Government continue to see positive results from their community relations initiatives in Northern Ireland. There is growing support for the measures which have been put in place in recent years. The "Making Belfast Work" initiative, which began in response to serious deprivation in parts of Belfast, continues to provide employment and training opportunities. On Monday, it gave me great pleasure to open the Shankill Family Centre. It provides evidence in physical and emotional form of the working together of the trust, the community and the voluntary groups. Nowhere have I seen the commitment from voluntary groups that I witnessed in Northern Ireland.
I would suggest that despite the tragedies that we have suffered in Northern Ireland over the past 12 months and the difficulties that many people face, the news, I am pleased to say, is not all bad. The economic

947
situation continues to show promise and social development continues apace, often setting standards for the whole United Kingdom.
The political process continues. There are some grounds for hope in Northern Ireland. Until such time as these direct rule provisions are no longer necessary the Government will continue to seek to govern through consent and democracy. However, until that day Northern Ireland must remain under direct rule. I commend the order to the House.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 24th May be approved [21st Report from the Joint Committee].—(Baroness Denton of Wakefield.)
6.47 p.m.
Lord Cooke of Islandreagh: My Lords, I listened with great interest to the comprehensive review of the past year in Northern Ireland. I am with the Minister in many of the good things that she reported. Progress has been made in a number of directions. However, I wish to concentrate on the political aspect—or perhaps the absence of it—and, in the order which follows, to mention some of the economic matters which the Minister mentioned.
This order is very important to us all in Northern Ireland as it is necessary in order to ensure the continuation of direct rule in its present form. But it is an interim period extension order which has been reviewed each year since 1974. It appears absurd that in the 20 years since 1974 something more permanent has not been developed and agreed. By far the greater number of people in Northern Ireland wish to be governed as an integral part of the United Kingdom, as set out in Section 1 of the Northern Ireland Constitution Act 1973, to which the Northern Ireland Act 1974 is subordinate. But democracy in local matters must be restored. Unfortunately, today we seem as far away as ever from any form of devolution.
The Minister set out the Government's commitment to the three-strand process and the belief that that is the way forward. Unfortunately, very few people believe that it is practical to expect to reach agreement on all three strands at once. It is fairly obvious to the man on the street that agreement on that is as far away as ever. I am one who believes that we should move step by step with some local democracy and then move on to the other steps. I certainly do not suggest that we stop at the first step, but the hope of progress will be much greater if we move steadily from one step to the other.
Unfortunately, in the political field things are not well. In some respects the Province is in a sorry mess at present. Many are frightened of being caught up in a shooting or bombing and we have had more than enough such atrocities recently. More generally, people are worried. They are fearful of the future and even angry. As the only native of Northern Ireland who is to speak this evening, I must try to describe some of the thoughts and feelings of the people as a whole because, as the Minister will know, people in Northern Ireland communicate well, one to another, and feelings spread about. It is not difficult to gather what are their thoughts.
948
In that context, I wish to apologise to the Minister on behalf of the noble Viscount, Lord Brookeborough. He wanted to be here this evening to speak in the debate but, unfortunately, he has an engagement in France which he cannot break.
To many people in Northern Ireland it does not appear that there is any government—and I do not mean the various departments which are working well and normally and which have made much progress. But people ask what is the Northern Ireland Office doing. Towards the end of last year it was suggested that some progress would be made with devolution in the Province. Dublin protested that that was outside agreed policy, and nothing more was heard of that. We were just told that talks were proceeding.
On the other hand, statements from Dublin have been made on an almost daily basis since the beginning of the year. We are told that it is engaged with London in discussing a framework for a "balanced constitutional settlement". People ask what on earth that might be. Mr. Reynolds, the Taoiseach, has also said that he will insist that that framework includes statutory cross-border institutions with executive powers. Mr. Reynolds has told us that the Government of Ireland Act 1920 will be on the table. The effect of those statements is similar to throwing a can of petrol on a smouldering fire.
It has now been reported that recruitment for the so-called Loyalist paramilitaries is better than ever; that their capability is rapidly growing. What horrors are in store if things go on as they are? The Provisional IRA campaign continues unabated. The Downing Street Declaration was a praiseworthy attempt to persuade the IRA to forsake violence for good, but unfortunately and clearly it has not been successful. I am sorry to have to report that in Northern Ireland more and more people believe that violence pays.
Everywhere people are talking and asking what will happen next and what is going on. People are asking what sort of people are in government and whether they are all stupid. They ask whether they can see straight. They say, "A friend down the road says that they are just 'incompeetent'"—and I shall await with interest to see how the record spells "incompeetent". The people then remember that our Government are headed by Ministers, and even Cabinet Ministers. It is believed that they must have some ability; they cannot all be stupid. They ask what on earth they are up to.
The people then remember 1985 and the Anglo-Irish Agreement —not that it is ever forgotten—when the Unionist community was totally ignored and Dublin was given a right to interfere in the affairs of the Province. The people ask what the Northern Ireland Office is up to at present. They wonder whether the Northern Ireland Office believes that, if it allows things to get in a total mess, people will become so fed up with it that a majority will say that they would prefer to be governed by Dublin. I have heard many people discussing and debating those matters. As your Lordships can imagine, that merely indicates the absence of confidence generally, and it is not good for morale and is not good for a stable community.
Your Lordships will be shocked to hear that many sensible, law-abiding people are no longer blaming the

949
Loyalist gangs for their activities. They are blaming the Government for their inaction and for their inability to see what seems to be obvious to so many. Fresh steps are urgently needed to deal with all paramilitaries. Time is not on anybody's side. The paramilitaries have been at it for so long that they have become institutionalised. Racketeering, sheltered by the gun, is widespread and complex. The substantial cash-flows from those activities permit criminals to live in a life-style to which they have become accustomed and political motivation may no longer be paramount.
It is interesting to note that more people on this side of the water seem to be reaching an understanding of our problems. Recently relevant articles have appeared in the serious weeklies and daily press. The first leader in 77K? Times on 22nd June expressed the matter very well and ended by stating:
"Imaginative security measures and swift devolutionary reform would contribute far more than the spent rhetoric of the Downing Street declaration".
Another leader in The Times on 27th June ended by stating:
"The Government remains committed to the belief that the problems of Ulster can be resolved by Anglo-Irish diplomacy, and to a fatalistic acceptance that the IRA can never be beaten. The first assumption is manifestly mistaken; and the second, contrary to ministers' assertions, has yet truly to be tested".
Again, there are articles which suggest that a number of options to deal with terrorists, which have proved effective in other countries, are open to the Government. Those suggestions include changes, some of which may erode areas of civil liberties and may not receive support from the legal profession. But temporary infringement of civil rights seems a small price to pay if the steps taken would enable the courts to take the gunmen and bombers out of circulation. Proposals along those lines have been made repeatedly to the Northern Ireland Office but without effect.
On Saturday last, the Prime Minister, after meeting Mr. Reynolds in Corfu, said that there would be no joint sovereignty in Northern Ireland now or in the future. That statement has been welcomed strongly but confidence in the Northern Ireland Office is so low that we need more than statements; we need action. That action must include steps which would show a much greater determination and political will to make clear to terrorists that they have no future. The police and security forces are doing all that is possible within their present remit.
Our local councils are restricted to emptying "wheelabins" and managing library boards. Most councils are working together well and more work should be passed to them without delay.
The continuation of direct rule is essential for the time being. I support the order this evening and I can only hope that the Government will wake up and take action which will restore confidence and give hope to the people in Northern Ireland.
7 p.m.
The Viscount of Falkland: My Lords, I rise with some diffidence as my noble friend Lord Holme of Cheltenham would normally be dealing with such an order. Indeed, this is only the second time that I have
950
spoken on Northern Ireland and, on the first occasion, I was also standing in as a substitute. We on these Benches take a position nearer to that of the noble Baroness than that of the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, who has just spoken. The noble Lord made an interesting speech, but I must say that I was somewhat depressed by the pessimistic note that he sounded, although I can well understand the origins of such pessimism.
Nevertheless, we on these Benches as a body believe that a solution must be found. We owe it to the people of Northern Ireland, to ourselves and to our descendants to solve the problem. It is not conceivable that we can hand on to future generations the kind of situation which has maintained, and continues, in Northern Ireland. We believe that the future of Northern Ireland must be determined by the people of the Province That is a view shared by Her Majesty's Government. The order to extend direct rule is, by its very nature, unfortunate but necessary. We support it reluctantly, with the hope that, as an interim measure, it will indeed be interim; although, as such, it has been continuing for a long time.
Political progress, and productive political progress, must be sought with all the energies at the disposal of the Government and all those who are involved in the process. We would support any alternatives to direct rule that had the support of the majority of Nationalists and Unionists. From these Benches, we have offered our contribution by way of solutions which we thought would constitute steps towards fulfilling those criteria. We know that the Government strive in the same direction. We wish them every success.
Obviously, the Joint Declaration was clearly the most important part of the Government's aims as set out in the Queen's Speech. It put the Northern Ireland peace process at the top of the political agenda. We congratulated the Government at that time and kept any reservations that we may have had quiet in an attempt to keep a united front which might help to persuade those who advocate violence. There again, the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, has told us that, unfortunately, those who support violence on both sides are increasing in number. That is most disturbing. Nevertheless, we must do all that we can to persuade the advocates of violence to adopt the democratic process in the way that the Government are moving.
The increased frequency of violence is both disturbing and upsetting as it represents a terrible and continuing blight on the lives of people in Northern Ireland. All of us who now watch television, listen to the radio or read newspapers, and know that there is violence not only in Northern Ireland but also all over the world, are becoming more and more concerned by the fact that this is the world in which our children will have to live.
Northern Ireland is so very close to us. The violence is a sign that the search for a breakthrough has unfortunately stalled. As an individual watching and listening to news programmes, and so on, it seems to me that the characteristic of recent months has been the increase in Loyalist violence. It seems that the Loyalists are vying with the Nationalists and the IRA for the publicity which they think will give them the position of setting the agenda. It is sad to note that the increasing

951
violence does not seem to attract the publicity that those people would probably like. That is even more disturbing.
Of course, constitutional parties should form the focus of all negotiations and certainly not the agenda of either the IRA or the Loyalist extremists. Those who accept that that is the only way, ultimately, to achieve a peaceful solution are more likely to make progress than those who do not. I believe that recent events in South Africa and in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict show us that progress is achieved by talks between moderates. Indeed, it is the moderates on opposing sides who, if they make sufficient progress, bring along the obstructive and destructive elements in the final stages. Unfortunately, it does not seem that that stage has yet been reached in Northern Ireland. However, we on these Benches would support anything that the Government introduce to bring us closer to that stage.
Obviously, the addressing of political problems is the answer to the ultimate aim of an enduring peace. I accept what the Minister said; namely, that all the news is not bad. Indeed, how can all the news be bad when steps have been taken to increase employment wherever possible and to introduce social measures in the way outlined by the noble Baroness? Therefore, we accept the interim order reluctantly and—it is to be hoped— with some optimism.
7.7 p.m.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, it is a matter of regret that we are here again debating the extension of direct rule in Northern Ireland. In principle, it seems to us that no one can defend it, but it is recent history that has driven that course upon us. Therefore, once again, we are simply renewing the status quo after 20 years. We are obliged to do so by terrorist activity which, as the Minister rightly said, we all abominate.
The recent spate of killings to which the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, referred, seems to us to highlight the need for a political settlement. We support the British and Irish Governments in continuing to try to agree a joint document to be put to the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland. We believe that it is vital that both Governments remain united in pursuit of a settlement which gives parity of esteem to the aspirations and beliefs of both sections of the community in Northern Ireland. If at all possible, it would be helpful if the Minister would give some indication in her reply of the timetable for the expected summit and also some indication, if she thinks it appropriate—as always, on such occasions, if the Minister says that it is not appropriate, I shall accept that—as to what agreements have been reached so far on the nature and powers of cross-Border constitutions.
It is now well known that our policy on these Benches has been for many years to support a united Ireland achieved on the basis of consent freely given. We would—as, indeed, we have always said—accept any agreement which had the support of the people of Ireland, both north and south. It was for that reason that we welcomed the assertion in the Joint Declaration that
952
no impediment would be put in the way of free agreement, freely arrived at without outside coercion or interference.
We urge the resumption of inter-party talks as soon as possible on the basis of the three-strand structure of 1991 to which the Minister referred. I support the remarks made by the noble Lord, Lord Cooke. We favour, as soon as possible, devolved power-sharing in Northern Ireland in the context of a wider constitutional settlement. As the noble Lord rightly observed, there is little direct accountability and virtually no power locally exercised by local authorities. Therefore, the quality of those willing to serve in local authorities remains sometimes modest because they have no effective powers. I entirely endorse what the noble Lord said about that being in part the way ahead.
Our policy is that there can be no likely purely internal settlement in Northern Ireland. The majority in Northern Ireland at present define themselves as British citizens, but in the recent European elections almost 40 per cent. of Northern Ireland voters voted for nationalist parties. As has been said earlier, Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution and Section 75 of the Government of Ireland Act are now on the negotiating table. That is a significant change from the past and offers a degree of hope.
I was not proposing to deal with questions of economic detail on this occasion but would reserve that for the second order with which we shall deal this evening. We reaffirm of course that the Unionist population in Northern Ireland has the cast-iron guarantee—which I repeat again on behalf of the Labour Party—that Northern Ireland will not be united with the Republic without the majority assent in Northern Ireland. What we need to look for—again I respectfully endorse what the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, said —is some indication as to what is in the Government's mind as to the next step. For my own part, I can readily understand and sympathise with the nature of the suspicions to which the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, referred. We need to have some indication as to what the Government are looking to. What are they thinking of in terms of a timetable? Is there any indication as to when a final response is likely to come from Sinn Fein or the Provisional IRA?
If there is any prospect of some indication of what is likely to be the Government's plan for the next six to 12 months, it would be helpful because what causes the suspicions to endure is a feeling sometimes, right or wrong —that does not matter for my present purposes —that those who live in Northern Ireland are not always kept as fully informed as they could reasonably expect. Therefore, with the regret to which I referred earlier, we accept the necessity for this renewal and hope that we shall not be meeting here year in year out on a similar such melancholy occasion.
7.12 p.m.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their concerned and committed contributions this evening. I share, too, the hope of the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Mostyn, that this is not an

953
annual programme that will last for ever and ever. We work very hard to try to move Northern Ireland into peaceful water.
I appreciate some of the anxieties which the noble Lord, Lord Cooke of Islandreagh, identified. I hear them myself from the people of Northern Ireland. I know, too, that he has made the Secretary of State aware, both through a meeting and through correspondence subsequently, of the anxieties which he highlighted tonight. I assure him that they were taken very seriously indeed.
It is a clear objective of Government policy to return greater power and authority to Northern Ireland's own elected representatives. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State has long made it clear that he holds too many of the reins of power in his hands. In making public appointments in my own areas of responsibility I take great care to try to ensure that in doing so we are giving experience to the people to whom we hope the reins can be handed.
However, if greater responsibility is to be given to local institutions, that should only be done by agreement with those who would have to work the new arrangements. In our view, therefore, this is an issue which would best be addressed in the context of the political talks where the participants are considering all the aspects relevant to a political accommodation in Northern Ireland.
The noble Lord, Lord Cooke, suggests that seeking an overall settlement is far too ambitious and that the process should move forward one step at a time. However, it is quite clear to us that because of the differing ideals and ultimate objectives of those whom the talks' participants represent, agreement on one set of relationships is only likely to be reached if the context for it is provided by agreement on the three sets of relationships as a whole. We believe this to be a political reality which cannot be wished away, and one which all of us involved in the process must recognise and work with.
Perhaps the noble Lord would be interested in this year's successes of the security forces. In my opening speech I referred to last year's successes. So far this year 233 people have been charged with serious terrorist offences—compared with 185 in the same period last year—including 54 who have been charged with murder or attempted murder, compared with 39 in the same period last year. However, we must take those figures in the context of the escalating violence to which the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, referred. I know that the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, understands that the security forces and the police offer no let-up at all.
The noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, rightly reminded us of our responsibility to future generations—that is something that we are indeed conscious of. I thank him for his support for our aims. While the noble Lord, Lord Holme, has a great depth of knowledge about the Province, his absence today did not, I believe, leave a gap in our debate.
The noble Lord, Lord Williams, asked where we are, what the state of play is at the moment and what we are looking forward to. I am delighted to say that in Corfu the two Prime Ministers were able to review the
954
progress made so far, which has been substantial, and to give a clear direction for the further work that needs to be done in a number of areas on which officials will continue to work. There are no fixed deadlines because it is important that solutions should be the correct ones. The noble Lord will not, I am sure, be surprised if I can claim no knowledge whatever of Sinn Fein's intentions. However, I would mention the joint institutions and the examples of working together. I know through my own departments that there is cross-border work on the Foyle fisheries commission which results in benefits to people on both sides of the border, as indeed did the opening this year of the Shannon canal which should bring economic tourist benefit to the people of that region.
I confirm—I cannot do so too strongly—that violence is unacceptable and has no rewards It distresses me that there may be people in Northern Ireland at the moment who think, perhaps for the first time, that it has rewards. But it has no future. The Government have an absolute commitment no work towards peace. We are not, as the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, suggested, asleep. We ceaselessly work to find a right solution which is acceptable to the majority of people in Northern Ireland.] regret that until that can be achieved I must commend this order.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Appropriation (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 1994
7.18 p.m.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield Baroness Denton of Wakefield rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th May be approved.
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I think perhaps we could describe this order as the housekeeping order of the Province.
The draft order authorises expenditure of £3,291 million for Northern Ireland departments in the current financial year. This is additional to the sum voted on account in March, and brings total estimates provision for Northern Ireland departments to £5,824 million, an increase of 4.1 per cent. on 1993–94. I know that the House continues to take a close interest in the prospects for economic development in Northern Ireland I have never returned to the House from the Province without being questioned about progress, and often I can answer with some success.
The latest economic indicators show that the local economy continues to perform well. Over the year to the last quarter of 1993, the output of Northern Ireland's manufacturing industries rose by 3.6 per cent., while employment levels rose by 1 per cent. over the year to March 1994. Seasonally adjusted unemployment has fallen in eight of the past nine months. At May 1994 the total was 98,000 or 13.1 per cent. of the workforce. That is the lowest level for almost three years. I remind the House that that figure represents a lot of people, and the Government are very conscious of it.
Encouragement is also provided by recent surveys of the local business community. These point to strengthening economic activity, improving output,

955
increasing investment intentions and improving order books, particularly for exports. Businesses do not have an easy task, but I believe that we can look forward with some confidence to continued progress in the months ahead. In the past six months I have been delighted to find that Northern Ireland companies are less hesitant and nervous of exporting than many companies in England.
I turn to the main items of expenditure covered by the order as detailed in the estimates booklet, starting with the Department of Agriculture. The net provision in the two agriculture votes amounts to some £164 million. In Vote 1, some £25 million is to fund EC and national agriculture and fishery support measures. In addition to various market support measures under the common agricultural policy, the vote includes some £10 million for grants for capital and other farm improvements, and £14 million is for the hill livestock compensatory allowance scheme.
In Vote 2, some £139 million is for regional services. This includes £59 million for agri-food development and scientific and veterinary services. Forty-four million pounds is for farm support, enhancement of the countryside, fisheries and forestry services. I am pleased to say that £5 million is for the rural development programme, an increase of £3 million over 1993–94. We regard that programme as one of importance to both fanners and rural areas.
In the Department of Economic Development's Vote 1, £130 million is required for the Industrial Development Board. Thirteen inward investment projects were successfully negotiated last year, representing a total investment of £259 million, while 2,309 jobs were promoted. That is a significant achievement in anybody's book.
In Vote 2, £34 million is for the Local Enterprise Development Unit and £14 million for the Industrial Research and Technology Unit. Elsewhere in the vote, £12.5 million is for the Northern Ireland Tourist Board. It is encouraging that in 1993 a record 1.26 million visitors came to Northern Ireland. I appreciate that that figure represents many people who visit their families and attend conferences, but in the latter case we know that if we can get people to come to Northern Ireland they will come again.
In Vote 3, £204 million is for the Training and Employment Agency. That includes £53 million for the youth training programme, £53 million for the action for community employment programme and £24 million for the job training programme. Neither Northern Ireland nor anywhere else in the country can hope to succeed without a skilled workforce.
I turn to the estimates for the Department of the Environment where £183 million in Vote 1 is for roads, transport and ports. This includes £152 million for the development, operation and maintenance of Northern Ireland's public road system. Vote 2 covers the important area of housing. Some £188 million will provide assistance mainly to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and the voluntary housing movement. When net borrowing and the Housing Executive's rents and capital receipts are taken into
956
account, the total resources available for housing will be some £570 million. This is £14 million more than in 1993–94 and will enable us to build on the progress which has been made in recent years. After a job, perhaps the most important thing to ensure quality of life is a home.
In Vote 3, gross expenditure on water and sewerage services is estimated at £200 million. Ninety-three million pounds is for capital expenditure and £107 million for operational and maintenance purposes. In Vote 4, £136 million is for environmental services, including £34 million for urban regeneration measures. These continue to be targeted at areas of social, economic and environmental need and have helped secure a welcome improvement to many areas of Northern Ireland where the need is indeed desperate.
The estimates for the Department of Education seek a total of £1,317 million, an increase of 3.6 per cent. over last year. Vote 1 includes £807 million for recurrent expenditure by education and library boards, an increase over the previous year of £40 million. This includes £760 million for schools and colleges of further education, which should maintain the pupil:teacher ratio at present levels. Also included is £47 million for libraries, youth services and administration, and £40 million for boards' capital projects. There is a provision of £133 million for voluntary schools and £11.5 million for integrated schools. There are now 21 integrated schools in operation, with 4,276 pupils in attendance. There are proposals to open three new integrated schools later this year. I have quoted many figures. I wish to assure your Lordships that they represent the importance that we attach to education in Northern Ireland. Vote 2 includes £109 million for universities, £124 million for student support, £17 million for arts and museums and £3 million for community relations.
In the Department of Health and Social Services, Vote 1 includes some £1,293 million for expenditure on hospital, community health, personal social services, health and social services trusts and family health services. I am delighted to report that that is an increase of 6.8 per cent. on last year. Vote 3 includes £116 million for the Social Security Agency and £14 million for the Child Support Agency. In Vote 4, £1,302 million is for a range of social security benefits, an increase of 4.3 per cent. on last year. In Vote 5, £458 million is to cover expenditure on the independent living funds, housing benefit, the Social Fund and payments to the National Insurance Fund.
Finally, I turn to the Department of Finance and Personnel. In Vote 3, some £4 million is for the community relations programme. Together with the expenditure by the Department of Education, total spending on the community relations programme will be £7.2 million, reflecting the importance that the Government continue to attach to community relations.
I hope that this short summary of the main components of the estimates is helpful. I assure your Lordships that the figures represent the values that we hold in Northern Ireland for the benefit of the people of the Province. I commend the order to your Lordships.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th May be approved.—(Baroness Denton of Wakefield.)
7.30 p.m.
Lord Cooke of Islandreagh: My Lords, it gave me no pleasure to speak, as I felt I had to, on the order whose proceedings we have just completed. I am very much happier to talk about the positive and encouraging matters that lie behind the appropriation order. The Minister described it as a housekeeping exercise, but I suggest that it is very much more than that. Behind that exercise there has been a great deal of planning and hard work by civil servants, Ministers and many people in industry, education and so on.
The House knows that the noble Baroness has been responsible for two departments in Northern Ireland in recent months. I am sure that your Lordships will be pleased to know that her hard work and ability have been recognised and noted with satisfaction. She has a wide range of responsibilities. The Department of Agriculture covers a varied field. I expect that the noble Baroness found that she had to learn a new language to understand the many acronyms such as ADOPs, LFAs and HLCAs. I shall not tell the House what they are, but these are all things that the Minister will have to understand. In addition, she is responsible for the Department of Health and Social Services where, I can assure the House, there is plenty of opportunity for an unwary Minister to trip up. I hope that the noble Baroness is enjoying her work.
Under many headings of expenditure matters are moving fast, not only in Northern Ireland but also elsewhere, not least in education. The recent announcement by the Minister responsible for education, Mr. Ancram, that he is undertaking a wide-ranging review has been widely welcomed. I have no doubt that much will come from it. In Northern Ireland we have enjoyed a high standard of education for a long time. I trust that that will continue. I suggest that this is an opportunity to make certain that at the higher level of education it becomes easier for school-leavers to move across into a job or, if not into a job, at least into positive training. I wonder whether in the past the educationists have taken as much notice as they should have done of the need to help students move across and adapt to the outside world.
It is the intention to develop a new university on the Springvale site in West Belfast. I wonder whether a university is the correct establishment or whether it should not be a polytechnic or technical college. A university does not always prepare students for the reality of work and equip them with the skills which are needed in working life today.
Training for work is most important. A great deal of work has been undertaken by the various departments and organisations responsible for training young people. A great deal of money is being spent on that. I believe that the Minister at the Department of Economic Development, Mr. Smith, has announced a review of training. Training needs to be co-ordinated to make sure that no gaps are left and that it is appropriate. Unfortunately, at present one quarter of those between
958
the ages of 17 and 24 are unemployed. As everyone knows, it is vital that young school-leavers get some form of employment as soon as possible so that they are not induced to engaged in unlawful activities. I know that the Minister is well aware of that, but it is my feeling that more could be done to co-ordinate training and to ensure that it is appropriate.
The hospital service is also undergoing change. Following the recent review of the hospital service here, the Secretary of State, Mrs. Bottomley, tells us that by the year 2000, 40 per cent. less bed space will be required in hospitals because of the revolutionary changes which are taking place in surgical procedures and other health care. I suggest that now is the time for an urgent all-Province strategic review of medical facilities looking forward 20 years so that plans can be made to ensure that appropriate facilities are available. I have no doubt that that review should be Province-wide, and that the territories of the present four area boards should be set aside. I feel that it is important that that is done so that money will not be spent in the wrong directions. What is happening is almost revolutionary. This is a great opportunity for an area the size of Northern Ireland to set up facilities in a way which will be most economic and will offer the best service for everyone.
In the Department of Agriculture there is uncertainty at present in respect of small farms. Your Lordships may be surprised to hear that 72 per cent. of the farms in Northern Ireland are classed as less favoured area farms and are therefore eligible for hill livestock compensatory amounts in respect of their cattle. Last year the budget for such grants was reduced substantially in the United Kingdom as a whole, and Northern Ireland suffered 16 per cent. of the total cut, amounting to just over £4 million. That has had a serious effect on the economy of very small farms. It has also had some effect on the continuity of economic farming in those areas. I ask what the Government intend to do to support the continuation of livestock farming in less favoured areas in Northern Ireland.
It appears that at present many farmers are experiencing delays in the payment of grants, and in some cases long delays. Those include the agricultural development operation plan—otherwise known as ADOPs—and the farm and conservation giant scheme. I wonder whether those delays are the result of public expenditure restrictions or due to administrative hold-ups. They are having an effect on the cash flow of farmers and, as everyone knows, cash flow is very important to farmers.
Agriculture includes fisheries and sums voted for the fishing industry. Some of those sums go to fish processing companies. There is assistance for the fishing fleet. The fishing industry as a whole in Northern Ireland is not very large but it is important. It provides considerable employment in coastal areas. Of approximately £9 million allocated to the fishing fleet in Northern Ireland under the EC Objective 1 Area Sectoral Plan only £2 million is allocated to the Northern Ireland fishing fleet. Of that, £1 million has already been taken up in decommissioning, and the remainder will probably be taken up in further

959
decommissioning grants. That will leave nothing to assist with the essential modernisation of ships and the substantial expenditure which is expected to be necessary in order to meet the new EC safety and hygiene regulations. No one is complaining about those regulations where there is a need to improve safety and hygiene, but at present the owners of small ships comprising the Northern Ireland fleet are wondering how they will be able to afford this necessary work.
In Northern Ireland we have been fortunate over a long time with our road infrastructure. We have an excellent road system, but anyone who drives round Northern Ireland regularly will see that road maintenance is steadily falling behind due to cuts in maintenance budgets. Various critical road plans have been delayed. For example, the two-lane road between Antrim and Ballymena has been further delayed and it is even more important now that the hospital has opened at Antrim. On occasions it can take some time to drive from the north of Antrim to the new hospital because of the heavy traffic on the single-lane highway.
It is important to the development of industry in the Province that the good road system is maintained. I ask what plans the Government have to ensure that maintenance standards are kept up. If maintenance is allowed to drop behind, the eventual cost of repairing the roads is much greater.
Great progress has been made on a number of matters in Northern Ireland in the past year. The Industrial Development Board is to be congratulated on its success in bringing in a number of important new industries. The work which is being done by the Industrial Research and Training Unit, for which funding is provided, is useful in assisting firms in all areas with technical assistance, advice, help with research and so on.
The electricity service is mentioned and money is voted to the regulator. Unfortunately, the tariffs for industry which rule at present mean that the cost of electricity to firms in Northern Ireland is higher than in Great Britain. It is almost certain that the difference will increase over the years rather than even staying at a similar level. There are various reasons for that which I need not go into now, but there is little real prospect of competition reducing the cost of electricity in Northern Ireland until well into the next century. There is just one possibility that could perhaps reduce the load to industry. That is in the balance of tariffs between industrial and domestic tariffs.
When the Northern Ireland Electricity Authority was privatised, the balance between the tariffs was altered in favour of the domestic tariffs, which are now on a par with those on the mainland. It is the large industries that will suffer the highest extra cost, in some cases up to 30 per cent. If the larger industries become uncompetitive, with resulting unemployment, it will not make a lot of sense that they will have gone out of business to benefit the householder. I understand that it would cost only between £10 and £20 more per household to bring the balance back to where it was before and make a considerable difference to larger companies.
960
I wish to finish by saying that the extent of public funding in Northern Ireland is widely recognised and I do not think that anyone would suggest that it should be increased. However, there can be cases where priorities should be changed and economies made. In the health service it seems that there is a chance that something could be done.
The management and administration of the hospital service are generally believed to be cumbersome, bureaucratic and over-costly. I should say, by the way, that it is widely recognised that we have an excellent health service from an operational point of view in Northern Ireland, but that does not mean that improvements cannot be made if the management and administration costs could be reduced. I understand that an internal report on administration will soon be available. I should like to ask the Minister whether the savings offered in the report fall short of those suggested in the report submitted to the Minister by Dr. Sir George Quigley and others. Will the Minister call in an outside consultant, on the lines of the Tomlinson review for London, to advise on this important matter?
7.45 p.m.
The Viscount of Falkland: My Lords, I wish to thank the noble Baroness for so clearly explaining the background to the Appropriation (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 1994 which meets the full estimates for the current financial year. That is against a general economic outlook in Northern Ireland which differs somewhat from that of the mainland of Britain, most noticeably in unemployment. To me personally and to all my colleagues on these Benches, unemployment is one of the most difficult and worrying problems which faces not only us but the rest of Europe and many other countries in the world.
In Northern Ireland, unemployment is significantly higher than here, and in certain parts it is alarmingly high. There is a 13.2 per cent. overall level of unemployment in Northern Ireland, and there are areas where it is as high as 20 per cent. That can hardly be the right climate for discouraging paramilitary recruiting, among the other effects of unemployment which involve many young people, unhappily. I understand that something over 50 per cent. of all the unemployed in Northern Ireland have been out of work for more than a year. In the first quarter of 1994, unemployment fell and has been falling ever since. However, there were still worrying job losses recently, notably in the construction industry with some 1,500 net job losses, as well as in the medical and health services and the veterinary services. There were 240 job losses in public administration. The losses may be related to the Government's radical health and personal social services Northern Ireland order which passed through both Houses of Parliament in February.
Curiously, there is a relatively small drop in jobs in banking and financial services. That may be a temporary phenomenon. Perhaps the noble Baroness could enlighten us on it. I should have thought that Northern Ireland was well placed for providing banking and other financial services with the very good communications which have now developed. Perhaps there is an

961
opportunity here which could be profitably exploited. It is of course quite obvious that the Northern Ireland economy differs in two major respects from that in mainland Britain. The most noticeable difference which has already been mentioned is the importance of agriculture. Proportionately three times as many people in the total workforce are employed on the land in Northern Ireland as on the mainland. There are the special circumstances which mean that the Government play a particular role in investment to support the economy. That the country is so largely dependent on agriculture and the investment that it receives are facts that are both relatively insensitive to economic cyclical developments, which can mean that the Province is, and certainly feels, left behind as Britain may (and we all hope will) enjoy the fruits of steady recovery.
In regard to particular points that arise in respect of the order, Vote 1, dealing with agriculture, is down on last year, from just over £14 million to something just under £12 million, having dropped from £17 million in 1992. Given the clear dependence of many parts of Northern Ireland on agricultural support and subsidy and the very substantial role that is played by agriculture in the total economy, it seems to us on these Benches that that reduction could be extremely damaging, especially to the smaller communities in the remoter parts.
Since the recent privatisation in electricity, anecdotal evidence suggests that the service has not performed as was expected and that there has been a deterioration, with power cuts and high prices. The extra £4.5 million to assist that privatisation is interesting considering that Northern Ireland Electricity became a plc in 1992. Parliament was also asked to approve £4 million last year and £3 million in 1992 for the same purpose. Perhaps the noble Baroness will be kind enough to explain that. The fall in funding for OFFER Northern Ireland is also interesting. Is it perhaps related to performance-related cuts given the relatively poor standard of service offered recently by Northern Ireland Electricity? It seems to us that greater resources rather than fewer should be given to electricity regulation.
So far as education is concerned, in Vote 3 the figures in 1992 and 1993 were £7.5 million and £8.5 million respectively. One wonders why there has been such a sharp and sudden rise. The figure includes premature retirement costs. Is a wave of early retirement anticipated?
Vote 2, for the Department of Health, has more than doubled in two years. In 1992 the equivalent figure was only just under £8 million. That has increased by about 140 per cent. in two years. Some of that increase concerns superannuation benefits for employees of the Department of Health. Is it related to the recent privatisation of health and personal social services in Northern Ireland? Perhaps the noble Baroness can throw some light on that point.
Vote 3, for the Department of Finance and Personnel, has fallen now for two years running. It seems to us that that is one of the most worrying aspects of expenditure covered by the order. The Community Relations Council does extremely worthy and useful—indeed, crucial—work in Northern Ireland which one hopes is
962
not being undervalued. Surely that must not be a component of expenditure to be dealt with alter everything else is sorted out. In our view it should certainly be a central element in the Government's strategy for the Province. The reduction is a cause of dismay to those of us on these Benches.
Finally, perhaps I may just remark on the amount of increase for the expenditure of the Northern Ireland Assembly. Does that indicate any plan for reopening in the not too distant future? Perhaps the noble Baroness would give her comment on that.
7.55 p.m.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, I also thank the Minister for two things: first, the clarity of her explanation; but, much more importantly, that I am able to say what a pleasure it was to hear the word "draft" correctly pronounced with a short "a", as she and I always do, rather than mispronounced with a long "a" as many of your Lordships do, having fallen into serious error.
Earlier this year we had a discussion on these lines. As the Minister indicated, it is very good to see. a slight fall in the May figures for unemployment. However, if one looks a little more deeply into the figures, more than half of those who are registered as unemployed are long-term unemployed and therefore have been unemployed for a year or more, which is worrying. The increase in those who are in employment is about 2,200. Unfortunately most of those jobs are female part-time and, although they have a value to some, they are not the full-time jobs that people really need if an economy is to be properly stimulated and reinvigorated.
More than one-fifth of those who are unemployed have been out of work for more than five years. That is dispiriting, sapping for the individuals and extremely expensive for public funds. The numbers in full-time employment in Northern Ireland (although the May figures were better) fell by 3,290 from December 1992 to September 1993. One wonders what hope is offered to those who are coming onto the labour market in their struggle for full-time, productive, decent, reasonably paid employment.
If one looks, for instance, at the travel-to-work areas, there are some further rather alarming figures. Eight out of 12 travel-to-work areas in Northern Ireland have unemployment figures of 18 per cent. or more. Of 566 Northern Ireland wards, no fewer than 107 have male unemployment figures of more than 30 per cent. As the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, said, more than 25 per cent. of those in the 17 to 24 age group are unemployed. We think that that is laying up a fairly dreadful harvest for the future. As the noble Lord said, and I respectfully agree, those are the people (that is the age group) whom paramilitaries are only too ready to exploit, the young disenchanted who are hopeless and dispirited.
I gave notice to the Minister informally earlier today about what troubles us about rumours of cuts taking place in training facilities for young people in Northern Ireland. I should be grateful if she could put our minds at rest on that matter, if she is able to do so.
Specifically also—I shall not traverse ground that was fully covered by the noble Lord, Lord Cooke of

963
Islandreagh —there are serious worries in Northern Ireland on all sides about the closing down of accommodation for elderly people and sometimes mentally ill people. Quite insufficient alternative arrangements are made for the mentally ill under the alleged care in the community policy and in respect of the elderly, causing deep worry and distress to very many people. There is real feeling about the possibly precarious position of the Royal Victoria Hospital. In dealing with residential care for the elderly, I would welcome a word of reassurance that there will be no threat of closure on The Banks, the residential home for the elderly in Bangor, North Down, in the constituency of Sir James Kilfedder, who frequently expresses a widespread unease about the position of that home. The average age of the residents is no less than 85. It seems quite monstrous that people of that age in those circumstances should be subject to worry and anxiety in the twilight of their lives.
I also indicated to the Minister the question raised by the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland; namely, the purpose of the £220,000 grant for the Northern Ireland Assembly. I personally welcome the component of Vote 3 (on page 7 of the draft order) in respect of cultural traditions, which we on this side entirely support.
Finally—I am afraid that it is now becoming for me a King Charles head but I intend to continue until the matter is resolved favourably, as I am sure it will be —what is the present position of the Government's thinking, if any, about the criminal injuries compensation scheme in Northern Ireland? As is well known, because of the superior legislative knowledge in your Lordships' House, the Government's proposal to do away with the proper scheme and introduce a mean, miserable tariff scheme was defeated in this House.
I should like to know what effect that entirely proper defeat is having on the Government's thinking on Northern Ireland. I know that the Minister always deals courteously with these matters and, subject to the constraints of decisions made by others, perhaps a shade deviously. I say that, as she knows, in all friendliness. But there is a serious point here. We have unanimously condemned the recent wicked killings of the people watching television in a public house. I put my mind only on the survivors. The fact is that if the Government's parsimonious scheme is introduced in Northern Ireland, the future care of those who are grievously wounded and possibly suffering permanent injury will not be compensated, nor will there be compensation for their lost future working years. So it is very important for many Members of this House, not only on these Benches but on the Benches which noble Lords to my right occupy.
We feel strongly that the uncertainty is becoming extremely demoralising. I constantly receive requests from a large number of different sections of the communities in Northern Ireland to know when at last the Government will be able to make up their mind. One would have thought that that was not a difficult activity.
8 p.m.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, let me first assure noble Lords that I did not mean to denigrate the order by describing it as a housekeeping order. We have to manage our resources to achieve our policies and aims. I hope that tonight's debate has proved that we do so. I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, for his kind remarks. I do indeed love my job in Northern Ireland and I suspect that perhaps it shows.
The noble Lord, Lord Cooke, said that we must give our young people hope and skills. That has been endorsed by other noble Lords. Perhaps it will reassure your Lordships when I say that there is no reduction in the budget for training. The Training and Employment Agency, which is responsible for industrial training in Northern Ireland, has had its budget for 1994–95 increased by almost £10 million to £203 million. That includes an increase of over £3½ million for the Youth Training Scheme, making a total of almost £52 million.
The Training and Employment Agency has recently completed a consultation exercise, following pilot training programmes in Ballymena and Newry, for a new training scheme called Jobskills. Decisions about full implementation will be taken after the results of the consultation exercise have been fully considered. The new scheme, if introduced throughout Northern Ireland, would have all the resources allocated to YTP, JTP and the skills training scheme—some £75.3 million in 1994–95. I hope that that scotches the rumour about a reduction or a withdrawal, which has given some concern.
In reply to the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, trying to ensure that the health service runs efficiently is a more complex task than I have found in any company that I have run in the past. As he rightly says, much of the change is driven by medicine itself. But he also referred to the management and administration of the hospital service in Northern Ireland. I am very conscious of the importance of reducing the management costs of the service to the minimum necessary to ensure that the highest quality and most cost-effective services are provided to patients.
I recently received the report mentioned by the noble Lord which was commissioned by my predecessor on the organisation of purchasing functions in Northern Ireland. I shall announce my decisions on that matter in the very near future. The report was based on analysis and research undertaken by outside consultants and outside members sat on the review body.
I can also assure the noble Lord that I listen very carefully to anything that Sir George Quigley says to me. We are very fortunate to have him as a trust chairman. In this instance, he had no opportunity to quantify the costs of the scheme that he put before me. But perhaps it would help the noble Lord to know that the cost of senior managers across the health service is less than 1 per cent. of total costs, while 56 per cent. of administrative and clerical staff are engaged in patient-related duties—staff such as ward clerks and medical records clerks.
If we are to manage efficiently, we have to measure. I can assure the noble Lord that when I look at the

965
Northern Ireland health service, I see it not only as individual trees but as the forest that represents the whole of the Province. I aim to ensure that if possible we have a health service which we would all wish to experience if it were our own families who were using it.
The noble Lord referred to the problems of hill farmers. I recognise the need to look very carefully at the difficult times that they are having. The noble Lord's concern was perhaps based on reductions in the hill livestock compensatory allowances which were made last year. But the reductions were far outweighed by the large increase in direct livestock premiums. In addition, many of the small farms referred to benefit uniquely in the United Kingdom from the special rate for suckler cow premium—some £20 per cow more than in Great Britain.
Our present information suggests further substantial increases in income for those people in 1993–94, in particular, income increases for the various smallest farms. Prices have been buoyant and farmers, like others in the rest of the economy, benefit from the Government's economic policies which have led to lower interest rates and low inflation.
I believe that the noble Lord correctly drew my attention to the delays by the Department of Agriculture in paying grants, particularly those relating to the agricultural development operation programme and the farm and conservation grant scheme. I recognise that the delays have caused problems for farmers. Cash flow is important for all businesses. We are doing our best to minimise the problem. Our target is to have all properly completed and substantiated claims for grants paid within 10 weeks of receipt. That is a figure that I should like to improve. We have not been achieving the present target in recent months. The recent relocation of staff involved in processing payments from Belfast to Londonderry has resulted in a backlog of work and a delay in the issue of payments.
That is a one-off situation. I can assure the noble Lord that the staff is attempting to reduce the backlog as quickly as possible. However, an important part in this matter can be played by the farmers. If all claims are submitted properly completed and supported by the necessary documentation, they can be processed more quickly. "Right first time" benefits all of us.
The noble Lord was concerned about assistance for modernisation and updating of the fishing fleet. There is a 4 million ecu budget set aside to provide aid towards the construction and modernisation of fishing vessels, which is intended to address the aging profile of the Northern Ireland fleet. I shall be making an announcement on arrangements as soon as final decisions have been taken in Europe. The separate cost of decommissioning Northern Ireland vessels will not come out of that 4 million ecu figure. Northern Ireland participated fully in the 1993–94 UK decommissioning scheme. I understand the difficult life that fishermen have and I am pleased to say that we were recently able to announce the continuation of decommissioning support and also that I have been able to clear support for two much needed ice-making plants.
966
The noble Lord was concerned about a good road system. I can assure him that the Government consider that to be a prime need for the Province. Despite many competing pressures, substantial sums have been spent on roads in recent years. The total spending this year will be £157 million, with over £65 million being allocated to maintenance. That is in addition to the £180 million which was spent on the maintenance programme over the past three years. At a time when all public expenditure programmes are facing pressures, those figures illustrate the importance which the Government continue to give to roads.
Of course, we have not been able to proceed as quickly as we would have liked with every scheme, including the Antrim-Ballymena road. It is being completed in stages. Stage one has been completed and the second stage is programmed for 1996–97. The remaining stages were always seen as long-term proposals and are included in our long-term plans. I accept that the delay will cause the noble Lord some disappointment but I hope he will recognise that we face difficult choices. I am pleased to reassure him that, if he is worried about the ambulance service to the new Antrim hospital, those services have been retained at both Ballymena and Lame. Information published yesterday showed how well our ambulance services do in meeting their charter standards, for which they deserve much praise.
The noble Lord raised the question of whether the proposed establishment of a new campus on the Springvale site should be a university or a polytechnic. It is an argument which has been debated for many hours in many places. It may be that a university degree will better help our young people to obtain employment. But I shall pass on his remarks to my honourable friend the Minister for Education.
The noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, again emphasised his anxiety about the unemployment figures in the Province. It is an anxiety that the Government share. It was interesting that the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, was telling me that my health service was over-managed and the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, was asking about the jobs lost from the health service. As a Minister it is difficult to please everyone all the time. We believe that we will deliver a good community care programme in Northern Ireland. There must be a transfer from the acute hospitals to the community and a period of adjustment. I believe that we will continue to ensure that the dedicated and committed people who work in our health service are well looked after and that their efforts are appreciated.
The financial service redundancies mentioned by the noble Viscount are not unique to Northern Ireland but simply a reflection of the productivity increases which banks and building societies are looking for. Northern Ireland weathered the recession well and I hope that it will benefit from the recovery in relation to the rest of the United Kingdom.
The noble Viscount mentioned the increase in costs in education. I can assure him that my honourable friend is a doughty champion when fighting for funds for education and none of us can argue with him about the importance of that. On agriculture the noble Viscount

967
questions reductions in figures. It is part of the agricultural policy that, if it is at all possible for farmers to be reliant on the customer who is beating a path to their door rather than on a subsidy from Europe which can be withdrawn at the stroke of a pen, I am sure that they will sleep happier in their beds.
I cannot say too firmly that there is no privatisation in the health service. The formation of the trusts was in order to allow responsibility to be carried at local level and I find it working extremely well. They are properly funded and reduction in costs is not a reason for their formation. As a priority in our programme we target social needs, and community relations fit into that area. It is a prime plank of our policy and many other items in our budget cover it.
Both noble Lords had obviously combed the budget carefully to identify the amount required for residual functions of the Northern Ireland Assembly. The net figure for this year is £347,000 and it includes the maintenance of the Assembly Library, which also acts as a reference library for all Northern Ireland departments, the examination of statutory rules and the running of dining-rooms for official and ministerial functions. We try to ensure that as many of Northern Ireland's people as possible enjoy functions in those splendid rooms. The Assembly is also responsible for the pension fund for members of the last Assembly. These costs have been incurred annually since the Assembly was dissolved in 1986 and I can assure noble Lords that they are not connected with possible political developments in Northern Ireland, though I note that that item will probably be scrutinised annually and carefully.
The noble Viscount raised many questions on the subject of the Estimates and I shall write to him if I have missed any. But I should like to take up the question raised by both the noble Lord, Lord Cooke, and the noble Viscount in relation to the cost of electricity. It is important that our industry remains competitive. It is more expensive to produce and distribute electricity in Northern Ireland than it is in Great Britain because power stations are smaller, the reserve margin is higher and customers on average are more dispersed.
The problem of higher electricity prices has been addressed through the development of the planned electricity and gas pipeline linkages with Scotland, competition in the supply of electricity and investigation into the potential for combined heat and power in Northern Ireland. As part of this investigation the Director General of Electricity has commissioned a study by the Department of Economic Development. It is a problem of which we are aware and we are working hard on it. I can reassure the noble Viscount that the cost of electricity privatisation will be met totally from the sale of the shares. That includes the figure that the noble Viscount mentioned.
The noble Lord, Lord Williams, rightly returned to one of our major problems; that is, unemployment and the difficulties of the long-term unemployed, the relationship between full and part-time work and male and female employment. They are all points that we regard as a prime requirement for efforts. There is a
968
direct relationship between this and terrorism. If violence could cease it would be so much easier to attract investment to the Province.
The noble Lord also raised the question of residential home closures, in particular The Banks. The matter of The Banks home is at the moment one for the North Down and Ards Health and Social Services Trust. Should a decision be made to close The Banks, it would come to me to be considered and endorsed. I can assure the noble Lord that I would not propose to endorse any decision on residential homes for old people without visiting and meeting the people. It is a programme that I have already started. I too am conscious of the stress it places on elderly residents and the fact that they probably go to bed at night worrying about the future of the home. I can assure him too that we shall make these decisions as quickly as possible. We recognise that for many of these people the family they now have are the friends with whom they reside in the homes.
The noble Lord questioned the future of the Royal Victoria Hospital. One of the main decisions of the Eastern Region Health Strategy Review was that the Royal and the City hospitals should not be merged. We have two flagships which can hold their heads up high throughout the United Kingdom and possibly through-out the world. We are at the moment rationalising, with my former chief medical officer as chairman of the steering group, to ensure that there is no duplication and no gaps and that we maximise on the skills available there.
I turn finally to the question which the noble Lord, Lord Williams, says he raises on every possible occasion. I am not being critical in saying that but I hope that he will perhaps consider again the suggestion that I might be being devious. I am telling him the situation as it is and continues to be. My right honourable and learned friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is considering what connotations there might be for Northern Ireland from the Home Secretary's new tariff-based compensation scheme. If my right honourable and learned friend decides to make changes to the compensation scheme in Northern Ireland, there will be a full public consultation exercise with all parties. I hear the noble Lord's appeal for speed and I will pass on his concerns.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, I was not suggesting—and I hope it was quite understood—that the Minister is devious. I was complaining about the message, not the messenger. Sometimes the message seems a shade on the devious side to those people who want to know what their future will be if they are injured.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, but the message is the facts as they are. I shall pass on his concern on the speed with which decisions are made. But I doubt whether he needs to press that point. Those of us who live in the community are aware of the concerns and the needs of the community. Perhaps the noble Lord might take some comfort from the fact that my right honourable and learned friend is indeed a most distinguished lawyer.

969
I shall read Hansard carefully and if I have missed any points I shall write to the noble Lord. Meanwhile, I thank noble Lords for their concern for the Province and for the people there. I commend the order to the House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Psychogeriatric Care: NHS Provision
8.23 p.m.
Lord Stallard Lord Stallard rose to ask Her Majesty's Government, in the light of the report by the Alzheimer's Disease Society, what is their policy on the provision of National Health Service psychogeriatric continuing care beds.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I regret very much the circumstances that have prevented my noble friend Lord Ennals from being able to ask this Question himself. We all wish him a speedy recovery and we hope that he will be back with us as soon as possible.
My own interest in this sad and tragic problem goes back many years to when I was privileged to serve as a constituency Member in another place. I have tried to maintain that interest since coming to your Lordships' House. Through all those years I have watched the Alzheimer's Disease Society grow. I have the greatest respect and admiration for how it has developed into a competent and caring unit providing us and many others with reports and information on all the aspects of this tragic disease as well as helping and dealing with carers and sufferers in all parts of the country. We owe the society our gratitude and support for the difficult tasks it has taken on.
This Question tonight gives me an opportunity to acquaint your Lordships with the findings and concerns outlined in the society's report National Health Service Psychogeriatric Continuing Care Beds, published at the end of last year. The report was also one of the subjects discussed by the House of Lords all-party group on ageing, when the executive director of the society, Harry Cayton, addressed our group a couple of months ago.
I shall start with the size of the problem. There are approximately 600,000 people with dementia in the United Kingdom. About 70 per cent. have Alzheimer's Disease. The term "dementia" is used to describe a group of illnesses which are the cause of progressive decline in the ability to remember, to learn, to think and to reason. Those people with severe dementia or who are in the later stages of Alzheimer's disease need continuing care where skilled nursing and regular medical supervision is available. This need will grow. We have discussed at length in a number of debates the demographic changes that will be responsible for that growth and for all kinds of problems. By the year 2021 there will be almost 900,000 people with dementia living alone in the community. That is a fairly sizeable problem that we should be tackling as soon as possible.
The Alzheimer's Disease Society believes that to meet this need there should be sufficient National Health Service continuing care available in every district. National Health Service continuing care beds are invaluable to carers in providing continuity, flexibility and reliability in terms of environment,
970
staffing and high quality care for their relation or friend with dementia who can no longer be cared for in the community. In supplying continuing care which is free of charge, the health service has traditionally been important also in providing a real choice for those carers who cannot afford long-term care in a residential or nursing home run by the local authority or the independent sector. However, despite local authorities having a duty to provide continuing care for the chronically sick and terminally ill, the society's evidence is that the health service is withdrawing from this role at an alarming rate.
The report surveyed the level and type of continuing care provision supplied by 64 district health authorities. It had three main findings: first, 56 per cent. of those: DHAs were providing fewer beds than in 1990, 31 per cent. were providing more beds and 13 per cent. the same number of beds; secondly, there was a wide variation between different district health authorities as to the level and type of continuing care provision; thirdly, at least three authorities—5 per cent.—had no psychogeriatric continuing care beds available for the care of elderly people with dementia. Further evidence suggests that there has been a 40 per cent. fall in the number of continuing care beds over the past five years.
One significant development arose from the health ombudsman's report on the Leeds health authority. In February 1994 the health service commissioner published a special report on the failure by Leeds health authority to provide long-term National Health Service care for a brain-damaged patient. In perhaps the most revealing comment of the investigation, the. Leeds health authority said that in not providing any long-stay medical beds in hospital or having contractual arrangements for such beds in private nursing homes,
"they were no different in that respect from most other health
authorities".
That is a damning indictment of the present situation.
While reductions in the numbers of National Health Service continuing care beds are in themselves worrying and important, the society feels that a number of other key issues are highlighted by the health service's abdication of its responsibilities in this area. There are serious territorial inequities as to whether people with dementia who have high needs and dependencies have access to suitable and sufficient psychogeriatric continuing care beds in their area.
There is a lack of accountability in this area of health service planning. More often than not, users, carers and voluntary organisations are not consulted adequately on health authority plans for closures or reductions in long-term care. Meanwhile the Government refuse to take effective action against those DHAs which are not shouldering their responsibilities in this area. If continuing care beds continue to disappear against the wishes of these people; if health authorities are accountable neither to the Department of Health nor to the community they serve, who is to ensure that they meet their responsibilities?
In those areas where people with dementia are denied access to National Health Service continuing care, carers are having to find and fund the care themselves. Most concern has been expressed by carers about the

971
stringent means test for long-term care in a residential or nursing home. While the Alzheimer's Disease Society is not opposed to some people making a certain contribution to the costs of caring, a policy which places the financial burden increasingly on older people and which increases the likelihood of making carers casualties of caring, makes no sense on either social or economic grounds.
The report notes that it is the harshness and the impact of the means test for such care which has caused the greatest alarm among carers of people with dementia. One of the most bitterly contested aspects of the means test rules is that, where a resident of a residential or nursing home has savings of between £3,000 and £8,000, local authorities have the power to sequestrate the whole of a person's occupational pension to pay for the costs of care.
There is a great deal of concern about the obvious impact that this is having on elderly couples of modest means, but particularly on women carers who have been reliant on their husband's occupational pension for a significant proportion of their income. Although they are entitled to income support in such situations, it is clear from those cases which have come to light that the wife's income is substantially reduced and that they face serious financial difficulties as a result. As one carer puts it:
"As I have no occupational pension myself I have had to apply for income support which has been granted, but I am left in much poorer circumstances and I have to meet heating bills, electricity, telephone and any repairs to the house".
Most of the women who have contacted the Alzheimer's Disease Society about the effect of the occupational pension rule have had to rely on their married woman's pension for income after their husband has entered long-term residential or nursing home care. These women have pointed out that they are therefore worse off than if they had been widowed or had divorced their husband. In both cases their pension entitlement would be greater. Therefore, these women would appear to be victims of both the system by which the state pension is administered and the rules by which their husbands have been means tested. Neither recognises this particular financial need. Of course, there are some men in similar circumstances, but by and large it is women who have had to bear the brunt of this kind of problem.
This feeling of injustice is compounded by one of humiliation that after many many years of working and caring and of priding themselves in their financial self-reliance and good housekeeping, they now have to claim benefits to make ends meet. That can be very hard on a large number of people in those circumstances. It is estimated that there may be as many as one in 10 women placed in that invidious position. It is well documented that among the over-65 age group women are even less likely than men to have built up significant pension entitlements of their own. The rules relating to the treatment of occupational pensions therefore discriminate indirectly against women over 65.
In response to the growing concern expressed by the carers and by the society about this particular aspect of the regulations, the Government have issued guidance to local authorities asking them to "bear in mind" that,
972
where the income of the spouse at home is significantly reduced by the sequestration of the occupational pension, they can use their discretion to award an increased personal expenses allowance so that a proportion can be used to support the spouse. This personal expenses allowance is presently set at £13.10p per week.
Despite the guidance decisions, other decisions have been taken which worsen rather than ease the financial situation of the carer. Indeed, increasing the personal expenses allowance will have financial implications for the local authority. That means that it is not in the interests of the social services departments to operate any guidance rule for the benefit of carers—in other words, they will do nothing about it despite the Government's attempts to issue guidance.
In sum, the report feels that the present system of financial hardship arising from the treatment of a resident's occupational pension is flawed. Until carers have a preserved right to a proportion of the occupational pension, social services will continue to apply the rules in their own favour. While recognising that it will not ensure financial security for all carers in this position, nor the need for some to claim income support, the society favours reform of the regulations which would give women a preserved right to 50 per cent. of their husband's occupational pension when he enters long-term care in a residential or nursing home.
In response to the concerns expressed in the report about the availability of National Health Service continuing care, the Government have reaffirmed that district health authorities have a responsibility to provide such care. The noble Baroness who is replying to this Question this evening, herself said last February:
"Our policy is quite clear: if people need professional healthcare —and that is a judgment made by a clinician—they should get that care within the National Health Service."—[Official Report, 22/2/94; col. 513.]
Similarly in a letter of 25th May 1994, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, John Bowis, stated:
"As I have stressed in our correspondence on this issue the NHS has a responsibility to provide long-term health care for those who need it for reasons of ill-health".
That is clear enough. Despite those assurances, it is the duty of the district health authorities to provide long-term care. The experiences of carers of people with dementia suggest that such rhetoric does not match the reality of the difficulties occurring in this area of health care. They are just so many words which are not being implemented at grass roots.
The discrepancy between the evidence collected by the society and the reported results of the Government's monitoring, merely highlight the need for further investigation and for a more open public debate on the issue.
In view of the growing numbers of people with dementia this need will increase. In this context, National Health Service continuing care beds should be available in every district for those people who need them. The society is being constructive as well as critical. A useful model which it endorses was proposed by the Royal College of Psychiatrists in 1989, when the RCP recommended that DHAs should supply one

973
continuing care bed for every 1,000 people over the age of 65 in their catchment area. It is a matter of concern that the society's report should reveal that 70 per cent. of DHAs are not aspiring to this sort of provision. I hope the noble Baroness will be able to enlighten us on that point.
The society is conscious of the need for the DHAs to decide such provision on the basis of local needs and resources. Of course we accept that. However, it is felt that the Government should not use this as an excuse for inaction where authorities are clearly not performing their duties. The report therefore urges the Government to issue stronger guidelines to district health authorities reminding them of their duty to provide continuing care; to clarify where accountability for continuing care for people with dementia lies; to issue further guidance to district health authorities on consultation procedures involving users, carers and local voluntary organisations in the future planning of health services; and to set out and consult with interested parties their future policy and objectives on psychogeriatric continuing care for people with dementia.
Before I conclude, perhaps I may give an example which encapsulates most of the issues. It is an illustration of the typical problems that are encountered by many carers. I am referring to the case of a lady who has; cared for seven years for her husband, who has Alzheimer's disease. He is 72 and she is 65. While caring for her husband at home, that lady has received limited help from the National Health Service in the form of day care and occasional respite care. She has had to continue caring for him at home because of the lack of NHS continuing care in the North Yorkshire area. In April her situation reached crisis point. Her husband was admitted to hospital in an emergency because of her mental and physical state and his own deterioration. Her GP agreed that she could no longer cope.
That month that lady wrote to the Alzheimer's Disease Society in desperation saying that she was waiting for an assessment to see whether her husband could be admitted into long-term care. She was anxious that that should be funded by the NHS since she could not afford the cost of a place in a residential or nursing home. She said:
"If I had to place my husband in private care I would be in the undignified position of receiving DSS support. I would be left with a demeaning £60 per week to live on after all these years of caring".
That lady wrote to the society again in May. Things had got so bad that she had tried to commit suicide. Her letter was written a few days after her discharge from hospital. She wrote:
"After being driven to breaking-point and still no firm promise of an NHS bed for my husband, whom they had taken into care because of my mental state I just couldn't take any more".
The society wrote to the area authority and to North East Yorkshire Healthcare, the trust, on her behalf asking them to intervene and to find her husband suitable care. In its reply the trust said:
"If you would like to assist [this lady] and many other carers like her … who at present do not have the hope of long-term care for their relative, I would ask you to make the points you raise in your letter to the North Yorkshire Health Authority. You may
974
also like to ask them to tell you how the level of provision for elderly mentally ill people in the area compares with other nearby areas".
That lady and her husband are still waiting for an NHS bed. That case is not unusual. It is a sad problem and there are far too many such cases throughout the country.
Finally, I should like to remind the House of what the Secretary of State, the right honourable Mrs. Virginia Bottomley, said in response to media reports of age discrimination in the treatment of people by the health service. She said:
"The founding principle of the National Health Service shines like a beacon in our society. The NHS provides services for everybody, on the basis of their clinical need and regardless of their ability to pay. There are no exceptions to that rule, whatever the age of the patient… It is the duty of all health authorities to ensure that people of all ages have access to acute care, and that specialist care is available for those who suffer with chronic: conditions due to the ageing process".
I can readily agree with all those sentiments. What I and the Alzheimer's Disease Society would like would be for the Government to begin to implement those sentiments in their policies and to tell us what their plans are for the immediate future.
8.43 p.m.
Lord Addington: My Lords, when I started reading up on this subject in preparation for this debate, the main thing that struck me was how frightening Alzheimer's must be not only for the carer, but also for the person who starts to suffer from that disease. If my reading is correct, the person concerned goes through a process of losing layers of memory and of ability. In the first stages, the sufferer will be aware of that. He or she is often aware of starting to deteriorate mentally but they know that they cannot do anything to help their condition. After that incredibly worrying and disturbing process, the sufferer then starts to lose all functions, layer by layer. Sufferers cannot organise themselves and they lose their social skills. They do not know, for instance, whether they are correctly dressed for going outside their house.
While that process is going on, the carer, on whom the noble Lord, Lord Stallard, concentrated, will suffer on two levels. They will be caused distress and they will suffer the stress of watching the sufferer—usually their partner —deteriorate. That leads to incredible emotional problems. The partner can do very little to help other than deal with day-to-day tasks. Those tasks will progressively become more difficult over a long time frame. We are dealing with couples of generally similar age. As the sufferer becomes less capable of coping with the problem, the problems for the carer will increase in severity. I can envisage few more nightmarish scenarios than that. We are talking about a situation that will get worse as one gets more feeble.
There will always be variations, but surely the Government should make a point of providing sufficient cover and help for the simple reason that we cannot reasonably or realistically expect anybody 1o cope in the latter stages. We must remember the emotional stress that is involved when dealing with a loved one who is deteriorating in such a way, and the physical difficulties of so doing.

975
The idea of care in the community and of trying to keep people in their own homes is laudable in most situations, but surely we are talking about terminally ill people. People do not get better from Alzheimer's disease. When the Minister answers the debate, I hope that she will be able to give us some guidance about how the Government can help those people who, as the noble Lord, Lord Stallard, said, find their incomes being cut as their partner is placed in the type of care that they have to have. In most cases, the sufferer does not go into care because the carer wants to put them there but simply because they have to have it. Surely some arrangement can be made—it need not necessarily involve very much more money—so that the carer can get more support if he or she is dependent on the spouse's pension. Surely something can be done along those lines.
Can the Government give some form of guarantee about the provision of effective respite care during that period? Someone who is caring for a sufferer for, say, five days a week may be able to cope for very much longer than someone who is caring for a sufferer for seven days a week. That may well lead to a far better balanced, more rational and more efficient approach to caring than if the carer was cooped up for long periods. It is not unusual for the carers of those with Alzheimer's disease to have to cope in that way. Any carer who is constantly cooped up with a problem will react against it. That might lead to a lack of sufficient care or even to abuse of the sufferer. Such problems tend to be enhanced if the carer feels trapped. That is a perfectly natural reaction.
I do not think that I can add very much more to the debate. As always, the noble Lord, Lord Stallard, was very thorough in giving us the hard facts of the matter. I hope that the Government can give us some idea of their thoughts about providing support to carers in general, as well as, more particularly, to the carers of those with Alzheimer's disease.
8.48 p.m.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Stallard for tabling this Unstarred Question and particularly for standing in for our noble friend Lord Ennals. I join my noble friend in hoping that we shall see our noble friend back with us soon. It is also important that I thank the Alzheimer's Disease Society for its important report which has stimulated today's debate.
As well as highlighting the acute anxieties of one patient group, the report has drawn attention to some serious general problems about the present provision of continuing care. The noble Lord, Lord Addington, referred to those general problems. I shall speak briefly about a few of those problems, and shall try to phrase my comments in the form of supplementary questions so that the Minister may be able to address some of them in her reply to my noble friend.
First, it is probably worth repeating the basic facts that were given by my noble friend in his extremely comprehensive introduction. Two points stand out. The first is that nearly 70 per cent. of health authorities now fail to provide the minimum number of psychogeriatric
976
beds recommended by the Royal College of Physicians, and more than a half of health authorities provide in 1994 fewer beds than they did four years ago in 1990.
As my noble friend pointed out, we all know the demographic position in this country and how demand is clearly rising. So it is particularly surprising that at this time we are seeing less special provision of beds than we did four years ago. It seems clear that there must be a connection here with the introduction of the internal market and the reorganisation of community care. After all, as we all know, geriatrics, and psychogeriatrics in particular, have always been Cinderella services in the health service. Few people have wanted to work in them, and there have been relatively few specialist physicians. How much more so now, in 1994, when we see hospital trusts having to compete to achieve better star ratings for rapid patient throughput, and to try to balance their budgets by concentrating upon care which is economically efficient. I wonder to what extent the Minister thinks that the introduction of the health market has exacerbated the care problem in this area which we all know has always been financially difficult for local health authorities, but which now seems to be becoming almost scandalous.
The Alzheimer's Disease Society Report and my noble friend have drawn attention to the very patchy provision of continuing care, and the very different ways in which duties are interpreted at a local level. They have both called for more precise guidance from the Department of Health about minimum standards, and more direction from the centre. But of course that direction from the centre I see as one of the victims of the reorganisation. Even responsibility for care from the centre is, as my noble friend said, often denied, because chief executives and trust chairmen are given their heads. In many ways, that autonomy is welcome; but with issues like Alzheimer's Disease, which are unpopular and create special problems for local health authorities and local trusts, clear leadership is needed at a national level. After all, dementia, as we have heard, is a complex, degenerative condition which involves many expensive types of support. It is vital if we are to retain the concepts of the National Health Service that we must have national standards of care. The Government must ensure that they are adhered to.
I know that the health Minister, Mr. John Bowis, has recently written to the Alzheimer's Disease Society rejecting the need for further guidelines; but I hope that the noble Baroness, the Minister, will urge her colleague to think again and, perhaps in her reply will explain why the Government think that a departmental spur towards what could be uniformly good practice is unnecessary. One of the areas where national guidelines could be most helpful would be in demarcating the responsibilities of health and social services for the continuing care of dementia. We may need to go even further back than that, and try to secure a generally agreed definition of Alzheimer's disease as a progressive neurological disease, rather than, as it sometimes seems to be viewed, a social problem.
At the moment, as the society's report points out, the degenerative nature of the disease for which different types of care are appropriate at different stages, makes

977
it difficult for local authorities to pigeonhole sufferers as the responsibility of either health or social services. That is true of other degenerative conditions such as HIV infection and AIDS, Parkinson's Disease and multiple sclerosis. The trend in all those cases is for social services to assume more of the burden of care and more of the responsibility. That has been particularly true since the introduction of the National Health Service and community care Act just over a year ago.
During a debate on where we stood on community care that we had in your Lordships' House in the middle of March, we discussed how the arrangements for the special transitional grant to local authorities and the Government's insistence that 85 per cent. of that grant is spent in the private sector have, at least in the view of speakers from these Benches, impeded the development of community care for many client groups. As my noble friend described vividly, it has been particularly hard for people with dementia and their carers.
Alzheimer's disease sufferers are assessed increasingly under the community care regulations. As my noble friend Lord Stallard recalled, that means stringent means testing. Carers themselves are not offered a separate assessment of their needs. That has led to the chilling threats to occupational pensions and family homes that my noble friend mentioned. If one were to be entirely cynical, it would be easy to deduce an almost Machiavellian process here. People with dementia are assessed for social services continuing care rather than being treated as NHS patients. Social services are compelled to spend 85 per cent. of their STG on private sector provision which usually means, because that is where the private sector concentrates, spending it on residential homes.
Alzheimer's disease patients are discharged from health service beds to private residential homes with obvious financial savings to the NHS but at the same time sometimes crippling financial costs to partners and carers. I do not think that the process is cynically planned, merely because I think what we are seeing in the present situation is probably a rather unfortunate muddle. That muddle would be greatly reduced if in her reply the Minister could give us a clear definition of the circumstances and conditions in which anyone, anywhere, is entitled to an NHS continuing care bed. A clear picture of the extent and limit of the duty of continuing care in today's health service market would provide a touchstone against which to judge an individual's needs and the type of service he or she should expect, and from what kind of agency.
At the moment it seems that genuine confusion about that crucial definition of where duties lie is causing a dislocation of local services and great distress to people suffering from Alzheimer's disease which, as the noble Lord, Lord Addington, described, is one of the most frightening conditions that anyone can face. These people are being passed from one agency to another and, frankly, when one looks at the examples given by the Alzheimer's Disease Society and other people involved in this area, many local authorities seem only to be competing with one another not to provide the right sort of care. That is a long way from ensuring a
978
comprehensive service from different providers, which was recently described as the ideal by Mr. Bowis when he wrote to the Alzheimer's Disease Society.
The Alzheimer's Disease Society has asked members of the health Select Committee in another place urgently to review the system of continuing care. I hope that that inquiry will happen so that the questions noble Lords have raised briefly this evening can be investigated thoroughly and discussed. In the meantime, it would be valuable if the Minister could respond to some of our specific questions, because we have a collective duty to ensure that particularly vulnerable members of our society are not falling through what seems to be an alarming gap in the provision of care, and that their carers are not being oppressed by additional unfair financial burdens.
8.58 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Cumberlege): My Lords, I should like first to pay tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, who has done much to improve the quality of life for those who suffer from mental illness, particularly through his work at MIND. I am very sorry that he is not here tonight, and, like the noble Baroness, I wish him a speedy recovery. I should like also to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Stallard, on picking up the baton at such short notice, but with his long commitment and knowledge of the issue he has appeared to do it with great ease. I should like also to acknowledge the work of the Alzheimer's Disease Society, whose tireless efforts in this very difficult and, some would say, somewhat unpopular area are so impressive. It has proved to be a strong and effective advocate for sufferers and their carers and has made a forceful impact, concentrating the nation's attention on Alzheimer's Disease. The department recognises the work that it does by giving it both a core and a project grant.
In 1991 there were not merely 9.5 million people of retirement age, but, of those, 750,000 were aged over 85. That figure will increase to over 1 million by 2000 —the largest number of octogenarians this country has ever had. Many of those people, although admittedly not in the prime of life, contribute much to society. They participate in voluntary organisations and are as a group not only receivers of care but also care givers. I remember hearing an 85 year-old woman who, after spending years supporting Age Concern, told the director that, sadly, she had had enough and that she would be giving up. "I want to spend my free time working for the peace movement", she said.
Despite the numbers of older people who are fit and well, the increasing population represents a significant challenge and will have a real impact on the kind of services which we develop in the years to come. One of the commonest diseases occurring in older people is dementia. It is estimated that 20 per cent. of people aged over 80 suffer from it and the main cause is Alzheimer's disease.
It is the Government's policy that people with a mental illness, including those with dementia, should be treated and cared for as close to their homes as possible.

979
In order to provide a seamless service, those involved —the statutory, voluntary, private and independent sectors—should work as closely as possible not only with each other but with informal carers, friends, families and neighbours.
As one becomes older the relationships within a family change. I have heard daughters say how difficult it is to look after a deteriorating parent when that parent has formerly been in a position of authority, a source of wise counsel, advice, love and affection. Dementia can tragically change all that, as was graphically described by the noble Lord, Lord Addington. It alters personalities and regardless of previous loving relationships a sufferer can become like a stranger. As one of the Alzheimer's Disease Society's striking posters states, "A wife can feel like a widow".
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Addington, that the misery, the suffering and the tragic consequences for those with Alzheimer's disease cannot be underestimated. Nor do I wish to diminish the effect that a sufferer has on the rest of the family and indeed the community. But there is a balance, and some relations derive great satisfaction from caring for someone, however dependent, whom they love. Those people deserve not only praise but need a huge amount of support. Without it, their burdens become intolerable and they then feel diminished with a sense of failure. That is why it is essential that statutory services should respond promptly, flexibly and sensitively to meet their needs, giving them the necessary support.
In the past, older people with chronic mental health problems were often looked after in huge institutions. I visited many of those wards and I do have to say that, however ill or demented the patients, they were not appropriate places for people to live out the last years of their lives. Often they were frightening, impersonal and isolated places which posed great problems for friends and relations who wished to visit. Since then there has been a consistent effort to change the emphasis and to provide more places and more services in the community, using a wide range of facilities in the statutory, voluntary, independent and private sectors.
The noble Baroness, Lady Jay, was critical of the internal market and the requirement that a percentage of the new community care grant should be spent in the private sector. That move has brought a whole range of new facilities to the community that were not previously available. It is choice and range and a wide number of different facilities and services that people want.
The new community care arrangements which we introduced in April 1993 reaffirmed our commitment to this approach. Our aim has been to offer social services departments and health authorities greater flexibility in responding to the needs of people who require long-term support. Local authorities, working with the health service, are responsible for assessing people's needs and, after close discussion with carers, for arranging support and services to meet those needs. This includes people who may require residential or nursing home care and who previously sought help from social security. Under the new arrangements, there are opportunities through imaginative commissioning to
980
enable very dependent people to remain in their own homes, if that is their wish, or to move into more homely residential or nursing homes. We have made significant new resources available to local authorities; £1.2 billion in the current financial year, rising to more than £1.8 billion next year.
Although it is still early days, there has been widespread support for this approach. The Audit Commission and the Association of Directors of Social Services have stated that the new arrangements have got off to a good start and that there is some evidence of more imaginative and flexible approaches being used to support vulnerable people in the community.
The noble Lord, Lord Stallard, was anxious that the NHS no longer has a role in providing continuing care. This is not the case. We have always been clear that the NHS's responsibilities remain unchanged. Health authorities and, where appropriate, GP fundholders should be contracting for a range of services to meet the needs of people, including those who suffer from Alzheimer's disease. But we cannot agree with the noble Lord that national norms or quotas are the way forward in terms of bed numbers. We believe that decisions about what services are purchased must be taken locally. Health authorities need to take into account local facilities both in the NHS and the independent sector. They need to consider how to use not only the skills and expertise which are available among professionals but also the range of initiatives, strengths and resources which are inherent in every community. Organisations such as the Alzheimer's Disease Society which know so well the anxieties, the tribulations, and often the very modest demands of their members have a crucial role in influencing the decisions about the planning and delivery of services. I would expect all local and health authorities to work with such groups and to take account of their views in developing their strategies and commissioning plans.
In looking at continuing care services we have emphasised the need for clear local agreements between local authorities and health authorities about their respective responsibilities. This was stressed strongly during the run-up to the implementation of the new arrangements. To reinforce local action, we required all local authorities to submit, as a precondition of receiving the Community Care Special Transitional Grant, evidence of agreements with health authorities about their respective responsibilities for continuing care.
We are monitoring the arrangements very carefully. When cases are brought to the notice of the department we act promptly, as we did in the Leeds case. The noble Lord, Lord Stallard, will know that the health authority has since revised its policy. It took action before the new reforms were in place. We will keep under review the need for further guidance. That point was raised by the noble Lord, Lord Stallard, and the noble Baroness, Lady Jay.
The noble Lord asked a number of questions relating to charges for residential care. The general principle of local authorities charging for residential accommodation has been established since 1948. That principle did not alter as a result of the recent community care

981
changes. It is reasonable that people for whom social services, including residential accommodation, are provided should pay for the provision of those services in accordance with their means. Otherwise, people with assets are unnecessarily maintained at the expense of the taxpayer. The method by which local authorities assess the ability of residents to pay was largely brought into line with the income support assessment rules from April 1993. But, as the noble Lord mentioned, we have also issued guidance to local authorities which stresses to them their ability to vary the personal expenses allowance to allow a resident to support a spouse at home. We believe that that is a positive contribution to that issue, but again we shall keep the position under review.
The noble Baroness, Lady Jay, emphasised the point made by the noble Lord that most district health authorities have not implemented the Royal College of Psychiatrists' recommendations with regard to bed norms. I would be concerned if this debate were to revolve only around the number of beds. We need to look at the range of services which district health authorities, together with social services, commission to meet the needs of people with dementia. With a greater emphasis on community care, different models of provision are possible and we need to look at the totality of what is provided.
We have to recognise also that patterns of care are changing and that many providers—for example, in York, Lewisham and Bexley—are providing new and innovative services in the community, working with carers and, in one case, very closely with the society.
The noble Baroness asked whether I would define health and social care responsibilities. She will know that that is very difficult because people with dementia are often in need of both health and social care. It is not a question of pigeon-holing people but of the two agencies working together to best meet the assessed needs of the individual and his carer.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, perhaps the noble Baroness will allow me to follow that up. It is not so much a question of creating a definite demarcation of administrative responsibility. But the concern is for people whose carers consider that they are ill and
982
therefore qualify absolutely for free NHS care when they may, under systems which seem to be becoming more common, be assessed under social services and therefore be liable to the type of means-testing on which my noble friend expanded in some detail when he asked the Question.
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, for people with dementia, as is the case with other people who require NHS services, it is a question of clinical judgment. One of the issues that we have stressed to local authorities when they are making their assessments is that they need to involve the GP and in some cases the consultant who is involved with that person's care. It is a clinical judgment as to whether NHS care is needed but I appreciate that there are grey areas and that it is not possible to draw very strong demarcation lines. Often it must be left to the judgment of the individuals concerned.
I should like to pick up the point made by the noble Baroness with regard to the staffing of psychiatric services. I believe that the noble Baroness was suggesting that it is difficult to find people to work in psychiatric and pyschogeriatric services. But that is not always the case. Last Friday I was able to visit the psychiatric unit at the Manchester NHS Trust where I was shown one of the most, I thought, impressive facilities for people who are suffering from severe dementia. On that visit I was interested to find out from the sister in charge that she had a waiting list of staff wishing to work there.
Therefore, in conclusion, I am very grateful to the noble Lord for raising this subject this evening. As I said earlier, the growing needs for health and social care of an ageing population present an important challenge to us and to agencies on the ground. I am convinced that the new community care arrangements provide a more flexible framework within which health and local authorities can work. But their success will not be judged solely by the number of beds provided but rather by the quality of care given to users, the support experienced by carers and the views of organisations such as the Alzheimer's Disease Society.
House adjourned at twelve minutes past nine o'clock.