Sitting of 31 March 1988

Preamble
The House met at half-past Nine o'clock
PRAYERS
[MR. SPEAKER in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
  AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

    Fish Farms (Pollution)
    Ms. Quin: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his Department has commissioned any studies to examine the extent of pollution caused by fish farms; and if he will make a statement.
    The Minster of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. John Selwyn Gummer): The effect of fish farm effluent is kept under review by the Fisheries Departments and recent studies have pointed to a significant decline in the quantity of waste discharged per tonne of fish produced.
    Ms. Quin: Is the Minister aware that several recent reports have claimed that highly polluted water from fish farms is threatening the survival of some of the native species of fish in our rivers, such as the brown trout? Is he satisfied that the procedures for monitoring the discharges from fish farms are working efficiently? If not, will he set up an inquiry into that matter?
    Mr. Gummer: I am satisfied that the procedures are working satisfactorily. As I have said, recent studies suggest that there has been a significant decline in the quantities of waste discharged per tonne of fish produced. We are looking carefully at the matter and are examining one or two specific cases. For example, the Wessex water authority and the Department of the Environment have been trying to deal with the problems that appear to have affected wild fish stocks on the Avon. However, we are sure that things are working reasonably well elsewhere.
    Mr. Nicholas Baker: Will my right hon. Friend take particular care to ensure that the procedures are not administered in a too discriminating and over-robust manner? Is he aware that fish farming — including crayfish and other crustaceous fish production — is a very important and growing industry which should not be damaged by excessive zeal by anyone imposing the procedures to which he referred?
    Mr. Gummer: I agree that fish farming is a very important industry. However, we must ensure that the industry does not badly affect the quality of the water in our rivers. We must keep an eye on the industry, but I agree that we must not do that in a way that makes people feel that they are being harried.
    Mrs. Ray Michie: Is the Minister confident that the ban on the anti-foulant tributyl tin, which is used in fish farms, is effective and that no outlet for the chemical exists
    1260
    through wholesalers? How should fish farms dispose of any stocks of that chemical? What advice is being offered to those fish farms on disposal methods?
    Mr. Gummer: As the hon. Lady will be aware, the Ministry took the lead in trying to do something about tributyl tin and the problems that we discovered in our research into sex changes among some molluscs and other small animals, which may have been of particular interest to other molluscs and small animals. The hon. Lady will understand that the particular cases to which she is referring are largely within the purview of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. I will ensure that he gives an answer to the hon. Lady on the specific cases to which she has referred.
    Dr. Godman: The Opposition welcome the growth and development of fish farming. A commitment was given by the Government at the recent ministerial conference on the North sea to the precautionary principle applied to pollution of the marine environment. What provisions are made to monitor routinely the use of chemicals used by fish farmers? Is there any provision within the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 to restrict or ban the use of Nuvan 500 EC by fish farmers? Is Nuvan not as dangerous to the marine environment as TBT anti-fouling paint?
    Mr. Gummer: The hon. Gentleman will accept that I might have looked at his specific example if he had asked me to do so. However, we take great care about fish farms, not only with regard to the chemicals that are used. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, we also consider the problems of water abstraction licensing, and that is another area that we have to watch very carefully. We have already undertaken to amend the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in that direction. I will certainly look at the specific cases that the hon. Gentleman has raised.

    Foodstuffs (Radioactivity)
    Mr. Frank Cook: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has any plans to change the levels of radioactivity permitted in foodstuffs exported from, and imported into, Britain and the EEC.
    Ms. Ruddock: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what were the permitted radioactivity levels following the Chernobyl accident for the import and export of foodstuffs in Britain and other EEC countries; and if he will make a statement.
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Donald Thompson): Good morning, Mr. Speaker.
    I have no plans to change present national arrangements regarding radioactivity levels in foodstuffs imported into or exported from this country.
    Following Chernobyl, maximum permitted radiocaesium levels for Community imports of foodstuffs from all third countries were set at 370 bq/kg for milk and babyfood and 600 bq/kg for other foods. Those levels remain unchanged. No comparable legislative measures were adopted governing either intra-Community trade or exports. Changes in EC arrangements are, of course, a matter for the European Community.
    Mr. Cook: Good morning, Mr. Speaker.
    I am grateful to the Minister for that full reply, and I am sure that the information that he gave will be useful to

    1261
    many people. But is he aware that there are reports from many Third world countries that they have received consignments, especially of dried milk powder, which exceed those levels; that, despite that, pressure has been exerted on those countries to accept the consignments; and that some consignments have been returned to Britain? Will the Minister look into the matter to see whether the reports are true? If they are, where are those consignments stored and what will be their future use?
    Mr. Thompson: I would understand the hon. Gentleman's concern if what he said had any basis in fact. No Third world country has registered any protest —[Interruption.] I shall answer the hon. Gentleman's question as gently as I can, and we shall see what he makes of it after I have finished.
    No Third world country has registered any imports from the United Kingdom that are above the EC recommended levels. There were two prongs to the hon. Gentleman's question: first, materials going to the Third world in aid; and, secondly, materials going to the Third world in normal trading patterns. There is no doubt that, at first, in the normal trading patterns some of our customers were reluctant to accept goods from Europe and the United Kingdom. That reluctance has been overcome. As the hon. Gentleman said, there has been much publicity about goods going in aid to the Third world. I shall consider any documents or evidence that the hon. Gentleman may have, but at present it seems that that charge cannot be laid at our door.
    Ms. Ruddock: The Minister probably knows that a consignment of EEC food aid to Mexico was traced to the Irish Republic and accepted back by the Irish Republic after complaints from Mexico. Although, as the Minister said, Britain has not been a source of over-contaminated food, does he agree that it reflects badly on the EEC as a whole? Did the Minister see early-day motion 733, which brought these matters to the attention of the House, and did he discuss them with those responsible during his visit to Brussels earlier this week?
    Mr. Thompson: I agree with the hon. Lady that the United Kingdom's record in these matters is remarkably good and should be a model—[Interruption.] I would have agreed with the hon. Lady had she said that. Since Chernobyl, the United Kingdom's record has been remarkably good. I am as worried as the hon. Lady is that the good name of the European Community will be spoilt by such incidents. It reflects badly not only on aid but on trade, and that is bad for all of us.
    Mr. William Ross: Is the Minister aware that my constituency is still suffering from the effects of the Chernobyl accident and that it is affecting sheep production in the mountainous areas? Given recent reports of the slow breakdown of radioactive materials, especially in peat vegetation, can the Minister give the House and the country an assurance that we know how long it will be before the caesium levels in those peat and upland areas fall to a reasonable level so that we can get rid of this dreadful problem, which must have an effect on food production and exports?
    Mr. Thompson: Despite the occasional levity, I take the problem seriously, especially in Wales, Cumbria, and Northern Ireland, where the effects of the accident at Chernobyl still linger. Unfortunately, I cannot give the
    1262
    hon. Gentleman any idea of how long it will be before the effects of the accident have gone from our land. We are monitoring on a continual basis, not only in the affected areas, but throughout the country and we are also monitoring imports of goods. The hon. Gentleman has heard the answer about exports.
    Dr. David Clark: Does the Minister agree that one cannot differentiate between aid and trade when talking about becquerel levels? Those levels are laid down by the EEC and should be adhered to in aid and trade by all countries. Will the Minister once again give us an assurance that he will examine the newspaper reports? I accept that most of them suggest that contaminated food has not been exported from this country, although there is the possibility of one shipment to the Philippines from this country. Will he give us an assurance that he will not only look into that but will take the matter to Brussels and ensure that food that is above the safety becquerel limit is not being exported, in either aid or trade, from any of the European countries? That is important.
    Mr. Thompson: Aid and trade are equally important. In many ways, perhaps aid is more important because the recipient countries have less sophisticated facilities than the trading countries that accept our goods. I fully accept the hon. Gentleman's point on that. I reiterate what I said to his hon. Friend the Member for Stockton, North (Mr. Cook). I will look again carefully at any documentation that he or his hon. Friends present to me. Having looked at that, I shall talk to my right hon. Friend the Minister and see whether it is necessary to take the matter to Brussels to encourage or fortify our friends there.

    Sheepmeat
    Mr. Macdonald: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations he will be holding with British sheep producers in advance of the next round of negotiations on the community sheepmeat regime.
    The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. John MacGregor): My agricultural colleagues and I continue to stay in close touch with representatives of British sheep producers and will continue to consult them on aspects of the review of the sheepmeat regime.
    Mr. Macdonald: The Minister may know what I am about to ask him, because I have written to him on the matter. Does he appreciate that the Crofters Union in the highlands and islands represents some 4,000 hill farmers, the vast majority of whom are involved in sheep farming? Does he appreciate also that crofting is a particularly successful form of agricultural activity and helps to retain a large population in the rural areas—one could say a high population per hectare? Given that, will the Minister undertake to seek a meeting with the Crofters Union on negotiations about the sheepmeat regime, and in those negotiations will he undertake to look for reforms and methods of administration that will benefit the smallest farmers, such as crofters, in the poorest areas?
    Mr. MacGregor: The negotiations have not yet got under way. However, my noble Friend the Minister of State, Scottish Office, met representatives of the Scottish Crofters Union on 5 February and assured the union that the interests of the traditional producers would be kept in mind in the negotiations. Obviously, I shall stay in close

    1263
    touch with my noble Friend the Minister of State and I shall bear in mind the points made today by the hon. Gentleman.
    Mr. Curry: Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that it would be unwise to be boxed in to a line-by-line defence of every dot and comma of the status quo in the sheepmeat regime and that what matters is to preserve equivalent benefits that exist now for British producers, make sure that we retain access to the continental markets that have grown in importance and retain the advantage that comes from our extensive system of rearing?
    Mr. MacGregor: It is right not to be committed line by line, because negotiations would never be successful if one started from that point of view. The negotiations have not yet started. I agree broadly with my hon. Friend that those are our objectives and I make it clear that I shall continue to seek measures for the future of the sheepmeat regime that will enable United Kingdom sheep producers to make the most of our natural advantages.
    Mr. Kirkwood: In his consultations with sheep producers in the United Kingdom, will the Minister bear in mind the importance of the sheepmeat regime, particularly the EEC Commission's proposals to change it, to areas such as Scotland and Wales? I plead that, when the negotiations in Brussels come to a head, the Minister will seek to take with him his colleagues the Secretaries of State for Wales and for Scotland, to emphasise the vital importance to those countries of the proposals that are being considered in Brussels.
    Mr. MacGregor: I work closely with my right hon. Friends. As a Scot, I am clearly well aware of the implications for Scotland. We shall have to judge at the time who goes to the negotiations. We have not yet started the negotiations. I suspect that they will be pretty long. We still lack detail on most aspects of the Commission's proposals, but I shall obviously be in close touch with my right hon. Friends. Of course, I discuss the matter with the industry in Scotland when I visit Scotland. We are well aware of the industry's views and the impacts on the two countries to which the hon. Gentleman referred.
    Dr. David Clark: Does the Minister recall telling the House immediately after the Copenhagen meeting that the sheepmeat regime proposals for stabilisers discriminated against this country? Does he recall also that such stabiliser proposals were accepted by the Prime Minister in Brussels? How will he ensure that sheep remain on the hills? How will he ensure an adequate income for sheep farmers in upland areas? Some of them have advised me that when the stabilisers come into force next year they will be down £3,000 on their already meagre incomes.
    Mr. MacGregor: As I have said, obviously there must be a stabiliser for the sheepmeat regime. Currently, costs are expected to be over 1 billion ecu for the sheepmeat regime as a whole. Therefore, it is necessary that there are stabilisers for the sheepmeat regime. We had to look at the overall balance of the outcome of the summit. One element in the sheepmeat stabiliser singled out the United Kingdom. That is because we have the variable premium, and no other state does. There was a feeling in the Community that a different regime had to apply to the different system that we have. There was one other discriminatory element in the proposals which is particularly important to the upland areas to which the
    1264
    hon. Gentleman referred. This is the proposal to limit headage payments. We got that out. Obviously, the impact of the stabiliser next year will depend on sheep production. If sheep production exceeds targets here and in the rest of the Community, the sheepmeat stabiliser must apply.

    Nitrates
    Mr. Alan W. Williams: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give figures for the amount of nitrates applied to land in Britain in each of the years (a) 1960, (b) 1970, (c) 1980 and (d) 1987.
    Mr. MacGregor: Such information is not available, as details are not maintained of the proportion of nitrates contained in fertilisers applied to land. Nitrates are, of course, only one form of nitrogen found in such fertilisers.
    Mr. Williams: The amount of nitrogenous fertiliser applied in the past 30 years has more than trebled. In view of the serious problem of pollution of water supplies by nitrates in eastern Britain and the major role that deintensification and low-input agriculture could play in reducing Common Market surpluses, will the Minister consider introducing curbs on the use of nitrogenous fertilisers? I have in mind either a tax on nitrogenous fertiliser or, in areas that are severely affected by nitrate pollution, a complete prohibition on the use of nitrogenous fertilisers.
    Mr. MacGregor: The Government are still considering the options that were identified in the nitrate co-ordination group report. They are complex matters. It is important that we get any policy changes or other proposals resulting from the report absolutely right. Although we are considering what should be done in the light of the report, I do not think that a tax is an effective or efficient means of reducing cereals and other crops in surplus; nor do I think that it would necessarily have the impact that the hon. Gentleman requires. It would have to be a very high tax indeed. Of course, it would operate indiscriminately. Therefore, I am not sure that it is the right approach to take. We are still considering the report in general and will make our views known as soon as we possibly can.

    National Farmers Union
    Mr. Jack: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met the president of the National Farmers Union; and what matters were discussed.
    Mr. Leigh: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met representatives of the National Union of Farmers; and what subjects were discussed.
    Mr. MacGregor: I meet the president of the National Farmers Union and other representatives frequently to discuss matters of agricultural policy. The last occasion that I met the president was Tuesday of this week.
    Mr. Jack: I thank my right hon. Friend for that news. Will he send a message of Easter hope to members of the National Farmers Union in my constituency, who are pig producers, that his success on stabilisers will open the door to the start of successful negotiations on 18 April, to a change in the green pound regime and to a reduction in the MCAs on pigs, which have so damaged the industry? Will he support the Food from Britain initiative, which is trying

    1265
    to open up new markets for British pork meat in the United States, and will he recommend to housewives this Easter that they should buy British pork?
    Mr. MacGregor: I am sure that housewives will have heard my hon. Friend's last point, even this early in the morning. I support the efforts that Food from Britain is making to try to increase exports of pigmeat products.
    As to my hon. Friend's first point, I raised the matter at the Agriculture Council this week, at which we had a preliminary discussion about the price review—the price proposals for this year—and I also discussed the matter with the president of the NFU. I have made it clear in the Council that, because of the increased use of cereal substitutes in the pig rations of some other member states, pigmeat MCAs are now producing, rather than preventing, distortions. I therefore called for an immediate and complete devaluation of our green rate in that sector. This will be a difficult and protracted negotiation because other member states hold a directly contrary view and the Commission has not made a proposal, but I have made my position clear.
    Mr. Leigh: When my right hon. Friend met the president of the National Farmers Union, did he make it absolutely clear that when he is in Brussels he is battling not only for Britain but for our farmers, particularly with regard to the green pound and stabilisers? To illustrate the difficulties that my right hon. Friend faced, will he say what line was taken by other member states on price fixing?
    Mr. MacGregor: Yes, indeed, I did. As to the general line on price fixing, I imagine that my hon. Friend has in mind green rates, which will be an issue in price fixing. There were some calls from member states in that regard, but the Commission made it clear that it was opposed to changes in green rates, apart from the Greek drachma—Greek MCAs are three to four times greater than those in the United Kingdom. I made my position on the green pound clear in the preliminary discussions that we had at the Council this week.
    Mr. Geraint Howells: Will the Minister assure our pig producers that their prospects for the next two years will be better than they are at present? Will he tell pig producers and the industry by what percentage he is likely to devalue the green pound in the next six months?
    Mr. MacGregor: I cannot give the hon. Gentleman an assurance, because we have a lightweight regime in pigs and it depends very much on the market. At present pig production is in surplus, and that market position is obviously affecting the price. In so far as measures are available to me, we argued for, and succeeded in obtaining, private storage aids, which are making some difference to market stability. I have made my position clear on MCAs in the pigmeat sector. The hon. Gentleman will recognise that pigmeat MCAs have fallen nearly 20 points since February last year to the current level of minus 7·5, which has made a big difference to the position. Pigmeat prices have stabilised and some feed costs are still coming down.
    Mr. Ralph Howell: I accept that my right hon. Friend is doing all that he can to bring about an immediate 9 per cent. green pound devaluation, but will he give an
    1266
    assurance that the Government are exerting maximum pressure in this direction, and will he say what is the chief stumbling block to the devaluation of the green pound?
    Mr. MacGregor: This is fundamentally a matter for the price proposals. I made it clear this week that it is necessary to take further steps towards achieving the objective of the complete removal of MCAs by 1992 when the single market comes into operation. We shall be discussing this matter at later Council meetings when we discuss the price proposals. With regard to the main stumbling blocks, there are divided views within the Community, and the Commission has made it clear that it is not making any proposals on this matter.
    Mr. Campbell-Savours: When the Minister next meets the president of the NFU, will he alert him to the increased incidence of licensed security dealers in the City of London who are investing in agriculture-related stocks, and, in particular, to the operation of Afcor Investments Ltd., which specialises in this sector and whose investments are questionable? Will he also raise the matter with his colleague at the Department of Trade and Industry?
    Mr. MacGregor: I know nothing of the question, so I shall look into it, but it is not the kind of matter that I normally discuss with the president of the NFU.
    Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop: Will my right hon. Friend ensure that he does not agree to any devaluation of the green punt without a larger prior devaluation of the green pound, so that British beef producers do not suffer still further from the disparity between the two and a devaluation of the green punt that is not matched by at least an appropriate one of the green pound?
    Mr. MacGregor: We have not got into detailed discussions on the price proposals yet, so the precise positions of the different member states is not yet clear. My hon. Friend will note that last year we had a devaluation of the green pound in relation to beef that was ahead of the Irish position, and the competitive difference has come down substantially in the past year or two.
    Mr. Wallace: Will the Minister accept that, in Scotland at least, farm incomes in real terms are worth only one third of what they were worth 10 years ago? Does he recall that 10 years ago Conservative Members joined Liberal Members to beat the Government and force a revaluation of the green pound? Does the Conservative party accept that the case for devaluation must be prosecuted with as much vigour now as it was 10 years ago?
    Mr. MacGregor: Farm incomes are under pressure throughout the world because of surpluses. It is because of that problem that we have been devoting so much effort to deal with the surpluses. The position of the green pound is a matter for agreement within the Council. Therefore, we have to get the proposal on the table if we are to get anywhere, and we have to get general discussion among the Twelve. That is where the issue has to be dealt with.

    Forestry
    Mr. Marland: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a further statement on measures to stimulate tree planting.
    Mr. Gummer: On 23 March we announced details of a new forestry grant scheme, to be known as the woodland

    1267
    grant scheme, which is to be introduced on 5 April. Copies of a Forestry Commission leaflet on the scheme have been placed in the Library of the House. We also intend to introduce the farm woodland scheme later this year.
    Mr. Marland: How will the new planting grants impact on the existing farm woodland scheme, about which the Conservative party is so enthusiastic?
    Mr. Gummer: The farm woodland scheme, as my hon. Friend knows, is a mixture of two parts. There are the planting grants, which come from the Forestry Commission, and there are annual income grants to farmers to make up for the income that they have forgone by using that land for planting. Therefore, the farmers will benefit from the new planting grants that the Forestry Commission has announced, although we have interpreted them in such a way as to be of particular advantage for the planting of broadleaves and of rather less advantage for the planting of conifers.
    Mr. David Nicholson: Can my right hon. Friend give the House an estimate of what effect the farm woodland scheme and set-aside are likely to have on land use and the countryside over the next decade?
    Mr. Gummer: My hon. Friend expects me to have a crystal ball of a kind that I would not claim to have. We believe that there is a considerable opportunity for farmers to use land in both these ways. We are trying to combine a regime of stricter price control with alternative uses. The advantage of the farm woodland scheme, which has been strongly welcomed by the Opposition—[Interruption.]—except, it seems by the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) will be seen quickly and clearly by farmers.

    Research and Development
    Mr. Hunter: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the financial resources currently available for agricultural research.
    Mr. Donald Thompson: The total of Government expenditure on research and development in agriculture and food planned for 1987–88 is approximately £195 million. In addition, much relevant research is done by the industry, particularly the food industry and industries which provide agricultural inputs such as agrochemicals and veterinary pharmaceuticals.
    Mr. Hunter: When does my hon. Friend expect to come to conclusions about the future level of public funding for agricultural research and development, especially in the light of an internal review recently conducted?
    Mr. Thompson: The internal review is still being conducted, and we have held informal discussions with various bodies, such as the Agricultural and Food Research Council, development councils, producer organisations, research associations and the IPCS.
    Mrs. Margaret Ewing: Is the Minister aware of the deep concern in Scotland at the continuing reduction in research facilities? Is he aware of the threat currently hanging over Torry research station in Grampian, and will he take action to ensure that we do not see the loss of this organisation?
    Mr. Thompson: I am aware that there is concern in many areas about the new shifts of research, and about
    1268
    areas in which research is going down. That is partly because we are looking at research into diversification and extensification, rather than, as formerly, purely producing more and more food. I shall look into the hon. Lady's question and write to her.

    Bees
    Mr. Allen: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has any proposals to hive off the responsibilities of his Department's bee officers; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. Donald Thompson: No, Sir. From the next bee season we shall be concentrating our inspection for foulbrood on colonies where the disease is suspected or which have a recent history of the disease, but these inspections will continue to be carried out by the Ministry's bees officers.
    Mr. Tony Banks: A stinging reply.
    Mr. Allen: Earlier this week I put on the Order Paper a request for morning sittings. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, and the usual channels for responding so quickly.
    Has the Minister received representations from the Nottinghamshire Beekeepers' Association? Is he aware that, by reducing the number of random checks of bee officers from his Ministry on the hives of this country he will encourage the spread of American foulbrood, European foulbrood and, indeed, the bee equivalent of myxomatosis, varroasis? Will the Minister now restore any of the cuts in bee inspections and stand up for the health of the British bee?
    Mr. Thompson: Random sampling over the past 10 years of almost every hive has found disease in less than 1 per cent. of the flock, so the present level of inspection cannot be justified. Nevertheless, we shall inspect those premises that have foulbrood.
    The inspections have prevented a further spread of the disease, and we now have a very healthy flock [Interruption.] We shall therefore inspect only premises where we suspect that the disease is present, or whose beekeeper asks us to inspect them.

    Green Pound
    Dr. Michael Clark: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent representations he has received about the level of the green pound; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. MacGregor: I have received a number of representations on this subject. The majority have sought a devaluation for pigmeat. Some have concerned all or a number of sectors. Representations from food manufacturing interests have opposed devaluation.
    Dr. Clark: I recognise that my right hon. Friend has already said that he is seeking a devaluation of the green pound. Is he aware, however, of the considerable importance attached by the British farming community to his success? Bearing in mind that the first 4 per cent. of any devaluation will be used to offset the drop in farm incomes brought about by the recent package of measures on stabilisers, is he seeking a devaluation greater than 4 per cent., so that there will be real benefit to the British farmer?
    Mr. MacGregor: Of course I am aware of the feelings of farmers in this country, but I think it is important to keep the two matters separate. The stabiliser regime is necessary on its own, with—if production goes beyond the maximum guarantee quantity thresholds—the effects of price reductions. That is necessary to deal with the soaring cost of the common agricultural policy and the surpluses.
    Devaluing the green pound is a question of fairer terms of competition between the member states, and is also strongly linked with the move towards the single market by 1992, when it must be right to get rid of the MCA system altogether. It is important to approach the two matters differently, and that is what I am doing.
    Sir Charles Morrison: In my right hon. Friend's negotiations with other member states, will he remind them that they are meant to believe in the principle of fair competition? Are not British farmers suffering considerably because of the level of the green pound? Will he impress upon those member states that, as they have to get used to the principle of fair competition for 1992, it would be far better if they began to get used to it now?
    Mr. MacGregor: I am sure my hon. Friend recognises that our competitiveness has vastly improved during the past year. United Kingdom MCAs are now 18 to 20 points lower than in February 1987, which is well over half in all sectors and more than three quarters for beef. That has significantly improved our competitive position. I agree about the importance of achieving competition on, overall, reasonably fair terms. I also agree about the importance of moving to that position ready for 1992, and that is what I stressed this week.

    Coastal Protection
    Mr. Atkinson: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received from coastal authorities on his proposed changes in the capital allocation for coastal protection works.
    Mr. Gummer: Representations have been received from a number of coastal local authorities, from Members of this House, and from others with an interest in this matter.
    Mr. Atkinson: Is my right hon. Friend aware of the important coastal protection work now under way in my constituency to save Hengistbury Head? Will he confirm that the proposed changes in capital allocation for 1988–89 will not affect schemes already under way or being considered by his Department?
    Mr. Gummer: My hon. Friend has mistaken the concept. All that we have said is that although there will be 100 per cent. capital allocation, there will be some occasions on which we will not have sufficient funds to give that percentage. We shall, therefore, offer a lower rate to local authorities that can manage with a lower capital allocation. The change is not fundamental; it is merely a means of ensuring that we use all our capital allocation each year, rather than leave some unused because local authorities cannot have 100 per cent. of what they need.

    Forestry
    Mr. Ron Davies: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations were held concerning the proposed new grant arrangements for forestry; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. MacGregor: The forestry grant scheme and broadleaved woodland grant scheme were closed to new applications from 15 March. In order to maintain the confidence of the forestry industry, it was essential to announce details of the replacement grant scheme as quickly as possible. The Forestry Commission therefore had to consider and finalise the details of the new scheme very quickly, which precluded prior consultations on them as such with outside bodies.
    Mr. Davies: In retrospect, does the Minister think that it would have been better if he had consulted the forestry industry, farmers and environmental interests? Does he accept that the result of no consultation is two forestry policies—one for England and one for Scotland and Wales? Does he recognise that the environmental safeguards that apply to Scotland and Wales are lower than those for England? As MAFF is the lead Department with responsibility for the Forestry Commission, does he propose to take any initiative to even out the application of his policy to Scotland, Wales and England?
    Mr. MacGregor: The policy, in most of its broad details, is applied uniformly throughout the United Kingdom. The difference to which the hon. Gentleman refers arises because my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and I said that we would be unlikely to accept proposals for conifer planting in the English uplands. That is an English environmental matter. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales, on environmental grounds and for forestry reasons that affect those two countries, took a different view on that aspect of the policy alone.
    Overall, the policy is the same for all countries. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will approve of the emphasis in the farm woodland scheme on broadleaves rather than on conifers. There is only a marginal difference in the conditions for English upland areas, and that is for environmental reasons.

    British Produce (Marketing)
    Mr. Butler: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has any further plans to promote the marketing of British produce; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. Gummer: The Government attach particular importance to the improvement of marketing. For that reason we set up Food from Britain in 1983. FFB has spent about £15 million so far at home and abroad, most of it provided by the Government. In each of the three years from 1988–89 our contribution will depend on industry providing at least £3 million.
    Mr. Butler: Does my right hon. Friend agree that we have excellent products in this country, but that traditionally we have fallen down on the marketing of them? Does he not believe that we could do still better?
    Mr. Gummer: I am sure that we could do better. Marketing is of great importance in the industry. It is in the market place that the farmer finds himself most at home. That is why I was pleased to see the excellent presentation of British food at the "Alimentaria" food fair in Spain, which is an increasingly important market.

    Forestry
    Mr. Chapman: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received about his Department's policy towards the encouragement of the planting of deciduous trees in England and Wales in the light of the Budget taxation proposals.
    Mr. MacGregor: I have received no such representations, but substantial encouragement for the planting of broadleaves will be provided by the new woodland grant scheme and by the proposed farm woodland scheme.
    Mr. Chapman: While very much welcoming the Government's woodland grant scheme, may I ask my right hon. Friend to confirm that, with the present state of the agriculture industry, we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to start re-creating some of our lost woodlands? Does he understand the importance of that envronmentally as well as economically, in the light of the fact that we have probably lost about half our ancient woodlands in the past half century?
    Mr. MacGregor: I agree with my hon. Friend that there is a good opportunity for three reasons—the surpluses, the environmental aspect and the other opportunities in farming. We have introduced the farm woodland scheme and it looks as if we shall get a good response to it.

  PRIME MINISTER

    Engagements
    Mrs. Maureen Hicks: To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.
    The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher): In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today, including one with the President of Cyprus.
    Mrs. Hicks: Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating the chief superintendent of the police in Wolverhampton and the 250 police officers in the west midlands on their brave and successful initiative with Wolves earlier this week? Does she accept that we must continue to detect and punish the violent football offenders who are determined to wreck football matches and ruin the game for genuine football fans?
    The Prime Minister: I think that the police in all parts of the country are to be congratulated on their determined efforts to tackle football hooliganism and to track down those responsible for this terrible offence that is doing so much damage to football. With good co-operation between the police, the Football Association and the clubs a good deal has already been achieved, but I agree with my hon. Friend that there is still a long way to go.
    Mr. Kinnock: Is the Prime Minister aware that from tomorrow, when her changes in housing benefit and rate relief come into effect, an old lady on a basic pension will, because of the 20 per cent. rule, have to pay £2 a week instead of getting £500 rate relief per annum? An 87-yearold war widow with a small occupational pension will have her housing benefit reduced by £17·87 a week. A couple in work with a joint income of £82 a week will lose £16·50 in help with their rent and rates. This is an historic day.
    1272
    It is the first Maundy Thursday in history when, instead of giving money to the poor, rulers are taking money from the poor.
    The Prime Minister: First, more is being given to the poor, as the right hon. Gentleman knows—a great deal more. Indeed, expenditure on social security has gone up from £16 billion to £46 billion—an enormous increase. It will go up a further £2 billion next year. That means—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."]— I am answering the question and I insist on doing so in my own way. The average family will be paying £64 a week to finance social security. Yes, we have had structural changes. Yes, they were meant to re-target the money spent so that disabled people, families with children and those in low-paid work are better off. In cash terms transitional protection of income support means that 97 per cent. of sick and disabled people, 92 per cent. of couples with children, 89 per cent. of single parents and 87 per cent. of pensioners get more or the same.
    Mr. Kinnock: The Prime Minister is making the same stupid mistake as she made with the National Health Service figures. First, does she not realise that there is no transitional arrangement for housing benefit and for the loss of rates relief, so that is utterly irrelevant? Secondly, the Prime Minister can play the numbers game as much as she likes. There are 9 million people in poverty in Britain now. In 1979 there were 6 million people who were reckoned to be in poverty. The right hon. Lady can talk about targeting as much as she likes, but does she not realise that if the targets missed include war widows, if the targets missed include people who are desperately sick, if the targets missed include hundreds of thousands of poor people, her targets are rubbish?
    The Prime Minister: What the right hon. Gentleman is saying is that we can never have a restructuring of social security if anyone loses. It is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. He totally ignores the enormous increases —[Interruption.] We deliberately re-targeted. I dealt with housing benefit last week. Yes, we deliberately did have changes. There is no blunder in the figures. The fact is that 97 per cent. of the sick and disabled, 92 per cent. of couples with children, 89 per cent. of single parents and 87 per cent. of pensioners are getting more or the same. As for war widows, they have more to thank this Government for than any previous Government. It was this Government who totally and utterly relieved war widows' pensions of tax, and I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for allowing me to say that once again.
    Mr. Kinnock: Is the Prime Minister not aware that in order to get those figures she has had to lump together gainers and those who are reckoned to be neither gainers nor losers? The Minister who compiled those figures had to go to the Select Committee yesterday and admit that those who are reckoned to be neither gainers nor losers are already losers because, as he put it, their benefits were frozen in 1987. Does the Prime Minister not recognise that £650 million is being taken away from housing benefit and that 700,000 people will lose everything? They are people who have put a few bob away to tide them through their old age. The right hon. Lady is cutting them off without a penny.
    The Prime Minister: Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that expenditure that has increased from £16 billion to £46 billion, and that is going up by a further £2 billion, is, even on his arithmetic, an enormous increase?
    Mr. Andrew Mitchell: Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating the miners at the Gedling colliery in my constituency on the figures that were announced earlier this week, which show that productivity over the last year has increased by nearly 25 per cent.? Does she agree that increased productivity and greater competitiveness offer the best guarantee for the long-term interests of the industry, not only in Gedling and Nottinghamshire, but throughout the British mining industry?
    The Prime Minister: Yes. I join my hon. Friend in congratulating the miners on the excellent increase in productivity. I join him also in making it clear that there is a very good future for those who work in the mining industry when they produce coal at competitive prices and give a very good return on the massive amount of investment that this Government have ploughed into the mining industry. Many congratulations.
    Dr. Owen: Will the Government rethink their appallingly short-sighted response to the report on AIDS and drug misuse in view of the fact that in Edinburgh 50 per cent. of those on injectable drugs now have the HIV AIDS virus, that this is by far the most likely route into the heterosexual community, and that unless money is spent in Edinburgh and in the country as a whole to control drug misuse we shall run a very serious risk of AIDS spreading into the community as a whole?
    The Prime Minister: I do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman. He is very well aware of the large amount of money that has been spent on warning people about the dangers of the behaviour that they assume. We have tried to get over to them an excellent educational policy, and we have tried to make available very good extra facilities. A large amount of money has been put into extra research. I think that we have got the balance about right.
    Mr. Cormack: When my right hon. Friend goes to church over Easter, will she see whether the collection is to go to the fabric fund? If it is, will she reflect, as she puts her contribution in the plate, that 15 per cent. is going to her next-door neighbour? Will she therefore have discussions with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see whether VAT can be removed from repairs to listed buildings, especially churches?
    The Prime Minister: The Easter collection normally goes, as my hon. Friend, I think, knows well, to the clergy in the diocese, and I hope that it will continue to do so. I realise that my hon. Friend knew all that and only twisted the question the other way to make his point. The matter has been considered many times, and I do not think that there will be any change in the decision already made.
    Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones: To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.
    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
    Mr. Jones: As the Prime Minister is so dismissive of the views of the Citizens Advice Bureau, does she share the views of the member of her own party who said yesterday that pensioners with modest savings could lose up to £10
    1274
    per week in housing benefit as a result of the changes coming into effect shortly? Will she give the House a straight answer?
    The Prime Minister: It was a matter of policy that housing benefit should be cut off where people have £6,000 in capital in addition to the ownership of their house, which many of them also have. It was a matter of policy that those people should not be entitled to housing benefit. Every two households in this country support not only themselves but a third household and there really is a limit to the amount that we can have in housing benefit. Again, we think that we have got it right and that people without capital should not be forced to pay housing benefit to those with sums over £6,000.
    Mr. Gow: When my right hon. Friend comes to reply to the letter sent to her by Amnesty International, apparently on behalf of three terrorists—mercifully now dead—will she point out that it is the organisation to which those terrorists belonged that has been in massive breach of all decent standards relating to human rights? Will she further point out that an inquest is to be carried out before a jury in Gibraltar and that the inquiry for which Amnesty International has asked is a stunt without status?
    The Prime Minister: I agree with almost every word that my hon. Friend used in putting his question so ably. I hope that Amnesty has some concern for more than 2,000 people murdered by the IRA since 1969. There will be an inquest in Gibraltar and that is the proper occasion for the matters in question to be examined.
    Mr. Harry Barnes: To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.
    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
    Mr. Barnes: At a moment of weakness on the Cross, Jesus said:
    "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
    Why, by the time we come back after Easter, will the Government have forsaken the poor of this country?
    The Prime Minister: As I said, the Government do not find resources; the people do. The people are already paying £46 billion to state social security, and it is going up by a further £2 billion. The average family will then be paying £64 a week to social security. That is a very considerable amount. It is not the Government, but the people who find resources.
    Q4. Mr. Nicholas Bennett: To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.
    The Prime Minister: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
    Mr. Bennett: Does my right hon. Friend agree that recent tragic events in Northern Ireland reinforce, if any reinforcement were necessary, the vital importance of the Army supporting the civil power there? Does she further agree that if the "Troops Out" movement, which is supported by many Opposition Members, were to be successful, it would place many innocent lives in Northern Ireland in jeopardy?
    The Prime Minister: I agree with my hon. Friend. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and there

    1275
    can be no question of withdrawing our troops while the security situation remains as it is and the IRA continues to murder and maim indiscriminately. I think my hon. Friend will agree that we have every reason to be grateful to the Army and the Royal Ulster Constabulary for the considerable restraint and courage with which they carry out their duty.
    Mr. Milian: Would the Prime Minister care to explain why she has chosen to meddle again in Scottish education and impose a major unwarranted and unwanted change —the opting out of schools? Would she care to explain why she intended to choose the dishonest and disreputable method of announcing the change through a planted amendment to the School Boards (Scotland) Bill?
    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman is aware that the system of governing schools in Scotland is quite different from that which obtains in England. He is aware that there is a Bill before the House which has received a First Reading and will soon receive a Second Reading. It will establish school boards in Scotland. That is the initial step which must be taken. There will be no addition, and nor could there be, under the Long Title, to make opting out a possibility during passage of the Bill.[Interruption.] We obviously take a totally different view. Our purpose is
    1276
    to increase choice in education, whereas the attitude on the other side of the House is that that is the education that Socialists want and the people must take it or leave it.
    Mr. Burt: To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.
    The Prime Minister: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
    Mr. Burt: Will my right hon. Friend recall, especially this Easter time, Mr. Terry Waite and Mr. John McCarthy, who are captive in Beirut? Will she note the deep concern that is felt on both sides of the House for those two good men and all other innocent political hostages? Can she reassure the House and the families of those men that everything possible is being done to secure their release which does not put further innocent lives at risk?
    The Prime Minister: Yes, we are very much aware of those two people and of all those who have been taken hostage. My hon. Friend is aware of the policy that we pursue. We will make representations on their behalf and follow up every lead to try to see that they are in reasonable health and are kept in reasonable circumstances. We will not pay ransom, because to do so would only mean that more hostages are taken. We do not forget these people and are well aware, particularly during public holidays, of the great strain that their families are under.

Business of the House
10.31 am
Mr. Frank Dobson: Will the Leader of the House state the business for the week in which we return after the recess?
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Wakeham): The business for the first week after the Easter Adjournment will be as follows:
TUESDAY I2 APRIL— Second Reading of the School Boards (Scotland) Bill.
Motion on the Church Commissioners (Assistance for Priority Areas) Measure.
WEDNESDAY I3 APRIL—Progress on remaining stages of the Health and Medicines Bill.
Afterwards motion relating to the Local Government (Prescribed Expenditure) (Amendment) Regulations.
THURSDAY I4 APRIL—Completion of remaining stages of the Health and Medicines Bill.
FRIDAY I5 APRIL—Private Members' Bills.
Mr. Dobson: I am grateful to the Leader of the House for his statement.
When can we expect a debate in Government time on the proposed sale of Rover to British Aerospace? In view of what we have just heard from the Prime Minister, may we expect a ministerial statement to establish exactly what is the Government's policy on allowing opting out of schools in Scotland? Is it as demanded by the Prime Minister in the leaked letter to the office of the Secretary of State and confirmed by her today, or is it as stated, and frequently repeated, by the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland? Parents in Scotland are entitled to some clarification.
When does the Leader of the House expect to tell us that there is to be a general inquiry into leaks from the Prime Minister's office, or is it that civil servants are gaoled when they leak what embarrasses the Prime Minister and promoted when they leak what pleases her?
Will the Leader of the House provide a fifth day on the Floor of the House for debate on the remaining stages of the poll tax Bill? He will be aware that the Secretary of State for the Environment tabled amendments to the Bill after the guillotine was introduced. We think that the Opposition and those Conservative Members who claim to oppose the poll tax should have an opportunity to debate in full those amendments and all other aspects of the Bill.
Although we recognise that the security services were rightly concerned to prevent a terrorist explosion in Gibraltar, when can we expect a ministerial statement to be made which explains what happened and how the press came to be misled into carrying false information about the subsequent shooting? My right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman) has still not had answers to the 10 questions that he put to the Foreign Secretary and until answers are given to those questions many people in this country will be perturbed about what is believed to have happened and this country's reputation will suffer.
Does the Leader of the House recall that on Tuesday the Prime Minister invited the Opposition to put down a motion to cancel the social security changes due at the beginning of April? Will he guarantee that, if we put down
1278
such a motion, the Government will find time for it to be debated and that the Prime Minister will take part in the debate and display to the whole country her expertise in robbing the poor to pay off the rich?
Mr. Wakeham: The hon. Gentleman asked me a number of questions about business for the week after the Easter recess and other matters.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether there should be a debate on the Rover Group and the recent arrangements with British Aerospace. We can best discuss that through the usual channels, but the Government will be happy to have a debate on that, if the time can be found for it.
With regard to Scotland, the points at issue could, with a little skill, be brought into the debate on Tuesday 12 April on the Second Reading of the School Boards (Scotland) Bill.
With regard to leaks, I do not believe that it would be right to have a general inquiry. I should have thought that the Opposition would have believed that proper government required confidential arrangements for dealing with matters and would have deprecated leaks rather than seeking to make political capital out of them whenever they occur.
I recognise that there is concern in some quarters of the House about whether there is adequate time for the Local Government Finance Bill. The House has passed a timetable motion in respect of the Bill, but I should be happy to have discussions through the usual channels to see whether satisfactory arrangements can be made.
As for the events in Gibraltar, I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would have agreed with the Prime Minister that it was right for the inquest in Gibraltar to have been conducted in accordance with the law and that any questions that might not be answered at that time could then be dealt with more appropriately through discussions with the Foreign Secretary and his right hon. Friend. I believe that it is the right course for the inquest to take place, although, of course, that is not a matter for me.
With regard to the Opposition motion on social security matters, there is an established procedure to discuss on Opposition days matters that the Opposition choose. No doubt—
Mr. Dobson: The Prime Minister asked for a debate.
Mr. Wakeham: The Prime Miniter made a suggestion as to what the Opposition might like to discuss. That is a matter for the Opposition and, when a Supply day is organised, no doubt they will have to choose the subject that they want to discuss. I have no doubt that whichever Minister replies to the debate will see off the Opposition once again.
Several Hon. Members rose—
Mr. Speaker: Order. The House knows that this is a day for private Members' Adjournment debates. I shall allow business questions to run until 11 o'clock. I hope, therefore, that hon. Members will ask brief questions.
Mr. Roger Sims: Does my right hon. Friend recall the emotional impact of the Vietnamese boat people who arrived in Hong Kong some years ago? Is he aware that several thousand refugees are still in camps in Hong Kong, some of them the original arrivals, and that when the governor of Hong Kong was in London recently he was apparently unable to persuade Her Majesty's

1279
Government to allow some of those refugees to settle in Britain and thus encourage other countries to help in solving this problem? Will my right hon. Friend consider allowing the House to debate our moral obligation to those refugees and, indeed, the people and Government of Hong Kong, who have shouldered the burden for so long?
Mr. Wakeham: That is an important matter in Hong Kong and it is of wider concern, but I cannot promise my hon. Friend an early debate on it. However, I shall refer the point that he has raised to my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.
Mr. Norman Hogg: Will the Leader of the House accept that, since the Secretary of State for Scotland is here today, and likewise the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland with responsibility for education, it would be appropriate to have a statement at 11 o'clock on the situation which obtains as a result of the now celebrated leaks which appeared in the Glasgow Herald? I am referring to the School Boards (Scotland) Bill and the Government's intention to bring forward proposals for opting out.
Will the right hon. Gentleman further accept that all those circumstances, which have been created largely by the Prime Minister, have caused the Secretary of State for Scotland to become something of a figure of ridicule in Scotland, which is not in anyone's interests? Such a situation cannot continue, and it would be in the Government's interest if a statement were to be made at 11 o'clock.
Mr. Wakeham: I am tempted to discuss other matters of ridicule, but I will not. The Prime Minister tried, and I tried yesterday, to set out the position with regard to education in Scotland. The right thing to do is to discuss this matter in the debate on the day that we return after the Easter Adjournment.
Mr. Teddy Taylor: In view of the most worrying statement this morning by the chairman of the excellent British Aerospace that his results have been devastated by losses on the Airbus contract, will the Government make an early statement about whether they have any powers to bring some economic management into that project and to stop the creation of a mountatin of state-aided and unsaleable planes?
Mr. Wakeham: I cannot accept what my hon. Friend says about the management of that project, but I shall certainly refer the matter to my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
Mr. James Wallace: The Leader of the House is undoubtedly aware of the great concern in Scotland about the leaked proposals. Will he say whether, in the absence of a Select Committee on Scottish Affairs, the Government would be prepared to send the School Boards (Scotland) Bill to a Select Committee before it is referred to a Standing Committee, or does he have news to report on the progress of setting up a Select Committee on Scottish Affairs?
Can the Leader of the House help us? Does he know why the Leader of the Opposition appears to have discontinued the convention that he asks the Leader of the House the question on business? Is he too busy fighting on other fronts?
Mr. Wakeham: I am always sorry when the Leader of the Opposition is not here, and that is no criticism of the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson), who stands in admirably for him. However, the Leader of the Opposition does seem to have one or two matters on his plate at the moment, and we shall await developments.
My task here today — [Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman asked me about the School Boards (Scotland) Bill and I am trying to answer him. My job is to announce the business, not the contents of ministerial speeches, and he will have to wait until Tuesday 12 April for that.
Mr. Eric Forth: May I share with my right hon. Friend the concern just expressed that the Leader of the Opposition seems to have abandoned the long-standing convention of his being here for business questions? Perhaps my right hon. Friend will take an early opportunity to explain that to the House.
May I urge on my right hon. Friend an early debate, ranging across the whole spectrum of political policy, so that the various Labour party leadership candidates may give to their colleagues and the House the fullest explanation of their policies? Perhaps they will be prepared to give a statement on whether any one of them elected to the leadership of the Opposition would be prepared to liaise with any of the others elected as deputy leader. Opposition Members are entitled to know the answer to that vital question.
Mr. Wakeham: As usual, my hon. Friend is being extremely charitable to the Opposition. However, having heard some of the right hon. and hon. Members who are candidates, my experience is that at the end of their speeches one is not much clearer what their policies are.
I am not sure that my hon. Friend's way is the right way to proceed.
Mr. Nigel Spearing: When will there be a statement on the Agriculture Ministers' meeting which took place earlier this week? Would it not have been better for the statement to have been made today? Will it be made when we return from the recess? Is the Leader of the House aware that 21 documents arising from the Copenhagen and Brussels meetings need to be debated in the House? Will he guarantee that they will be debated before decisions are taken?
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the April business statement for EEC matters is not in the Vote Office? Does he agree that these matters are not up to scratch in a procedural sense, and should not the Leader of the House ensure that matters are improved as soon as possible?
Mr. Wakeham: The hon. Gentleman keeps a close watch on these matters. He is aware that I have had discussions and I recognise that there were some shortcomings in what happened in the past. We are doing our best to improve the position. There were certain discussions through the usual channels about the most convenient way of handling statements in the House. I will take on board the points raised by the hon. Gentleman and try to improve in the other areas.
Mr. Ivor Stanbrook: Is my right hon. Friend aware of any early-day motion which has attracted the support of more than 350 hon. Members? Does not such support reflect the strong feeling in the House about the anomaly whereby all public service pensioners' war

1281
service is included for pensions purposes unless their service was abroad? In view of the strong feeling expressed by the vast majority of hon. Members on both sides of the House, is there any need for a debate? Should not the proposal just be introduced?
Mr. Wakeham: I recognise how strongly my hon. Friend and other hon. Members feel about this. As he is aware, my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has said that he would be glad to discuss the issue again with my hon. Friend the Member for Orpington (Mr. Stanbrook) and a number of his colleagues. That is perhaps the best way to proceed.
Mrs. Ann Clwyd: As a result of the considerable concern over the Government's poll tax proposals, their complexity and the fact that amendments were introduced by the Secretary of State for the Environment after the guillotine fell, will the Leader of the House ensure that an extra day is made available so that those proposals can be explored in considerable detail in the House before we vote on them?
Mr. Wakeham: I do not believe that the fact that there are Government amendments automatically means that the guillotine motion passed by the House is invalid and should be reconsidered. That is not a precedent that I can accept. The question is rather the number of amendments, their complexity and whether there is adequate time. I told the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson), the Opposition Front Bench spokesman, that I would have discussions through the usual channels. We will look at this again, although the House has settled the matter.
Mr. Nicholas Baker: Will my right hon. Friend find time to discuss the report published today by the Haringey education authority which recommends that children should be required to learn about
"gay scientists, lesbian stand-up comics and Nazi persecution of homosexuals"?
Will join me in condemning pernicious rubbish of this kind and support a policy for the sake of the nation's children and to prevent discrimination by way of reaction against the homosexual community that local authorities should not try to pretend that homosexuality is a pretended family relationship?
Mr. Wakeham: I agree entirely with my hon. Friend, but I cannot find time in the week after the Easter recess for a debate on that subject.
Mr. Tony Banks: May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to early-day motion 919, which marks the fact that today is the second anniversary of the abolition of the Greater London council?
[That this House notes that 31st March marks the second anniversary of the abolition of the Greater London Council; calls attention to the loss to London of bold, imaginative and socially responsible policies in the areas of transport, planning, housing, recreation and the arts; further notes the cuts being imposed by the Government upon the London Fire Brigade together with the general deterioration during the past two years of London's services and infrastructure; and calls for the restitution of London-wide
1282
local government, together with a single voice for the capital city and the return of a sense of London identity and zest for living which two years ago emanated from County Hall.]
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in many respects services and infrastructure in London, particularly with regard to transport, planning and housing, have descended into unplanned chaos? The right hon. Gentleman has promised an early debate on London. When will it take place?
Mr. Wakeham: I congratulate those who tabled the early-day motion, because without it we would have quite forgotten the anniversary. Perhaps we should have a minute's silence from the hon. Gentleman once a year. That would contribute more to good government than anything else that he has done. I listened carefully to what he said, but I cannot promise an early debate on the subject.
Mr. Harry Greenway: Will my right hon. Friend take note of the reduction in rates payable by Londoners since the abolition of the GLC, for which we are all grateful, which we do not want back in any form?
Will my right hon. Friend consider early-day motion 752, signed by hon. Members on both sides of the House?
[That this House calls upon Her Majesty's Government to press the European Economic Community to renew the import ban on baby seal products as a means of maintaining pressure for a ban on the inhumane culling of baby seals, wherever they occur.]
May we have an early debate on this important matter?
Mr. Wakeham: That is an important matter. The Government strongly support the current EEC directive banning the import of harp and hooded seal pup skins and products on conservation grounds. A review of the conservation status of those two species will be undertaken before the expiry of the directive at the end of September 1989. No expiry date has been attached to our national measures to implement the directive under the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act 1976.
Mr. Bob Cryer: May we have a debate on the Register of Members' Interests, especially in view of the abuses that have come to light, including the planting of 58 parliamentary questions on behalf of Price Waterhouse and the recent article in the Daily Mirror demonstrating that Morgan Grenfell appears to regard Members of Parliament as being available for hire?
I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to early-day motion 927, which calls for an inquiry into the sale of the Rover Group and especially the role of the right hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit).
[That this House notes the £2·9 billion paid to rescue British Leyland, now called the Rover Group, by the taxpayer; is astonished that British Aerospace is effectively being paid £650 million to take over the sole remaining British volume car-maker with assets valued at over £700 million and an improving financial position; demands that any benefits go to the nation; and calls for a full inquiry into this bizarre deal and the position of the Right honourable Member for Chingford as adviser to the Chair of British Aerospace in the conduct of negotiations.]
Would it not be better to discuss all those matters and the effectiveness of the register in an early debate?
Mr. Wakeham: I know that the hon. Gentleman wishes to be helpful in these matters. I have noted the Select

1283
Committee's proposal about the changes to be made in the registration of directorships and its further consideration of lobbying, but I do not see the need for a debate. Although there is a stronger case for a debate on the Rover Group, I can add nothing to what I have already said to the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson).
Mr. Nicholas Bennett: In the light of the successful completion last night of the Committee stage of the Abortion (Amendment) Bill, after three and a half days of exhaustive, if not exhausting, debate, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the fact that if the Bill was obstructed on the Floor of the House on Report and Third reading, and was not completed, many people who have a great interest in the subject would look to the Government to provide time so that the House could make a final decision on the matter?
Mr. Wakeham: The Government have made their position clear. At the beginning of the Session, we provided additional time for private Members' Bills generally, and, except in wholly exceptional cases, we do not believe that we should provide additional time for any Bill, however important it is or how much support it attracts. But I agree with my hon. Friend that the whole House would deprecate the use of procedural tactics to try to stop it reaching a decision on the matter.
Mr. Rhodri Morgan: Has the Leader of the House read early-day motion 922, which has been signed by more than 120 Labour Members of Parliament?
[That this House notes the Prime Minister's apparent wish for a debate on her social security changes; believes that the challenge she issued to the Leader of the Opposition on this subject on Tuesday 29th March was solely intended to cover up her own confusion; and invites the Prime Minister therefore to propose a debate in Government time and on a Government motion to enable the Leader of her Majesty's Official Opposition to respond to her challenge.]
It seems to commemorate another second anniversary — the last time that the Prime Minister spoke in a debate in the House. Does the Leader of the House agree that the 62 new Labour Members are suffering from a form of sensory deprivation, which is a great disappointment to them, not having heard the Prime Minister's spout-to-kill policy in operation? Does he agree that the social security changes that will be introduced on 11 April would provide a suitable opportunity for a debate involving the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition?
Mr. Wakeham: I had noticed that early-day motion, but it completely misses the point made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on Tuesday. If the Opposition are so set against the social security increases that will go to the overwhelming majority of claimants after 11 April, they should give themselves the opportunity to stop those increases.
Mr. Allen Adams: Given that once again this week the Prime Minister has behaved towards Scotland with all the sensitivity of a sex-starved boa constrictor, will the Leader of the House—
Mr. Speaker: Order. I do not know whether there is anything in "Erskine May" about that sort of comment,
1284
but I do not think that it adds to the dignity of the House. As it is Easter, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will rephrase his question.
Mr. Adams: Of course I withdraw it, Mr. Speaker. I would not call the Prime Minister a sex-starved boa constrictor, but outside this place I have heard a number of people refer to the Prime Minister in those terms.
Will the Leader of the House try to get the Secretary of State for Scotland off his knees for five minutes and bring him into the Chamber to make a statement on Scottish education so that we may know exactly what the Government's policy is?
Mr. Wakeham: If the hon. Gentleman is trying to influence me or change my mind, he will have to do much better than that.
Mr. Max Madden: Is the Leader of the House aware that many pensioners are extremely angry about losing the pension increase because of the delay in payment until 11 April? Will he arrange to dip into the money that the Government are saving by robbing pensioners of their pension increases to pay for free television licences for all pensioner households? Those licences will be increased on 1 April.
Will the right hon. Gentleman also arrange for the Secretary of State for Social Services, on the first day back, to make a statement on the changes in the social security system, which the Government have called historic, to enable the House to put questions to him about the problems that will inevitably arise from those changes?
Will the Leader of the House ensure that citizens advice bureaux are not victimisied by the Prime Minister but are given additional funds to deal with the avalanche of queries arising from the social security changes?
Mr. Wakeham: The answer to all the questions except the last one is no, Sir. The hon. Gentleman's question on funding for citizens advice bureaux is not a matter for me.
Mr. Jeremy Corbyn: Will the Leader of the House ensure that during the week after the recess there is a debate on foriegn affairs, and especially the Prime Minister's forthcoming trip to Turkey? Will he convey to her the wish of many hon. Members and many British people that, instead of approving the veneer of democracy that the Turkish Government try to put on their country, she should instead visit the prisons in Turkey, which are the most overcrowded and which have the largest prison population in Europe?
She should also visit Diyarbakir in eastern Turkey where many Kurdish people are being killed by the Turkish army, and she should call for the release of Mr. Kutlu and Dr. Sargin, the general secretaries of the Communist party and the Workers party respectively, who have been held in prison and tortured but have not yet been brought to trial. Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that the Prime Minister denounces this travesty of democracy in the name of this country?
Mr. Wakeham: I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will have a successful and informative visit to Turkey. I have already said that the time is approaching when we should have another debate on foreign affairs. I know that hon. Members on both sides of the House wish to discuss many issues, but I cannot promise such a debate in the near future.
Mr. Greville Janner: May we have a debate very soon on the extraordinary saga of the disappearing documents, which were in the Public Record Office, relating to war crimes in general and to the allegations against President Waldheim in particular? Will the Leader of the House draw the attention of the Foreign Secretary to the leading article in The Times today about an alleged deal with Allied intelligence, and will he assure the House that the Easter holiday will not be used by our military intelligence to remove yet more documents from those files?
Mr. Wakeham: The hon. and learned Gentleman wishes me to refer that report in the newspapers to my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary. I shall certainly do that. I know how strongly the hon. and learned Gentleman feels about some of these issues, but I cannot promise him an early debate on the matter.
Mr. Barry Porter: Will my right hon. Friend find time for a debate on the troubles of Prescot, or indeed the troubles caused by Prescott? Prescot requires, indeed demands, new employment and it is right that the problems of this small town in south Lancashire should be debated in the House.
Mr. Wakeham: I regret that I cannot find time next week for that very important subject.
Mr. David Winnick: I welcome any move by the Home Secretary to ensure that there is adequate protection for African National Congress representatives in London following the assassination that took place in France. Would it be possible for the Foreign Secretary to call in the South African ambassador and make it perfectly clear that Britain will not tolerate the South African authorities' murder squads operating in this country? Would the Leader of the House also remind the Foreign Secretary that the ANC offices have, on numerous occasions, been burgled and that on one occasion they were fire-bombed? We must tell South Africa that its murder squads and other hit agents cannot operate in the United Kingdom under any circumstances.
Mr. Wakeham: I have no idea whether the hon. Gentleman's allegations are correct. However, I shall refer the points he made to my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary.
Mr. Tony Worthington: The Leader of the House must act to end the tragi-comedy of Scottish education policy where the Secretary of State for Scotland is being turned into the Kurt Waldheim of the Government Benches; he only obeys orders. Will the Leader of the House arrange for the Prime Minister to come and tell us about Scottish education policy because the Secretary of State does not know about it?
Mr. Wakeham: What is tragic is the way in which the Opposition get excited about some of these things and make a great deal of fuss and then realise that they are barking up the wrong tree. What I have done to try to assist them is to arrange the Second Reading of the School Boards (Scotland) Bill on Tuesday 12 April, and if they get their act together, they can make their points in that debate.
Several Hon. Members rose—
Mr. Speaker: Order. In view of the fact that the Adjournment debates are starting half an hour later than is shown on the Order Paper, the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. McNair-Wilson) and the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Strang) should divide the time between them. The debate of the hon. Member for Newbury will continue until 11.30 and the debate of the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East will be from 11.30 until 12 o'clock.
Mr. Tam Dalyell: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: I cannot take points of order now. This is private Members' time.
Mr. Dalyell: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I asked you for a ruling yesterday, as reported in column 1107 of Hansard, on the issue of leaks by civil servants and politicians. My question is simple: are you going to consider that, possibly over the Easter recess, in the light of what was reported in column 1107?
Mr. Speaker: I shall be considering throughout the Easter recess what went on yesterday.

Light Aircraft (Safety)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Ryder.]
11.2 am
Mr. Michael McNair-Wilson: I am grateful for this opportunity to speak about the safety of light aircraft. I do so as deputy chairman of the Air Safety Group, an organisation on which are representatives of all the main political parties. If 1988 is anything like previous years for light aircraft accidents—by "light aircraft" I mean aircraft below 5,700 kg in weight — there will probably be at least 200 accidents, some of which will be fatal.
In 1987, 56 people were killed in crashes of that sort. On the face of it, that sounds like a large number of accidents until one realises that there are about 4,000 aircraft in that category. Nevertheless, the chances of being killed in a light aircraft are 46 times greater than in a commercial jet. A total of 200 accidents, even if they represent only 5 per cent. of light aircraft in operation, is a high number and in recent months I have tried to discover whether there are any similar features in light aircraft accidents that call for remedial action. To some extent, I think that my research has paralleled that of the Civil Aviation Authority, the inquiries of which proceed.
In a press release in October 1987, Mr. Christopher Tugendhat, chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, said about last year's figures:
"Whereas fatal accidents involving UK public transport aircraft are very rare, the fatal accident record for light aircraft operated by private individuals and flying clubs has shown a disturbing increase."
He went on to say:
"I am asking a CAA task force to analyse these accidents to see whether there are any common threads and if anything can be done."
This morning I want to suggest some steps that should be taken. I do so after talking to private flyers, those who run flying clubs and the accidents investigation branch of the Department of Transport at the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnborough.
The first and most surprising discovery I made during my investigations was that there is no legal requirement for light aircraft owners to have third party insurance. Obviously, some pilots have that as well as personal accident insurance. However, despite the number of accidents to which I have referred, insurance remains an optional extra. I find that disturbing. After all, light aircraft crashes often cause fatalities not just to the pilot and his passengers but to members of the public.
To give one example, in September 1985, at Fordingbridge, a microlight aircraft that had been flown to a school fete crashed when taking off from the fete. It killed a woman and injured her child as well as five other people in the crowd and the pilot. The pilot was not insured. As it happens, it was the first microlight crash in which a member of the public has been killed in this country. I refer to it solely because it illustrates the hazards inherent in private flying and the reason why third party insurance should be a legal requirement. In fact, had that pilot taken out third party insurance, it would have cost him £120 per annum, and, if he had personal accident insurance, that would have cost a further £500 per annum.
Of course, insurance will not prevent crashes or save lives, but it means that victims of such accidents can
1288
receive compensation. I commend to my hon. Friend the Minister the suggestion for compulsory third party insurance for private pilots.
When I visited the accidents investigation branch at RAE Farnborough, it told me that on average there are about 150 reportable accidents a year involving private light aircraft, including club aeroplanes. A reportable accident is one in which there has been a death or serious injury or in which the aircraft was missing or has been badly damaged. If someone has been killed, the accidents investigation branch sends out a team to the site of the crash for a field examination a report is submitted to the CAA. Roughly four months later the accidents investigation branch will publish an account of the crash in its bulletin. That bulletin is widely circulated among aircraft operators, flying clubs and manfucturers. However, private pilots will probably not see it unless they are a member of a club.
To obtain a private pilot's licence, the would-be pilot has to undergo a medical examination before he or she obtains a student pilot's licence. He will probably go solo after 10 to 15 hours training and will receive his licence after 40 hours in the air. Once he or she has received their PPL, they will be required to fly for at least five hours a year, in fact during a 13-month period. Depending on when they fly the five hours, it would be possible for them to fly those hours within a two-year time frame. However, those five hours are meant to be a refresher course, proving that the pilot is keeping up to date with the requirements of his aircraft, modern air space and aircraft regulations.
It must be anybody's guess as to whether five hours in 13 months or over a period of two years is enough to ensure that a pilot maintains his skills and remains fully conversant with the flying scene. Most flying clubs will not allow their members to use their aircraft if they have not flown during the previous three months. However, as long as a private pilot notches up his five hours in those months, he will continue to possess his licence and be entitled to fly.
That position does not exist in America, although there is much more private flying there. In America, private pilots must have a check-up with a qualified instructor every two years before they can continue to fly. That seems to be a sensible procedure that I suggest we should follow.
I have already referred to the medical examination that every would-be pilot must have before being given a student pilot's licence. When he obtains his PPL, assuming he is under 40 years of age, he will not be required to have another medical examination for five years. When he is between 40 and 50 years of age, he will have to have an examination every two years, and only when he is between 50 and 70 will he be required to have an annual health check-up.
Perhaps such wide intervals up to the age of 50 are acceptable and based on medical advice, but an annual medical when a licence is renewed would not seem to be unreasonable, particularly as 60 per cent. of light aircraft accidents are put down to pilot error, while only 30 per cent. are put down to mechanical failure, and the remaining 10 per cent. are put down to other reasons, of which attempted aerobatics make up a sizeable chunk.
Pilot error brings me back to the airmanship of the pilot, his knowledge of his machine and of the elements through which he will fly. Over and again, I was told that weather plays a crucial part in accidents and that, although pilots will have been through a meteorology and navigation test, too often they ignore weather conditions

1289
unless they are flying club aircraft. In that case, they can fly only if the chief flying instructor agrees; otherwise the decision to fly is the pilot's. He may or may not have an instrument rating. He may or may not possess effective information about the weather conditions into which he will fly, but if he decides to go, he may do so.
I have not seen a breakdown of accidents showing the extent to which weather is a contributory factor, but I know that icing on wings has caused several crashes. That leads me to ask whether the present meteorology exams are still enough and whether something more should be put in their place.
My hon. Friend the Minister knows that private aircraft are not required to be equipped with radio transmitters, although most modern aircraft, other than microlights, have them. It is a safety measure. Those to whom I have spoken seem to want to leave the situation as it is.
Club aeroplanes are maintained on a transport category certificate of airworthiness, which is to a higher standard than that required of a private pilot, who is allowed to do a certain amount of maintenance for himself. There are 50-hour checks and 100-hour checks. I said that club maintenance is to a higher standard than that which is required of a private pilot, but it depends on enforcement of the regulations.
Last summer, I flew to France in a club aeroplane. I was surprised to find that several instruments were malfunctioning. Our pilot, who happened to be my nephew, got us to Abbeville and back safely. When we arrived home at the club, another pilot and his family were waiting to fly the aircraft somewhere else. Nobody checked the instruments. Presumably that pilot, too, handled an aircraft with malfunctioning instruments. It illustrated the point that perhaps the CAA does not police private flying as scrupulously as is required.
It is inevitable that, in a short debate such as this, I shall have overlooked certain points that also contribute to aircraft safety. I have not referred to drunken flying, yet there is no doubt that it is a contributory factor to accidents. It is reasonable to ask whether we use our air space to ensure maximum safety for commercial aircraft and privately owned small aircraft, and whether club airfields are properly equipped with radar. Perhaps, as our air space becomes more widely used, the time has come to consider a measure of re-regulation, and to take a searching look at the general safety of light aircraft and those who fly in them.
11.13 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Peter Bottomley): The House will be grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Mr. McNair-Wilson) for introducing this subject. I pay tribute to his work as deputy chairman of the air safety group. He rightly said that commercial aircraft safety is at a welcome, high level. The general problems of those using light aircraft, often referred to as general aviation, deserve as much attention as those of us who fly as commercial passengers. Obviously, the regulatory regimes are different. I am glad that my hon. Friend acknowledged the role of the Civil Aviation Authority. Again, its competence and responsibility deserve praise. It does a good job on behalf of the people of this country.
1290
My hon. Friend drew attention to the increase in the number of fatal accidents. In 1987, the number rose to 25. From 1981 to 1986, the number fluctuated between 13 and 20. The significance of the increase has been considered by the civil aviation study group.
I shall tell the House about the CAA's present views on light aircraft safety. Parliament has entrusted to the CAA all aspects of aviation safety regulation. It is for the authority to determine what steps are required to ensure safety in this important sector of aviation. The Government wholeheartedly support the CAA. Regulatory experience and expertise rests with the authority. I am grateful to it for providing me with factual material for today's debate. I shall arrange for the authority to respond to any points that I may not be able fully to answer in the available time.
Mr. Michael McNair-Wilson: May I press my hon. Friend the Minister a shade further on third party insurance? If there were to be such a requirement, would it entail legislation, or could the CAA make such a request to him?
Mr. Bottomley: That is exactly the sort of point to which my hon. Friend may get a detailed response later. The owner or operator of an aircraft is strictly liable for injury or damage to people or property on the ground. That is covered by section 76 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. As my hon. Friend said, there is no legal requirement for an owner or operator to have insurance. It is for an owner or operator to decide the level of insurance for third party purposes.
It is worth noting that most owners and operators are fully insured. All United Kingdom airlines take out insurance to cover all risks. The vast majority of general aviation is also covered. It is believed that most sporting aviators and private pilots have cover. We shall be grateful to see any evidence that people can provide to the CAA or to the Government. It is the type of issue that Parliament should consider.
Towards the end of 1987, the mounting total of United Kingdom light aircraft accidents began to cause concern in the aviation community. The CAA set up a study group to investigate the scale of the problem and to decide whether there were common causes. The group was required also to identify regulatory and other measures that could be expected to halt and reverse the undesirable trend. I may have to double-check the number of fatal accidents in 1987. I am not absolutely certain whether the total is 25 or 29, but I shall clear up that point. The difference may be the four microlight and helicopter accidents.
My hon. Friend referred to one microlight accident. The CAA investigation concentrated on the major group of powered fixed-wing light aircraft. It was considered that the operating environment and handling characteristics of helicopters and microlight aircraft differ from the main group in so many fundamental ways that their inclusion would hinder analysis. The analysis set out to determine the precise scale of the problem and to relate the significance of the relevant 25 accidents to past records. I shall pass over some of the details of that, but it will be in the CAA report that will come out shortly.
A statistical analysis was applied to the observed variations in accident counts in specific areas, such as technical and weather factors. No individual factors were

1291
found to be significant. In summary, the CAA's statistical work at the end of 1987 suggested that the rise in accident figures for the year may have been significant. The CAA's interpretation was that, based on previous data, the figures were somewhat higher than what one might expect. Satisfactory analysis to verify or to refute the interim interpretation would require accurate figures on hours flown.
The study group found no grounds for complacency. Other major aviation countries, such as the United States of America and Canada, have significantly reduced their general aviation accident rates during the past 10 years. In the same period, the United Kingdom's rate has remained at a fairly constant but higher level. It might be expected that figures for the United Kingdom would, at worst, mirror international levels. There is a clear implication that positive measures to reduce the future United Kingdom accident rate must be implemented.
The group agreed that, irrespective of the final, accurate trend determination, there was a need at present to continue the search for significant accident causes and to develop proposals for remedy. I am sure that the group will be grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury for raising the issue in the House.
Four major activity problem sectors have been identified and examined in detail—multi-engined aircraft accidents, weather-related accidents, accidents attributable to technical causes and private — non-club —accidents. Those problem sectors matched the concerns that my hon. Friend mentioned and I am sure that the House will appreciate the research that went into his speech and the way in which he raised the issue.
The selection filter for those areas was simply the fact of their relatively high frequency of occurrence in the 1987 statistics. Specific remedial action might logically be expected to be the most cost-effective.
In all those investigations, the most common recurring theme was "error of judgment." The group felt that general and particular issues should be addressed in the search for improvement. That implies an examination of the pilot error aspects of accidents, with particular emphasis on the need to improve the general level of decision-making made by light aircraft pilots. It also takes account of the four main problem sectors and calls for more specific examination of the factors affecting them.
The CAA concluded that additional general aviation regulation was not likely to be effective in the pursuit of improved decision-making because strict adherence to existing regulations would have eliminated a high proportion of the accidents. The basic problem is determination of the causes of lack of adherence to regulations and the development of remedial proposals. Without them, the imposition of additional regulations would be irrational and probably nugatory.
When pilots fail to adhere to existing regulations they do so either because they have personality problems prompting them to disregard constraints or because they are unaware of the existence or significance of the regulations. In either case, the remedy lies primarily in better training and education and only partly in a more vigorous application or policing of existing regulations.
Despite some concern that has been expressed by the general aviation community, no correlation was established between the weather-related accident count and recent changes in the aviation meteorological services in the United Kingdom. It was accepted that the service
1292
can provide all necessary information for safety operations. There is a recognised need to ensure that all general aviation pilots are made aware of the details of the modified service. Action already taken by National Air Traffic Services should largely cover that need. Many pilots operating outside club environments are not easily accessible for information distribution services, but a solution to this problem is needed.
The development of an effective system for preparation and dissemination of appropriate further education material requires more attention. It is improbable that such a programme could he effected without additional cost, and that may be difficult to justify in the face of current debates about the CAA's regulatory responsibility for non-commercial aviation activity.
There is a body of opinion in the sporting and recreational aviation community that supports the concept of self-regulation for such activities. It is argued that such flying is a sport, with no more or less inherent risk than others such as motor cycling, mountaineering, skiing or sailing, and that light aviation should be subject to no more regulation than is applied to those sports.
The view of the CAA is less sanguine. Aircraft in flight over land are regarded by many on the ground as a noisy, physical threat. They share the United Kingdom air space with growing numbers of public transport aircraft, so uniformity of regulation is essential for the continuing safe conduct of flight operations. There is no possibility that this necessary uniformity could be achieved by the fragmented system implicit in the self-regulation concept. The CAA retains the responsibility for aviation affairs right across the spectrum. Included in that responsibility is the duty to establish and sponsor such aviation safety promotion activity as is deemed necessary for a reduction in the accident rate.
The authority cannot provide services for nothing; it is responsible for the health of the whole industry. If it is accepted that recreational flight is a foundation for the commercial structure, it must follow that the limitations of possible cost recovery from general aviation cannot justify a reduction in involvement. The cost will have to be recovered from the industry as a whole.
The further education need also became apparent in the study of accidents to pilots operating outside the flying club environment. Identified causes for 50 per cent. of accidents to the non-club set were miscalculation of aircraft capability and navigation-weather problems. These same problems accounted for only 25 per cent. of the accidents in the club-associated set. The conclusions to be drawn from that disparity must be tempered by the smallness of the sample. It is reasonable to infer that in some respects the non-club set is more at risk than the club-affiliated set. The distribution of safety promotion material must be adjusted accordingly.
The analysis of multi-engined aircraft accidents showed yet again that errors of judgment lay at the root of most of the accidents. Some seven of the 11 pilots involved were professionally licensed and, consequently, subject to regular periodic performance testing. The further examination of the causes of this apparent professional inadequacy will be dealt with by the CAA flight operations inspectorate. There is a suspicion that the current aviation boom has already caused a reduction in the mean experience level of pilots at the air taxi section of the industry, and that may be becoming apparent in accident

1293
levels. Consideration is being given to reappraisal of approval and checking requirements to allow for those reduced experience levels.
In the remaining non-professional sector, it was felt that lack of checking was unsatisfactory. As my hon. Friend said, a twin-engine aircraft rated pilot may remain continuously rated-licensed with only five hours flying per year, including one twin-engined aircraft flight. Under such undemanding circumstances, it might be expected that the impact of the original training lessons would be reduced by the passage of time and the shortage of continuous experience. Nor is it likely that such a regime could provide sufficient opportunity for refresher training in sectors such as asymmetric flight. Within the club environment, there may be reasonable continuous performance monitoring, but the private aircraft operation outside the club is under no constraint except self-discipline.
The group felt that the number of loss-of-control-after-engine-failure accidents was strong evidence in support of a requirement for a more positive and formal system for verification of continuing performance adequacy. Proposals will be made for the introduction of such a system, and this is the only sector in which new regulation rather than further education has been seen to be desirable. Those words will provide some reassurance to my hon. Friend and they show that he has put his finger on one of the more practical issues in which change is likely to be made.
Absolute safety is unachievable. There will always be an element of risk in flying. The aim of the safety regulations must be to attempt to reduce that risk to an acceptable level. Legislation by itself will not improve safety unless it reinforces what is generally agreed and accepted as being good practice. The most effective way to improve flight safety is through better education in its broadest sense. It is also the most expensive solution.
The CAA report on general aviation accidents is more comprehensive than can be outlined here. At present it is on CAA internal circulation for comment and should be made more widely available by the end of next month.
Anyone reporting this debate would be well advised to recognise the distinction between "General Aviation" and "general aviation", as most of us as fare-paying passengers would regard it. Many involved in the light aircraft world apply their skills in an acceptable way. The relatively small number of accidents is welcome. It was the increase in the level of accidents in 1987 that caused concern. It is right to pay attention to any trend that appears to be out of line and I am sure that the House will agree that our aim should be to make the United Kingdom one of the safest countries in the world in light aviation, in the same way that we are on the roads.

AIDS
11.29 am
Mr. Gavin Strang: It is hardly possible to exaggerate the seriousness of the threat of AIDS to our society. It is undoubtedly the biggest crisis in public health for over half a century. It is true that, according to Government figures, only 749 people have died of AIDS and only 1,344, at the last count, were identified as suffering or having died from AIDS. However, as we all know, this is only the beginning of this tragedy and many thousands of people are already infected with the AIDS virus and will develop AIDS and, like all AIDS sufferers, will subsequently die from that illness.
The AIDS syndrome was described only in 1981, and it was in 1983 that the human immunodeficiency virus which is responsible for AIDS was identified. Since that time, a great deal has been learnt about the virus, and we certainly know a lot about the methods of transmission. The virus does not survive easily outside the human body; that means in practice that there are three methods of transmission — sexual, blood to blood and maternal/ foetal. It is certainly the case that in England the vast majority of people who have died from AIDS or are suffering from it are homosexuals, but it is wrong to see the problem of AIDS as one that is solely, or even largely, related to the gay community.
I am glad that a Scottish Office Minister is here to reply to the debate, as the position in Scotland is different. Whereas in the coming years the vast majority of AIDS sufferers in England will continue to be homosexual, in Scotland that will not be the case. There is nothing unique about Scotland. The position in Italy and Spain is similar, in that over half the cases of AIDS there are related to drug abuse.
In Scotland the problem is concentrated, to a large extent, in the south-east. It is well known that the situation in Edinburgh is serious. It has been known for a long time that more than half the injected drug misusers are carriers of HIV. It would be helpful if the Minister could confirm the last figures that I have, which show that in Glasgow 5 per cent. of injected drug users were HIV positive.
It is vital that we recognise the enormous importance of tackling the spread of this virus, either within the drug-injecting community or between the drug-injecting community and the rest of society. This is important, first, because there are thousands—in Edinburgh alone there are more than 2,000—of people who misuse drugs and who are HIV positive.
Secondly, it is important to understand that the drug takers are a transient group; they are not a fixed population. People give up drugs and move into general society and, sadly, people, usually younger people, move into that community or habit. It is also the case—again, there has been some misinformation about this, but the research in Edinburgh makes it quite clear—that these drug addicts travel all over the country, so that the infection is spread from major cities, whether Edinburgh or Dundee, to other parts of the country.
Fourthly — this is particlularly important — the infection among the drug-taking community will for some time be the main source of transmission into the heterosexual community. The evidence is clear, but it is unfortunate that we still find people writing in the popular

1295
magazines suggesting that the virus cannot be transmitted by normal sexual intercourse. A paper was published recently by a group of Edinburgh workers based on research into partners of HIV-positive drug abusers and one can be fairly confident that the vast majority of these partners have not been injecting drugs themselves. It is clear that a number of them are already infected by HIV as a consequence of a heterosexual relationship with an HIV-positive drug-injecting partner.
Another reason why we attach such great importance to this issue is that the vast majority of the babies who are born HIV positive — of 65 such babies born in the United Kingdom, 40 have been born in the Lothian area —are born to mothers who have contracted AIDS or the HIV virus through the misuse of drugs.
How can we tackle this enormous problem? One approach is to eliminate drug misuse, because if we could do that, we would eliminate this source of infection. We all want to eliminate drug misuse, but we shall not achieve that, certainly not within the time scale that is necessary if we are to avert an enormous increase in the spread of HIV throughout our society. We cannot allow ourselves to get hooked on to that approach. We will want to try to ensure that the measures that are taken to tackle HIV within the drug community are complementary to measures to reduce drug abuse, but one of the mistaken approaches, which I hope that the Minister will reject, is the suggestion that the solution is simply to tackle the problem of drug misuse.
It has been spelt out time and again that the threat of HIV to our society is much greater than the threat of drug misuse. We must fully recognise that fact, which means that we cannot wait until we have tackled the drug problem. We have to persuade drug injectors to alter their habits. How best can we go about doing that? The best information that we have had to date on how to do so is the document of the Government's advisory council on the misuse of drugs, which was published earlier this week. That document represents a valuable statement on how we should go about tackling this problem.
The report emphasises —this is how we see it in Edinburgh on the basis of our experience — the importance of making contact with these drug misusers. We must educate them, and that cannot be done through television or public education programmes. We have to do it by making direct contact with them and, as a consequence, the advisory council has come out strongly in favours of the development of a community-based drug service. We have some experience of this in Edinburgh, where there are a number of drug groups. Historically, partly because of the lack of provision by the public sector, these are voluntary groups which were originally directly funded by the Scottish Home and Health Department but which are now being funded by the local health boards.
These groups are already making a valuable contribution, but they need more resources. The people who are working in the front line are able to relate more effectively to drug injectors than some of the professionals, and they need more resources. They can provide advice and counselling. The most important thing is to make contact, and contact is not made with many drug misusers. The report suggests that so far only a third have been contacted.
The conditions of service of workers in the drug groups should be improved, and this applies to both national and local government funding. Better facilities are needed. To
1296
make these workers wait for three years on temporary contracts before telling them that there will be an extension of the programme is wholly unsatisfactory, and I hope that something can be done about that. We need to allow these dedicated people security of employment, because we know that we shall need them for a long time. We also need more provision in the public sector. We need better hospital-based facilities to back up local drug groups and more back-up, in particular, for general practioners who have a high number of HIV-infected individuals within their practice.
It is crucial that we provide additional resources to back up the facility for that kind of contact with injecting drug misusers. Once a dialogue is taking place, we are able to have some influence over them. There is evidence that that influence is already beginning to reduce the risk of their picking up the virus, if they do not already have it, or of transmitting it to other people.
We know that the main method of transmission among drug takers is the sharing of dirty needles. Edinburgh's history in that respect is well summarised in last Session's report of the Select Committee on Social Services into AIDS, which pointed out that during the epidemic of heroin taking—particularly among young people—in Edinburgh in the early 1980s, the practice of sharing dirty needles was very prevalent. That practice was probably contributed to by the police effort to clamp down on the drug problem by virtually eliminating the legal sale of clean syringes. As a consequence, there was a tremendous explosion in the number of people infected over that period.
It is well known that that was the main method of transmission. It was clearly documented in a paper produced by Edinburgh professionals in February 1986. The Scottish Office commissioned a report from a committee chaired by Brian McClelland published in September 1986, which recommended decisively that the Government should bite the bullet and provide clean syringes at an exchange centre, where drug injectors would be able to obtain free needles and syringes.
The Government's response to that call has been so inadequate as to be positively irresponsible. They sat on the McClelland report for months. Eventually, they announced 15 pilot schemes, 12 in England and three in Scotland. Of course such projects involve problems —the Minister may wish to comment on them—but we must make the projects work. It is not sufficient to say that, because there has been a problem in Dundee, such a project will not be possible there. The Edinburgh example shows that the schemes can be made to work. In the long term, the only test of their success is the extent to which they reduce the spread of HIV. But we will not know that for many years. In the short term, the only test can he the number of clients who have been contacted and provided with clean needles, with whom a relationship can be developed and who can be given advice.
Edinburgh has one centre open for half a day a week. We want many more centres throughout the area that are open for much longer. The Government's response to the recommendation in this area in the report by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs is profoundly disappointing. The Minister for Health states:
"While the evaluation points to some promising features of such schemes, we do not consider that we yet have sufficient evidence to recommend an expansion of schemes in England."

1297
The Scottish Office is marginally more positive in its response. The Under-Secretary of State, who will reply to today's debate, states:
"So far as further needle exchange arrangements by Health Boards are concerned, we are not yet in a position to reach general conclusions on whether any extension of the existing arrangements would be appropriate. However, if any Health Board considers that, notwithstanding possible developments in the pharmacy-based field, there is a need for such facilities in their area, we shall be prepared to consider specific proposals." —[Official Report, 29 March 1988; Vol. 130, c. 406.]
I hope that the Government will think again.
Of course we support the provision of free needles through community-based pharmacists. I welcome the Under-Secretary's statement in his response to the ACMD report that he will enter into discussion with pharmaceutical organisations in Scotland with a view to encouraging them to sell clean syringes. Indeed, there is a good example of how that can work in Glasgow.
In some instances, individual general practitioners may also have an important part to play in the provision of clean needles and syringes. However, they are not a substitute for needle exchange centres. The counselling, advice and education that can be provided in a well-established needle exchange centre, where effective dialogue with drug injectors is possible, may well be more effective than a pharmacist could ever be. That is not to detract from what the Minister is trying to do, but his proposals must not be seen as an alternative to support for such centres.
When we had our only major debate on AIDS, in November 1986, the then Secretary of State made the point that the Government wanted this to be an all-party issue. Of course we are all united on the need to tackle the problem. But, as I said in that debate, if the Government want it to be an all-party issue, that can be sustained only if they are prepared to provide the level of resources that the community—the electorate—considers adequate. We are approaching the point — if we have not already reached it—at which the Government are failing to do that.
In some health authorities and health boards in London —and certainly in Lothian and other parts of Scotland— the provision of facilities to look after AIDS sufferers is already a significant proportion of their budgets. I welcome the Government's specific capital allocation for AIDS units in Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee, and I have no criticism of the level of that allocation. I feel, however, that the Government have fallen down on the expansion of resources to tackle the problem before it reaches the stage at which people suffer and die of the disease.
We need a much larger investment in projects to provide counselling and advice for drug users. Of course, some of the money must come from social work departments. The Minister will know of the disappointment, particularly in Lothian, in the Government's response to the joint officers committee of local government and civil servants which reported jointly to COSLA and to Ministers. The Minister accepted the report's recommendations, and said that the increase already provided for social work would cover the requirements. But that is not really adequate, especially in Lothian, which has a special problem. While I welcome the
1298
additional money that is being provided, particularly on the capital side, we need additional, specific resources, not only to support the projects to which I have referred, but also for the social work departments' functions in this area.
There was all-party support for the funding of £500,000 by the Lothian regional council, even in its current difficulties. I believe that Lothian may have to make great sacrifices to find money to tackle the problem. The money should come from central Government.
Lothian is lucky—as the Minister, who has taken an interest in the matter, will probably confirm—in that a number of very able people are working on the subject, some highly qualified professionals and other dedicated workers with the voluntary groups. It is striking that so many people have come forward, including senior public sector professionals, to tackle the problem with such commitment, but we need more resources.
Tragically, Lothian is an archetypal authority in that we are having to tackle a problem of major significance to the entire United Kingdom and other European countries. I believe that we can become a model of how best to tackle the problem if the Government give the funding we need, but that will not be done in a few months.
Although it is not only a question of resources, I must stress that we do need more resources, particularly in Lothian, so that we can set an example that will benefit not only Scotland but the rest of the United Kingdom and Europe.
11.50 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Michael Forsyth): I congratulate the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Strang) on securing this Adjournment debate and on choosing this important subject. I assure him that the Government take the problems of AIDS and drug misuse very seriously. We know that they are of considerable concern in Scotland.
Of those who have chosen to be tested for HIV infection, more than 50 per cent. are intravenous drug misusers, whereas the corresponding figure for the United Kingdom as a whole is only 7 per cent. In Scotland, more than 20 per cent. of those infected are women, the great majority of whom are intravenous drug misusers. In other parts of the United Kingdom, the AIDS epidemic manifests itself in risk groups such as homosexuals, but in Scotland it is predominantly associated with intravenous drug misuse. As the hon. Gentleman rightly emphasised, that carries with it the danger of spreading the infection, through sexual contact, to a wider population.
The hon. Gentleman asked me to confirm figures for the extent of infection among drug misusers in the east, as opposed to the west, of Scotland. He has obviously studied the ACMD report, which in paragraph 7.4 estimates that between 40 and 50 per cent. of intravenous drug misusers in the east of Scotland are infected with the HIV virus, whereas for the west of Scotland the estimate is between 2·5 and 5 per cent.
The hon. Gentleman asked me to acknowledge the imperative that the fight against the spread of AIDS should take precedence over the Government campaign to end drug misuse. I am happy to assure him that it is indeed the predominant priority, and our policies are geared towards that. The main message of the Government's

1299
public education campaign is that drugs should not be injected, but that those who persist in doing so should not share needles or other equipment.
If the spread of the virus among those who inject drugs is to be slowed it is vital that they understand the dangers of sharing syringes and needles, and they should act on that knowledge. The evidence is that that message is getting across. Indeed, one reason for the high level of HIV infection in Edinburgh and the east of Scotland was the injecting culture, where people deliberately shared needles. That resulted in a rapid spread of the disease.
The hon. Gentleman suggested that our response on needle exchanges had been inadequate. The experimental needle exchanges have provided a wealth of useful information about the behaviour of drug misusers and about the ways in which they can be encouraged to change to safer practices. The Dundee scheme was closed because of disruption by some of its clients. The Glasgow and Edinburgh schemes were more successful, although, on the basis of the hon. Gentleman's test of take-up, the Glasgow scheme was a little disappointing.
On 29 March I said that we had informed Lothian and Greater Glasgow health boards that, although central funding would not continue after 1 April, they could continue to operate their schemes if they considered that to be appropriate to local circumstances. The two boards have decided to do so. The drug misusers who have availed themselves of the services of those two boards can therefore continue to do so during the foreseeable future.
The hon. Gentleman emphasised the importance of funding local drug misuse services and voluntary groups that are in touch with drug misusers, and I agree with him. I am sure he knows that central Government funds are not intended to finance every worthwhile drugs-related project throughout Scotland. However, our programme makes a substantial contribution to the encouragement and assistance of such services. We announced last year that we were making an additional £300,000 per year available for a further expansion of drug misuse servies in recognition of the additional demands placed upon them by HIV infection and intravenous drug misuse. To encourage the development of local plans, we asked the health boards to co-ordinate proposals and to submit bids for a share of the additional resources.
We have taken on board the hon. Gentleman's plea that we recognise the special problems faced by Lothian and Greater Glasgow. The additional resources were specifically targeted at the three health boards most affected—Lothian, Tayside and Greater Glasgow. In total, £1·1 million has been set aside in the current year's health programme specifically for the support of drug misuse services, and a similar sum will be made available next year.
1300
The hon. Gentleman asked about resources for social work and rightly pointed out the responsibility that falls on local government. A joint working group of Government and local authority officials estimated that in 1988 social work expenditure to deal with the effects of the AIDS virus would be just over £1 million for Scotland as a whole, probably rising to about £3·5 million in 1990. Those are not the Government's estimates; they were made by those involved in the provision of services. We have taken account of that in our rate support grant settlement for 1988–89 through a 1·5 per cent. increase in real terms, which is in excess of £3 million in 1987–88. Therefore, it is difficult to accept that the Government have done anything other than provide the resources required.
Dr. David Owen: Will the Minister provide any additional resources as a result of the report, or is it simply a continuation of existing programmes?
Mr. Forsyth: The right hon. Gentleman knows that in answer to a question on Wednesday I made it clear that the Government would take careful cognisance of the report's recommendations. The thinking behind the report has been very much a part of our developing strategy. For example, we said on the same day that we would look to the retail pharmacist as a way to increase the supply of needles, and the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East paid tribute to that decision. It runs very much in line with the thrust of the report's recommendations.
The' report also pointed to the importance of finding informal ways to reach out and make contact with drug misusers so that we could get across to them the necessary information that might encourage them to change their behaviour. That aim has been part of our funding strategy for voluntary organisations and support groups, through the health boards.
The hon. Gentleman said that the number of clients of needle exchanges was a test. I cannot help but observe that when I visited the needle exchange at Ruchill it was dealing with about 65 people, whereas around the corner the pharmacist was selling more than 1,500 sets of injecting equipment every month.
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for having raised this subject. I assure him that AIDS and drug misuse have far-reaching social and economic implications which present challenges to the Govermment and the community on several fronts. We intend to meet those challenges. We are grateful to him for the support that he has given us and for the action that he has taken in the House in pursuing the matter.

Rover Group
11.59 am
Mr. Hal Miller: I should make it plain at the start that this is in no sense an attempt to pre-empt the debate that is to come. I applied for this Adjournment debate before the statement on Tuesday was public knowledge.
With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I should like to leave a little time for my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. King) to join the debate. He and I share the Longbridge works and most of the workers live in our constituencies.
I welcome the Under-Secretary of State for Industry, who has had a long connection, in his constituency and now in his official duties, with various forerunners of the Rover Group and who triumphantly concluded the recent deal for the sale of Leyland Bus on which I congratulate him. It is singularly appropriate that he has also had close experience of British Aerospace. He is in a unique position to advise the House on the benefits of the deal, so I do not apologise to him for the inconvenience of bringing him back to London for the debate, because he will welcome the opportunity to expand on the remarks of the Chancellor of the Duchy on Tuesday which, necessarily in responding to questions, were slightly disjointed.
The agreement between British Aerospace and the Rover Group is a great coup. Certainly it is a political coup. It is no wonder that the Opposition are asking for a full-scale debate, as they made such a sorry fist of the questions on the statement. They could not understand that limiting the tax losses was of benefit to the taxpayer. Indeed, they started burbling about child allowances in the context of what most of us concerned with the motor industry would regard as a most significant development and opportunity.
The political aspects certainly reflect the cracking pace that the Department of Trade and Industry under Lord Young has set in moving towards an enterprise basis and in returning to the private sector in a state of health the industries that have been in its charge.
It is worth emphasising that the Rover Group agreement is not just a political coup. It is a commercial coup because the speed with which the agreement has been reached has done a great deal to ease, if not end, the uncertainties that might otherwise have affected suppliers, dealers, customers and those who work in Rover. That confidence is very important.
We should not overlook the fact that while Rover has been in public ownership there has had to be each year full Government consideration of the corporate plans, with a great deal of discussion in the media and elsewhere about whether such plans were being funded in full and whether they responded to the capacity of the industry or its competitive prospects. All that discussion, which was necessarily spread out over some months each year, did a great deal of damage to the certainty that suppliers, dealers and workers in industry naturally expect to enjoy. I am glad that they will no longer be exposed to such intense scrutiny and the expressions of such doubts, whether or not they were justified.
The agreement also marks the care that the Government have taken with the Rover Group. It is not a question of getting rid of it at any price, as the Opposition have been trying to suggest. The Government
1302
have sustained it almost at any price, and certainly at great cost to the taxpayer. Therefore the Opposition are in some difficulty. On the one hand they suggest that Rover is being got rid of at any price, and on the other hand the say that the Government are doing too much to help it. The Opposition will have to make up their mind which path they wish to pursue.
Conservative Members certainly take confidence from the progress that Rover Group has made under Mr. Graham Day and his management team to improve the margin on its vehicles, to improve the quality of those vehicles, to develop markets for them, to return the company to a trading profit and enable it to resume its rightful place in the private sector. That is a mark of the progress that has been made. It is not a sign of defeat or failure; it is a very strong signal of confidence in the progress and viability that the company has achieved.
Part of that confidence comes from the collaboration with Honda. In the days of the Ryder report—if we can remember those gloomy days—I said in the House that the future for the company, as it then was, rested in collaboration with other companies. At that stage, we had not envisaged the collaboration with Honda which has been most fruitful in terms of shortening the design cycle, bringing forward new models, sharing the experience of such a skilled engineering company as Honda and developing remarkable products which now enjoy success in the market place.
The additional collaboration with British Aerospace marks another step in the same direction. I welcome the fact that collaboration with a British company is about to start, thereby giving further confidence to dealers that there will be no hiccups in the marketing of vehicles, and that customers may retain their traditional loyalties and continue to support the product.
I wish to make one or two further points that would do a great deal to buttress the confidence of those in the industry and the all-important customer. I refer to the Metro in particular. I shall question the Minister in a moment, but I believe that we already have an assurance that the next model jointly to be produced with Honda will be continued—it is now codenamed the R8.
However, I want to look a little further ahead. If the Metro model is to be replaced, the necessary steps will have to be taken now for it to be produced in 1990. If we were to have the R8 in 1989, we must have the new Metro in 1990. That means that work must be undertaken. That vehicle is clearly important, and not only for those who have the interests at Longbridge at heart. As two of every three vehicles sold by Rover are Metros, and as it is the only model on the best selling list, it is vital for the work force that suppliers and dealers should be able to sustain their businesses.
Is my hon. Friend the Minister able to say anything about the outcome of the discussions in Japan between Lord Young, Professor Smith and Mr. Day? Was there any discussion of models after the R8? Did Honda say anything about its future intentions? Did it say whether it wished to go it alone on a green field site, or is it looking forward to continuing its collaboration with Rover and British Aerospace?
I appreciate that it may be difficult for my hon. Friend to give an open answer to a very important question, but it leads on to my next point. My hon. Friend the Member for Northfield and I believe that it is important to retain

1303
volume car and engine manufacturing at Longbridge, not just for constituency reasons but for west midlands reasons and state of technology reasons.
Never let us forget that at one stage the Longbridge plant accounted for over 50 per cent. of all the robots installed in this country. It is at the cutting edge of technology. That is why it is important to be able to look forward to continuity, so that further development similar to that which is being undertaken in association with Warwick university may proceed.
If there has been any suggestion that Honda may not wish to proceed other than on a model-by-model basis and that it may have long-term plans to proceed independently, why, oh why, should a condition be imposed that British Aerospace must not divest itself of its cars division for five years? It would be foolish to preclude another manufacturer that might wish to take advantage of the excellent K series engine that is being produced at Longbridge, because it would add considerably to economies of scale and would enable the company to send some of its models down the assembly line, thereby reducing costs. What is the reason behind the imposition of that condition?
We have nurtured the Rover Group to the point at which it may at last be returned to the private sector. The agreement is a mark of success. It prepares the ground for the further progress and development to which I am glad to note that British Aerospace is committed.
12.12 pm
Mr. Roger King: I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Mr. Miller) for allowing me to say a few words in this debate. I warmly support all that he said. He put the case extremely well.
Broadly speaking, I welcome the Government's decision to merge British Aerospace and the Rover Group. I make no comment about price, but it ought to be placed on the record that only two years ago the management was interested in purchasing Land Rover for about £250 million. At that stage, Land Rover was not even in the black. British Aerospace has negotiated a substantial bargain.
The Rover Group is not confined solely to Land Rover and Austin Rover cars. It still retains a 40 per cent. shareholding in Leyland Daf, which is now in profit. My hon. Friend the Minister has an immediate interest in that company. The Rover Group also retains a 25 per cent. holding in Unipart, the spare parts distribution and manufacturing section of the original BL cars group. It is trading very well indeed — as is Istel, the computer software and services subsidiary. The Rover Group is more than just a car manufacturer.
I welcome the deal and the price that has been paid. It has pleased many because of the resultant increase in the industrial strength of the new company. The House will recall that we sought to achieve that in the late 1960s. It was said that we had to be big to be beautiful and that we needed big muscle to succeed, but we learnt that we can be too big and that we can have the wrong muscle. I very much hope that the synergy of this arrangement is correct and that particular parts of this greater organisation will not disappear and wither away.
We hope that the industrial strength of the new company will be great, but we must ensure that there is a commitment to the maintenance of the car industry. It is
1304
essential that where the Rover Group is to find its market within the European Economic Community should be clearly defined. The group has at last pulled itself out of the financial quagmire and is now trading in the black. By all accounts, it should be doing a great deal better during this financial year.
I am encouraged by what Mr. Graham Day said in his circular to all employees. He said that the company has made great progress and is determined to maintain it. There could be no better signal of that determination than an announcement that the company intends to retain its present volume of car production at around 500,000.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove referred to the commitment to the new Metro project, which represents two fifths of current production. It is essential that distributors and dealers throughout the world should have such a car in their inventory. If they do not have a supermini car, they cannot face competition from all over the world. The Metro is consistently in third place among the top 10 cars in this country. It accounts for a substantial components input at the Longbridge works, where there are hundreds, if not thousands, of components suppliers. We look forward to the new management endorsing its determination to remain in that market by announcing that the new Metro will go full steam ahead.
If there is to be a change of direction, the £95 million that was spent on developing the K series engine and fitting out a new gear box factory, which the car will use in conjunction with the forthcoming R9 model, will have been largely ill spent. It can be justified only by large-scale production of new engines and gear boxes; 300,000 units a year are needed for the new Metro and the R8 car that is to be manufactured next year. Large-scale production is needed to justify the expenditure that has already taken place and that is still taking place. I look forward to a commitment on that scale.
I recognise that it is impossible for the company to publish confidential details of its forthcoming models. That information is rightly kept secret. However, we are living in unusual times and it is not unreasonable to ask for such a commitment. The Rover Group has the ability to prove that it is a worthy part of the car industry. Enormous strides have been made in productivity and quality. This last outpost of a rich British motoring legacy can deliver the goods and it is doing so. It deserves more than a lingering decline into obscurity. I am sure that the new management will grasp the opportunity to make a great success of it.
Not long ago, Austin Rover ran a slogan, "Now we're motoring." Unfortunately, it did not. Perhaps the smile on Professor Rowland Smith's face shows that he has thought of another one: "Watch us fly." This time it really must.
12.20 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Industry (Mr. Robert Atkins): I am particularly pleased to be answering the Adjournment debate initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Mr. Miller). It gives me great pleasure to congratulate him on raising this subject; whether by accident or by design, he finds himself in the front line as a result of the announcement made earlier this week.
The House will be aware that my hon. Friend is one of the authorities on the motor industry. He is chairman of the all-party motor industry group, and he is heard on these matters with respect. So it is, too, with my hon.

1305
Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfields (Mr. King) who in his past incarnation—and in his present incarnation as the hon. Member for the constituency that includes Longbridge — knows much about the importance of Austin Rover.
This is an ideal opportunity for the three of us —saving the presence of the hon. Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke)—to discuss the excellent news of earlier this week. I know a little about the Rover Group, as I represent the constituency that includes the town of Leyland, where it all started. Up there, they still talk about "Spurrier" or "Leyland Motors". I am very much involved, too, on the British Aerospace front and, incidentally, that company is still known as English Electric. The traditional names that abounded have changed.
I know from my experience of Leyland DAF and Leyland Bus, which featured in the press only yesterday, as well as of British Aerospace, just how important and ideal the combination of the Rover Group and British Aerospace will be. To add weight to the success story that is British Aerospace and will be British Aerospace and Rover, let me cite the acquisition by BAe of Royal Ordnance in my constituency, which has been extremely well run by BAe's managers, building on a very good work force.
In engineering terms and in a variety of other ways, the combination is excellent news. I very much agree with my hon. Friends the Members for Bromsgrove and for Northfields that the Opposition have been slightly wrong-footed on this; I put it no higher than that. We shall view with a great deal of interest their contribution to the debate that they have requested, and which I understand we are likely to have. We are very proud of the achievement that this spectacular deal represents in both political and commercial terms. It is an achievement for which my right hon. and noble Friend the Secretary of State should be congratulated. We shall welcome the investigation that the Public Accounts Committee has suggested it may carry out, as well as the close examination of the deal by the Opposition, because we believe that it is an excellent deal that will stand the test of time.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove asked about the commitment of British Aerospace in general terms. I am in no doubt at all that British Aerospace has taken on the company because it wants to develop and build upon it. BAe is keen to ensure that the work put in by Graham Day and his team is properly developed. BAe has said that it wants to abide by the terms of the business plan that Graham Day has produced. While there may be changes as time progresses—I hope that my hon. Friend will be watching for them and will give us the benefit of his advice—the company has told us that it looks on its acquisition of the Rover Group as a long-term investment and that it is committed to the maintenance and development in the longer term of the group's present business. Obviously BAe will address itself to the future well-being of the business and the shape of the product range.
While it would clearly be wrong for the Government to impose constraints on the management of the group, I should draw hon. Members' attention to BAe's own press release, which states that BAe believes that Graham Day and his colleagues have done an excellent job of
1306
repositioning Rover Group for the future and is keen to support his future plans for the Rover Group. The company has told us that it is conscious of the importance of Rover as a British-owned manufacturer of cars and four-wheel drive vehicles, not simply in terms of direct employment—to which both my hon. Friends referred— but in terms of Rover's significance to its supply industries, distributors, dealers and customers.
We have had a number of letters from component manufacturers and some from dealers saying how pleased they are that the deal originally suggested would be a British solution. The Opposition underrate the importance of that at their peril. The House will recall that in past discussions we all sought a British solution. British Aerospace further said that its purpose in acquiring Rover was to hold and develop its principal businesses and sees no reason to disturb these. British Aerospace's commitment is there, declared for all to see, and we can look forward to the result with confidence.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove referred to Honda. Honda made it abundantly clear to my right hon. and noble Friend the Secretary of State, on his visit and in our earlier brief discussions, that it welcomed the continuity of Rover Group's British management team, which would be assured by British Aerospace's ownership of the company. Honda said that it is keen to be involved in the discussions, which may well go wider than the motor industry because of Honda's close involvement with a wide variety of activities connected with electronics and related matters.
My hon. Friend referred specifically to the Metro. My hon. Friends are right to suggest that the Metro has played a substantial part in the achievements of the Rover Group in recent years. As my hon. Friend said, about two fifths of the sales have been Metro sales. British Aerospace recognises that fact. I cannot give my hon. Friend an absolute assurance—I know he understands that—that the Metro as such will continue, but it would be foolish of British Aerospace not to recognise the importance of the Metro and of building on its success in the market place. I am sure that British Aerospace will look to the future along those lines.
Another point that needs to be reiterated, although my hon. Friends did not deal with it in detail, is that, although we have achieved much, we need to ensure that the European Commission hastens its progress in giving its support to the deal. My right hon. and noble Friend the Secretary of State has done much work already with officials in trying to persuade Commissioner Sutherland that much needs to be done. Commissioner Sutherland has said, rightly and properly, that an investigation will have to be carried out. We hope that he will be able to undertake it quickly and efficiently to ensure that the deal gets the go-ahead in the time scale that we seek for it.
It is a source of great satisfaction to me, as the hon. Member for the constituency that includes Leyland, to join my hon. Friends, whose experience is well known to the House as well as to their constituents in welcoming a deal that will do an enormous amount to resolve some of the difficulties faced by the Rover Group over the years and to build on the obvious commitment that the Government have shown to the Rover Group by virtue of the investment of about £2·9 billion since 1976.
The agreement will provide a good deal for the taxpayer and for the shareholders of the companies concerned and, most important, an excellent deal for both British

1307
Aerospace and the Rover Group in their many and various guises the length and breadth of the country. I am pleased to be able to give my support and encouragement to an interesting and exciting future for both companies.

Community Care
12.28 pm
Mr. Tom Clarke: Community care is in crisis. The plight of the elderly, the mentally ill, the mentally handicapped, the physically disabled and the frail, and the millions—mainly women—who care for them tells us something about our society. For it is right that we should be judged on how we treat the most vulnerable of our fellow citizens.
All the evidence suggests that most community care is provided by a member of the family, a whole family or close friends. Community care should therefore not be considered a marginal policy for a marginal group of people. It involves mutuality — the responsibility of people to each other — which creates the fabric of a society that is worth being part of. There is a clear role for Government nationally and locally.
I hope that we can today examine the Government's record and, perhaps more important, their intentions in these matters, especially following the plethora of reports from Griffiths, to Wagner, Firth and the Social Services Select Committee in the previous Parliament. Almost all of them have met a deafening silence from the Government. Deafening silence is not something that we normally associate with the Under-Secretary of State, so perhaps she will correct that today.
The hon. Lady may be able to tell us why the Griffiths report on community care has all but disappeared. Time and again, when Ministers were pressed on social services, they said that the report would deal with such matters. They advised the House and voluntary organisations to wait for Griffiths. What happened? In contrast to the Griffiths report on the Health Service, the report on social services was quietly published on the morning after the Budget. There was no ministerial statement and no press conference. If ever there was a case of shooting the messenger and attempting somewhat clumsily to hide the message under the carpet, this was it.
The Government may be disappointed with the Griffiths report because it emphasises the role of local authorities. We ought not to be too surprised by that. The former Secretary of State for Social Services, as long ago as 27 December 1986, gave us a hint that, because the Government do not give community care a high priority, and because Sir Roy might feel that there was a role for local government, the Government might not say too much about his report. The Guardian of 27 December 1986 reported as follows:
'Mr. Fowler has become the odd man out in a Cabinet so plainly contemptuous of local government. He has actually been heard to praise the work of council social services departments, which he knows are pivotal to the success of community care."
The fact that Sir Roy Griffiths may have reached the same conculsion may be the reason for the Government's remarkable silence. I hope that the Minister will correct that silence today.
The Minister will also be aware that Sir Roy Griffiths gave a great deal of attention to the quite staggering report on these issues by the Audit Commission, which found that Government policies were "in disarray". It accused the Government of trying to muddle through in the hope that community care would somehow materialise as long-stay hospitals were closed.

1309
If there were not problems in community care, the Government's social security review and their intentions for what is to happen after April have added considerably to the difficulties of many communities and people. There has been a collapse of any recognisable strategy for community care. I should like to give the Minister some examples. If time allowed, I could give many more. I am sure that she is in the same position.
The Edinvar housing association in Edinburgh has written to the Secretary of State for Scotland explaining that six mentally handicapped persons who had moved into a excellent community care project are in danger of losing housing benefit to the extent that their position in community care is in jeopardy. The director, Mr. Robin Burley, recently wrote to the Secretary of State for Scotland. I understand that he will await a reply. He wrote:
"Not only will the April changes compound the perversity of the incentives which encourage residential care but in this small scheme six people who last summer moved from hostels to their own homes may have no alterntive but to move back to residential care."
If that happened, it would be an absolute scandal. I regret to say that it is not a isolated case.
My hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Mr. Wardell) has written to the Secretary of State for Social Services about elderly persons who will have to sell their homes if the property is thought to be worth more than £6,000 before they can even be considered for income support for residential care after 11 April.
Yesterday I received a letter from Age Concern telling me about funding for emergency alarm systems which will cost many of our most vulnerable elderly people about £5 a week. That simply will not be recognised by housing benefit, income support or even the social fund.
Most worrying of all is the problem of school meals and milk for the mentally handicapped and special school pupils. The Minister is rather fond of lecturing the nation about nutrition. It would be a scandal if such vulnerable young people were not thought to be deserving of decent nutrition through meals and milk as of right. I am delighted to learn from my colleague, Councillor Charles Gray, the leader of the Labour group on Strathclyde regional council, that the Scottish Office appears to be taking a civilised view in its interpretation of the measure. I welcome that, and I would welcome still more the hon. Lady's confirmation that the same will be true for meals and milk for mentally handicapped children in the rest of Great Britain.
Hospital discharge and bridging funds worried Sir Roy Griffiths. The Minister must be aware of the many problems which are commonly called the "revolving door syndrome." In the absence of assessment, proper bridging funding and proper arrangements, many people are being discharged from long-stay hospitals to community care which simply does not exist and then find themselves back in hospital. The hon. Lady will be aware of the Association of Metropolitan Authorities' letter to the DHSS about the withdrawal of funding from regional health authorities to local authorities, especially in the north-west and the northern region. She will also be aware of the letter from the Association of Directors of Social Services to my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field), who is the Chairman of the Social Services Select Committee, expressing its anxiety on these issues.
1310
On 15 March the hon. Lady gave me some replies when I tried to find out whether information on these important matters was kept centrally. She told me that she did not have that information. That is an indication of Government priorities. After all this time we ought to know what the problem is, why there are variations from one part of the country to another and why people are suffering. When people are forced to leave hospital— sometimes after a short stay — they are often thrown into a community which is not prepared to receive them. The hon. Lady must know that relevant legislation exists in the shape of the Disabled Persons (Services, Consultation and Representation) Act 1986.
I was happy to note that Sir Roy Griffiths went a step further on this point. That certainly does not allow the Government to sit back and do nothing at all. It is a scandal that should be dealt with and we cannot claim to be giving priority to community care when there are so many people leaving hospital without proper assessment or arrangements. It is a disgrace by modern civilised standards.
Some aspects of the Act would and should apply to any reasonable strategy for community care. That represents true consumerism. When the 1986 Act, which has not by any means been fully implemented, dealt with the right of advocacy and with representation, when it recognised the needs of carers — for example, women in this country who are saving the Chancellor of the Exchequer about £6 billion a year and whose dedication should not be exploited — when it dealt with the issue of hospital discharge and when even the title referred to consultation, we were attempting to establish that people in the care of the social services were entitled not just to be considered as consumers, but to be treated by society in a way consistent with their rights as fellow citizens.
The Minister may agree that that is not always possible in the absence of resources. Although I disagree with many of Sir Roy Griffiths' recommendations in respect of YTS, competitive tendering, vouchers, and the social fund, I do not see that as any reason for not having a full debate on his recommendations, especially in the light of the cost of producing his report. When he said that we considered that community care was the distant relation and nobody's baby, that reflected his view of successive Governments' attempts to pursue a policy, while not being absolutely clear about resources. Of course local authorities are often concerned that they are asked to carry out duties and responsibilities without the resources being made available. There are wide geographical variations of provision. I have never believed that community care should vary from region to region. There should be national standards based on the local knowledge of councils and of those who deal with those matters, principally the consumers.
I find it difficult to understand why, for example, in Devon, 8,000 people in residential homes receive supplementary benefit compared with 1,000 in the Lothian region, although the population is about the same. Perhaps the Minister will be able to explain the wide variation in home help provision, respite care and occupational therapy. Surely, as a society still rich in resources, we are not prepared just to dismiss the problems of the mentally handicapped and send them into families which are unable to cope, and to leave the elderly to deal

1311
with the appalling problem of loneliness unassisted. We should act as a genuine community in response to those problems.
I do not regard this as the major debate on the Griffiths report, but it is a start. In the Audit Commission's withering indictment of Government policies on these matters it said:
"The only option that is not tenable is to do nothing".
I hope that the sheer volume of concern about community neglect and human suffering will shame even the Government into doing something.
12.44 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security (Mrs. Edwina Currie): I congratulate the hon. Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke) on his success in the ballot and on raising this debate about community care. He has raised many questions and I shall endeavour to answer him in what is inevitably a short debate. I may need to write to him later on some of the topics particularly in respect of detailed examples.
I can answer two of the hon. Gentleman's questions very quickly. First, we do not collect national statistics because we believe firmly in local arrangements. If the hon. Gentleman stays to listen to the next debate on the East Yorkshire health authority, he may hear how that authority is tackling the problems that he has outlined. Secondly, fewer people in Lothian may be obtaining supplementary benefit for care than in Devon because people in Lothian are much better off. The average income in Scotland is the second highest in the United Kingdom. It lags behind only London and the south-east. It is much higher than in my constituency of Derbyshire, South.
Mr. Tom Clarke: The hon. Lady has just confirmed the need for a national survey and for information to be made available on a central basis. She has displayed an appalling ignorance of the problems of Lothian region and of Scotland. If that information were made available nationally, perhaps she would be better informed.
Mrs. Currie: The hon. Gentleman did not call a debate on the problems of Lothian region. I propose to answer his points.
The hon. Gentleman asked particularly about the Griffiths report. As he knows, we asked Sir Roy Griffiths to
"review the way in which public funds are used to support community care policy and to advise …on the options for action that would improve the use of these funds as a contribution to more effective community care."
Sir Roy presented his report on 12 February and we published it shortly afterwards. We have made it clear that we regard it as a basis for discussion, along with the other recent work mentioned by the hon. Gentleman, such as Lady Wagner's report on residential care, the proposals drawn up by Joan Firth in my Department and the timely comments made by the Audit Commission in 1986. The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the Select Committee on Social Services, which reported in the 1984–85 Session on community care for the adult mentally ill and mentally handicapped. He may recall that I was privileged to be a member of the Committee at that time.
The Government are not suffering from a lack of advice. Sir Roy drew attention to the findings of the Audit Commission to the effect that better value could be obtained from extra resources. We shall take careful note
1312
of all that has been said, including the points raised by the hon. Gentleman, and we shall make our views known in due course.
I can report progress on the Disabled Persons (Services, Consultation and Representation) Act 1986, which the hon. Gentleman piloted through the House and which received a great deal of support on both sides of the House, not least from myself. Following the successful outcome of discussions with the local authority associations, sections 5 and 6 of the Act, which relate to the assessment of needs of disabled young people leaving school and which many of us regarded as being very significant, were implemented with effect from 1 February 1988. We implemented sections 4, 8(1), 9 and 10 on 1 April 1987 and we propose to implement section 11 as soon as possible. Discussions have already opened with local authority representatives on section 7, as part of a continuing dialogue on implementation of the Act. My officials intend to resume discussions shortly with the aim of determining costs and a timetable for implementation. Health authorities and the voluntary sector will also need to be consulted. Section 7 is likely to be the next section to be implemented.
As for the sections relating to Scotland, sections 12 and 14 were implemented on 1 June 1987, section 15 was repealed by the National Health Service (Amendment) Act 1986 and section 13 was implemented on 1 February this year. That is the Scottish equivalent of the English sections 5 and 6. Technical sections 16 to 18 were implemented on 16 April 1987.
Further discussions are planned with the local authority associations on the cost of other outstanding sections of the Act, and implementation of those will take place as and when the necessary resources can be made available. I should just remind the hon. Gentleman that some of the sections of the Children Act 1975, which was passed at the beginning of the previous Labour Government, took many more years than that to he implemented.
Mr. Tom Clarke rose—
Mrs. Currie: I would be grateful if I could get on, as the hon. Gentleman has asked me many questions.
The hon. Gentleman knows that community care is the special brief of my noble Friend Lord Skelmersdale. As I read through the voluminous literature and papers on this matter, I was struck how often I came across phrases such as "Our aim is to provide better services." Our aim is to do all that we can to strengthen and support a competent and responsible society. The aim should be to help individuals achieve their potential within such a society. That means putting our hospitals, homes, doctors, care-workers, services and so on into some kind of context. They are not the aims but the means by which we achieve our aim.
As the hon. Gentleman has said, most people who need help and care live at home. Most are cared for by their families. Children, particularly mentally handicapped children, are now overwhelmingly at home with their families. As we go up the age scale, that gets harder, as the number of old people now match the numbers in the younger age cohort, which would be the caring cohort, so it becomes relatively more difficult for caring families to manage.
I can offer an example from my own family. My mother was one of 10 siblings. They had little difficulty in caring

1313
for their parents. My mother and her brothers and sisters, of whom eight now survive, are all aged between 65 and nearly 90. Between them, the eight produced only seven children. That problem is not just common to Britain but to the western world. The whole pattern of demography in the free world has changed dramatically and some aspects of patterns of care will also have to change.
But other changes are more positive. Elderly people are fit, active and, in large numbers, play a far bigger part in society now than ever before, perhaps not always with a pay packet attached, but with their time and experience. We particularly undervalue the role of such people, particularly in the caring services.
We also forget that elderly people are not a separate species and they expect the same degree of choice and control over their lives as they had when they were younger. The elderly, and those who are mentally ill or handicapped or disabled, are not a separate species but citizens. For them, as for everyone else, the job of the state is to enable them to live their lives to the full and make their contribution to society, whether they are able or disabled, frail, failing or as fit as a fiddle. That is the aim of policy and everything else is a means to that end.
Nor should we forget that the part played by the state, particularly in the provision of services, is much smaller in the overall context than we all imply. We have mentioned the family. We should mention friends and neighbours, particularly in constituencies such as mine, a scattered rural area. We should mention what is called the voluntary sector — that always sounds like a product on a supermarket shelf — and the more formal carers' organisations, many of which existed long before the welfare state was established some 40 years ago.
The state's role is to provide and pay for a great deal of care. Roy Griffiths rightly pushes us to think how that might be organised in future. But the state side is only a small part of the considerable, often unseen, network of care. Let me quote someone who described that far better than I can nearly 200 years ago. It was Tom Paine in "The Rights of Man" who said:
"Society performs for itself almost everything which is ascribed to Government."
I hope that the hon. Gentleman, who has a distinguished record as a Socialist mayor of a great city, will not mind too much if I offer him the words of the philosopher-founder of Socialism as an example of what I am getting at.
The hon. Gentleman particularly mentioned hospital closures and discharges. He knows that the aim of policy is not closure, but the development at a local level of a comprehensive range of well co-ordinated health and social services, matching the range of needs of mentally ill and handicapped people, the elderly and their families. When such local services exist, some hospitals will no longer be needed. The pace of closure is entirely conditioned by the pace of provision of local services. Quality matters more than speed. We say this repeatedly to the health authorities and I hope that the hon. Gentleman recognises that we mean it.
During the past 30 years most mentally ill patients who were well enough to leave hospital have already left and are now in the community. So far, we share the view that not enough resources have followed the patient out of hospital into the community. The 31 planned closures of
1314
large hospitals will help to put that right, and the remaining 70 or so traditional hospitals are becoming much smaller and are playing an important part in their own district services. Further discharges are not in themselves an aim of policy. It is for the consultant in charge and his colleagues to decide whether an individual will benefit from discharge.
A similar position applies to the mentally handicapped. The pace of contraction of the large mental handicap hospitals depends on the development of appropriate short, medium and long-stay provision for the residents. We have advised health authorities to aim to accommodate people in small, homely units based in their local communities. None of that should require the establishment of large hospitals, but some might need units with special facilities.
Again, the scale of future NHS residential provision for mentally handicapped people depends on local estimates, particularly of the number of severely and multiply handicapped people or of behaviourally disturbed or mentally ill people. We also need to learn from experience new ways of meeting the needs of such people for medical and nursing care in small NHS and other settings.
However, I am satisfied with—indeed I am pleased to see — the progress being made. For example, the number of mentally handicapped children in NHS hospitals and hospital units fell from over 7,000 20 years ago to barely 490 in 1986. In October 1986 we stated that provision should be made so that no mentally handicapped child receiving long-term care should need to live in a large mental handicap hospital.
Mr. Tom Clarke: The hon. Lady will recall that I asked her a specific question about school meals and milk for mentally handicapped children and those in special schools. I would be grateful if she would reply to my point.
Mrs. Currie: The hon. Gentleman will know that some aspects of those policies are under discussion, but, broadly speaking, our overall policy has been and is to ensure that people receive benefits in cash rather than in kind. That has been the policy for a long time on both sides of the House. As I recall, it was also the policy of the previous Labour Government. However, I shall write to the hon. Gentleman to deal with his point in detail.
The problems of the mentally handicapped are now much better understood in our community. There has been a sea change in services for those people and their families in recent years. I used to be a regular visitor to Monyhull hospital, which was in my ward in Birmingham and which I represented for 11 years. As we made steady progress, one of the porters remarked to me that he could tell the difference because the doctors now had to clean their own cars. It struck me then with great sadness how much we had unwittingly restricted the personal development and happiness of so many thousands of our fellow citizens simply because they had been dubbed "slow" or "in moral danger" decades before in childhood.
The contrast was shown for me up the road outside Collingwood: school in Birmingham for children with special needs when I was chairman of the governors. One day, as I chatted to the then headmaster, Bob Dunn, we were shyly approached by a former pupil. She told us that she was working, and, with great pride, showed us her payslip. The headmaster, with great presence of mind, told

1315
her gravely that she was clearly earning more than he was. In another age, in another time, she would have languished all her life in hospital. The alternatives are so much better.
We do have far more difficulty with mental illness. Apart from anything else, the numbers are so much greater. After heart disease, mental illness is the second biggest expense in the Health Service. By 1985–86 the total hospital and community health service cost of mental illness was well over billion, and that does not include, for example, the cost of drugs and care through the family practitioner committees.
I had the figures for mental illness analysed recently and I was surprised to discover the extent to which mental illness is a female problem. In every age group, looking at admissions to hospital for mental illness, women outnumber men. Among men, the commonest diagnoses are schizophrenia and alcohol-related problems, although obviously alcoholism can be an effect of mental illness as well as a cause. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will welcome the setting up of a ministerial group on alcohol misuse with membership from 11 Departments, chaired by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. We hope to make progress on a wide range of services and policies that will help that group of people.
Among women, the major group is the elderly and the commonest diagnosis is not, as I would have expected, dementia, but depression. The archetypal mental patient in Britain is a depressed old lady and much of that clinical depression may be postponable, if not preventable. At least we can aim to minimise its effects. Therefore, it follows that the pattern of services in the community and the way in which we treat our old people may need to shift to reflect those new patterns of need.
I am satisfied that we are making progress and I share the hon. Gentleman's feeling that we shall continue to need our hospitals and improvement in our community care for many years to come. We will need our hospitals for sanctuary, respite, teaching and training, research and ultimately, of course, for long-stay care.
In the past there has been tension about the relative contributions of the different providers of care. Most notably, there was tension between the hospital or institutional provision and provision in or by the community at large. I do not believe that that conflict is necessary or real. The whole spectrum of care provision is complementary. In our 1987 election manifesto we said:
"Elderly, disabled, mentally ill and mentally handicapped people, should be cared for within the community whenever this is right for them.
In the past some people who should have been cared for in other ways have remained in hospitals, sometimes for years. That is changing … This changing pattern has already brought a better life to many thousands of people. It has the potential to do so for many thousands more."
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will join me in reiterating those words.

East Yorkshire Health Authority
1 pm
Mr. James Cran: I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to raise two problems that affect the East Yorkshire health authority. I know that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security is well aware of them, as I am pleased to say that she visited the authority a week or so ago. The first problem does not necessarily particularly affect any other district health authority. However, I am convinced —unless my hon. Friend can tell me otherwise—that the second problem will certainly affect other district health authorities, and that is why I am raising it now.
The East Yorkshire health authority has not always been successful. It would be silly of me to claim that it has. However, I have no doubt that it is successful now. It delivers services to my constituents and to people in neighbouring constituencies in a way that would draw a certain amount of acclamation from my hon. Friend and her Department. We would be entitled to believe— and I thought that I was entitled to believe—that a successful health authority, like the divine Greta Garbo, has a right to be left alone. I am sorry to report that that is not the case. The East Yorkshire health authority is not being left alone.
The first problem that I want to address to the House involves successive proposals to reorganise health services on the north bank of the Humber. If an attempt at amalgamating East Yorkshire health authority with the Hull health authority had occurred once, I might be entitled to make a small protest. If it had happened twice, I might be entitled to make a rather larger protest. In fact, as my hon. Friend is aware, attempts at amalgamation have not occurred once, twice, or thrice. As far as I can understand from the record, five attempts have been made. Indeed, there might even have been six attempts, depending on one's definition of an attempt at amalgamation. The last attempt occurred this year. The problem is therefore not old. It is still a current issue, or seems to be.
My hon. Friend will be aware of my views on this matter, as they are fairly well known. I lobbied against an amalgamation because I did not see evidence to suggest that the delivery of resources and care for patients would be any greater as a result of amalgamation. A more important consideration, and one that I have applied to local authorities, is that the closer we can get the provision and delivery of services to the consumer, the better.
With that background, my hon. Friend would have been as delighted as I was to receive a copy of the letter that I received on 5 February from the chairman of the Yorkshire regional health authority, who said:
"Dear James,
Whilst we decided not to proceed with the merger"—
now, that was wonderful—
"we did see the need for increased co-operation and collaboration in a number of areas. For this reason we shall be undertaking a full option appraisal on the optimum long term pattern of general hospital services on the North Bank of the Humber for the total population."
I want to reassure my hon. Friend that I am not prepared to argue with that, as that is perfectly legitimate. On the one hand there is an assurance that there will he no merger, and on the other the letter states that an examination must be made of the two health authorities to optimise the services.

1317
However, I received another piece of paper with that letter, which was a recommendation dated 28 January 1988 from the Yorkshire regional health authority. That did not seem to be consistent with the chairman's comments. The recommendation was
"that no action be taken at the present time in respect of possible unification of East Yorkshire and Hull Districts."
I am bound to draw the attention of the House, my hon. Friend and you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to the fact that after six attempts at amalgamation we are entitled to know what "at the present time" means. I am entitled to construe that perhaps it means that someone else will have yet another go at amalgamation. We would be forgiven for thinking that perhaps that would happen not in five or 10 years' time, but in five or 10 months' time. There is therefore a certain lack of consistency in the signals coming from the Yorkshire regional health authority.
With regard to that inconsistency, I have the minutes of a meeting held on 21 March between the regional health authority and the East Yorkshire district health authority and Hull health authority. The minutes state that the chairman of the Hull health authority
"indicated that as far as Hull was concerned, the districting issue was finished."
The regional health authority chairman, Mr. Brian Askew, said that it was
"time that the districting issue was forgotten."
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security (Mrs. Edwina Currie): Districting?
Mr. Cran: Yes.
If ever I had a confused set of signals, it must be those that I have described to my hon. Friend. Although I may have been entitled to a certain amount of levity on this subject, the serious point is that the regional health authority and my hon. Friend have responsibility to clear up the issue. In saying that, I am not ruling out the fact that we will not look at the whole of Yorkshire or any other part of the country to find a better system of organising the Health Service in future. We may do that, but I am wholly against this piecemeal organisational tinkering which leaves my constituents not knowing which health authority will be in place at any given time.
That also means that the managers within the health authority do not have much confidence in their jobs and how to do them, because they do not know who they are working for. If the authority was a business, the company involved would have a continual takeover threat hanging over it. With such a sword of Damocles hanging over it, how can we possibly expect managers in the East Yorkshire health authority to deal confidently with their jobs and manage the health authority properly?
I humbly submit that under the laughable circumstances that I have outlined, they cannot be expected to do their jobs properly. The managers are doing their best, and they are doing their jobs well, but I would not be surprised if some of them were beginning to wonder what was happening. I therefore want a little clarification of the Government's view of the lack of direction from the regional health authority.
Problems seem to come in multiples for East Yorkshire health authority. The second one relates to the fact that it has with a vengeance got on and done its job. As my hon. Friend knows, it started with 12 inefficient and poorly
1318
utilised hospitals, which resulted in a waste of resources. Having established that that was the case, the chairman, the general manager and the board set about considering how to use their resources better and, with everyone's cooperation, reduced 12 inefficient hospitals to seven more efficient hospitals, which is exactly what my hon. Friend, the Government and the community want.
That move freed a large amount of revenue which the authority believed, perhaps naively, it could use to improve its resources. Its property sales during the past three years having been worth £2·5 million, which is a considerable sum, it intended to use the money to transform Castle Hill hospital in Cottingham into a district general hospital, which was an eminently sensible decision. That has only partially been implemented.
The nub of the problem is that that which you have is not necessarily yours, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because, at a regional health authority meeting, decisions were made on what is called resource allocation, and the minutes state:
"It is therefore recommended that the planned reduction of allocation to East Yorkshire be commenced in 1988–89 by a reduction of £1 million."
All this is a week or so before the new financial year starts, so the problems have been compounded. The minutes continue:
"This then creates the sum"—
it certainly does—
"of £1 million for redistribution within the Region and the RHA is recommended to agree to the following proposals."
The proposals are that East Yorkshire should get back £250,000 of its own money for improvements to be agreed in cardi-thoracic services. It is also fortunate enough to get back a further £250,000 to be held for mental health bridging purposes as proposed by the authority. Details of the programmes are to be agreed by the regional health authority.
That is all right thus far, but the third recommendation is that £500,000 should go to Hull health authority in recognition of its overall RAWP position. There it is, Mr. Deputy Speaker. A district health authority creates £2·5 million by getting rid of unused and inefficient resources and it then thinks, "How shall we use those resources for the benefit of our patients?" It then decides to create a district general hospital and embarks upon the project but, all of a sudden, part of the resources are taken away from it and given to someone else. If ever there was an example of banditry at work, I am entitled to say that this is it. East Yorkshire health authority may be forgiven for thinking that it had acted in accordance with the Government's policies. I believe that it has, and if it has not no doubt my hon. Friend will tell me, but it certainly seems to have struck the wrong chord with the Yorkshire regional health authority.
As I am sure my hon. Friend will be aware, at least two other district health authorities in Yorkshire which are also significantly above their RAWP allocations have not had a reallocation of resources in the bandit-like manner that I have just outlined. I suspect that there is a pretty good reason for that: they did not have the foresight of East Yorkshire health authority to divest themselves of resources that they did not want and use the money to improve patient services, which is what they should have done.
The message is that district health authorities must beware of selling assets which they do not require. Any district health authority that decides to sell its unwanted assets should beware, because there may be a robber

1319
somewhere — in the form of another district health authority—ready to nab that money if it has the ear of its regional health authority. It follows that I do not understand the logic of the decision made by Yorkshire health authority. That is not to say that I do not recognise the problems of Hull district health authority. It would be silly of me to say that. The authority has resource problems, and it must cater for patients who originate from the area of the East Yorkshire health authority. But that problem will diminish by allowing East Yorkshire to keep its cash and build its district general hospital. Then it will have the facilities to cater for its own patients. That, not the reallocation of resources, is how to reduce the problem.
It would idle of me not to suggest to the House and to everyone who is fair-minded — I have no reason to believe that my hon. Friend is other than fair-minded— that it will be exceedingly difficult to motivate not only East Yorkshire but any other health authority to divest itself of assets that it does not need when it cannot be sure of keeping those resources. It does not make good horse sense, and I repeat that other district health authorities should beware of what happened in East Yorkshire.
I am also entitled to question the figure of 6.1 per cent. above RAWP target for East Yorkshire for 1988–89. All the figures available to me from the health authority show that there has been a rapid increase of between 20 and 30 per cent. in the number of patients being treated. The regional health authority is using historical figures, and the clear message is that the authority should use more up-to-date figures. It is ludicrous to reduce the allocation while activities are increasing.
After that endless parody of a case that I would not have believed unless I had seen it in action, I wait with bated breath to hear my hon. Friend's comments.
1.17 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security (Mrs. Edwina Currie): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Beverley (Mr. Cran) on winning a place in the ballot. In the short time that he has been in the House he has shown a keen interest in health and welfare matters. I do not know whether he realises it, but so far he has written me 35 letters and tabled 10 questions, and now he has taken up the cause in debate. He is one of the most active of the new intake, and I commend to his constituents, whom he represents so well, his persistent but courteous approach to Ministers, which I am sure will bear fruit.
East Yorkshire health authority covers most of the area known by the old and much-missed name of the East Riding of Yorkshire. It includes the hinterland of Hull, but not the city itself, which has its own health authority. We expect the East Yorkshire and Hull health authorities to work closely together, with Scarborough to the north and York to the west, to plan and provide services for the people of the entire neighbourhood. I am sure that my hon. Friend would agree with that, although I understand his misgivings about formal mergers. I hope that he can support the co-operation that I have just mentioned, since we hope to provide a high standard of cost-effective service to the people of Yorkshire. I note that he is nodding in assent.
I take up with my hon. Friend the word "districting", which I believe he used when quoting from a health authority document. I hope that our friends in Yorkshire,
1320
whatever else they may be doing so brilliantly, will be careful about the surgery that they are performing on the English language. I think that they meant the discussion of mergers or boundary changes.
As my hon. Friend will know, the funding of the NHS has increased substantially. This year we will be spending £21 billion on the NHS, and next year we will be spending £22 billion. For the hospital and community health services in England, for which I have responsibility, funding has increased from £8·1 billion in 1982–83 to £11·5 billion this year. This is an increase of 38 per cent. in cash and 11 per cent. in real terms over a five-year period. We might use that to reflect on the 2 per cent. per annum growth that some critics will call for. We have already been getting that level of growth.
Funding for Yorkshire regional health authority has risen from £583 million in 1982–83 to £818 million this year. This is an increase of 40 per cent. in cash and 12 per cent. in real terms, which is slightly more than the national average.
This year East Yorkshire health authority will be spending £40 million. It has also received £80,000 under the waiting list initiative for two of its projects, and it has added to that from its own resources, as my hon. Friend described. Its costs improvement programme amounts to some £820,000, which is 2·1 per cent. of its budget. According to my figures, it also has available £1·25 million this year from land sales.
Those are substantial figures and they reflect considerable credit on the health authority. Indeed, they would reflect credit on health authorities twice its size. I hope that some of the bigger health authorities, including those elsewhere in Yorkshire, to which my hon. Friend referred, whose performances are, shall we say, more sluggish, will take due note of what they have been up to in East Yorkshire health authority. If they are not taking due note, we are. I assure my hon. Friend of that. I take seriously his point about incentives.
Many health authorities have developed a good record of improvements in service—quality, quantity and cost-effectiveness — under the guidance of the Government. East Yorkshire has a much better record than many, particularly in the vigorous examination of patterns of work, which have often been long established, the release through planned change of additional resources —through its own efforts — and the intelligent reapplication of those funds to improve local health care. In 1986–87 East Yorkshire achieved cost improvements of £1·36 million, which was just under 3·5 per cent. of the budget. In 1987–88 it will, as I have mentioned, achieve improvements of £818,000, which is 2·1 per cent. of its budget, and next year it hopes to achieve £865,000, or 2·2 per cent. It has achieved that by careful scrutiny of, for example, domestic support services, portering, transport and energy conservation measures, which released £116,000 in 1986–87 and will release a further £55,000 in the year to come.
As my hon. Friend said, I saw all that myself last week when I visited Castle Hill hospital at Cottingham to open the new cardio-thoracic wards. The new wards form part of the major upgrading of the cardio-thoracic facilities that serve the four Humberside health authorities — East Yorkshire, Hull, Grimsby and Scunthorpe—and part of north Yorkshire. It is a magnificent development and demonstrates the commitment of the Government, the

1321
Yorkshire regional health authority and the district health authorities to improving the services for patients suffering from coronary heart disease.
I greatly enjoyed my visit. The sun shone and everybody was dancing around like lambs with two tails. They were so pleased with the new facilities. I would be grateful if my hon. Friend would pass on my appreciation to all his constituents and to Mr. Hooper, the chairman of the East Yorkshire health authority, Mr. Nichols, his district general manager, Mr. Nair and Mr. Moghissi, the consultant surgeons and all the staff and patients for their kindness and hospitality during my visit.
The food that I had was some of the best I have ever tasted. Indeed, I asked for the recipes. It was the first health authority lunch that I have attended in recent times where non-alcoholic drinks were served throughout, and I suspect that the conversation was all the better for it.
The darker side of British life, particularly in Yorkshire, was also brought home to me a little later when, in one of the wards, I met a young girl not yet 30 who was being treated for lung disease. She had been a cigarette smoker since childhood. I was moved that day, as I always am, at meeting so many people suffering from what we now know to be preventable diseases. The Yorkshire regional health authority and the local district health authorities in Yorkshire are taking those matters seriously and have increased their health promotion budget in ways that we hope will bear fruit in years to come.
The new cardio-thoracic wards are not the only capital developments at Castle Hill and in the East Yorkshire health authority. For example, in January work was started at Castle Hill on a major project to build a new surgical unit that will comprise four operating theatres, four wards and a day ward. I could see that work proceeding apace during my visit. In addition, on 5 March the new Bridlington community hospital, which is managed by the East Yorkshire health authority and which was built at a cost of about £16 million, took its first patients. I well remember my hon. Friend's question to me about the new hospital on 27 October, when he reminded me that it was completed ahead of time. That hospital will provide 200 beds for acute elderly and maternity patients, a 60-place day hospital, an operating theatre suite, outpatient departments and support facilities. It is a splendid development and it will clearly make a major contribution to improving health services in East Yorkshire.
I refer now to my hon. Friend's point about the £1 million reduction in the allocation. As he will know, the distribution of resources to district health authorities is a matter for the regional health authority concerned—in this case, the Yorkshire region. Clearly, regional health authorities must take into account the balance of resources between districts and ensure that there is a fair and equitable distribution. What we do as Ministers is allocate money to regional health authorities. They then send it out. The RAWP formula is intended only to assist us in sending money out to regional health authorities. It is not intended to be any more than the vaguest guide for allocation between districts. Indeed, as my hon. Friend knows, we are currently looking at the RAWP formula. There may be some amendments which, perhaps, will take into account changing patterns of population growth in many parts of the country.
1322
The money does not, however, belong to the regional health authority. It does not belong to the district health authority — East Yorkshire or otherwise. It does not belong to any of us. It belongs to the taxpayer. Eventually, we have to account to the taxpayer — him or, more likely these days, her—for every penny that we have. There is total homogeneity about the money. It does not acquire a different colour the moment it is allocated to East Yorkshire. I am afraid that it is exactly the same money, and it is raised and accounted for in exactly the same way.
I understand that East Yorkshire has had its revenue allocation, which it controls, reduced by £1 million for 1988–89. That is because, since 1985–86, East Yorkshire had been treating fewer of its own local patients than had been expected and planned for. This has created additional pressures on the neighbouring authority in Hull. In particular, although East Yorkshire health authority is treating cardiac patients from neighbouring health authorities, large numbers of psychiatric patients are crossing the border into Hull, where resources are being stretched to meet their care.
The pattern of revenue funding that we have had so far has enabled East Yorkshire to transfer considerable sums of money every year from revenue to capital, which does not lead one to feel that the revenue side of its budget has been under enormous strain. I am advised that the adjustment will not adversely affect patient services, although I can well understand that the management of East Yorkshire health authority, which naturally had all sorts of plans for spending that money, could feel somewhat troubled.
We should look at it this way: the NHS money has been redistributed to the benefit of NHS patients. As my hon. Friend said, of the £1 million, £250,000 will be used to improve the super district cardio-thoracic services at Castle Hill hospital. This means that services are available for patients from more than just one district. Thus, that handing back of £250,000 will reflect the movement of patients into East Yorkshire. A further £250,000 will be earmarked by the region as a bridging fund for mental health services in East Yorkshire.
If my hon. Friend was able to hear any of the debate that immediately preceded this one, he will know that we have difficulties in creating the kind of community care services that we all want to see, so that people do not have to travel a long way from home for their care and, particularly, in the case of the long-term chronic sick and mental illness, they can expect to be cared for closer to home. The remaining £500,000 will be allocated to Hull, in part to reflect the cross-boundary flows that I have already mentioned.
This is not a cut, and it is not banditry either. I assure my hon. Friend that spending in his constituency and in the vicinity is still tending to go up, not down. Neither the Chancellor nor the taxpayer will see that £1 million again. I suspect that it will be joined by many more millions of pounds in years to come, as I have already said. People from the north bank of the Humber, including my hon. Friend's constituents, will continue to benefit from this money. It has been earmarked for specific services within East Yorkshire, rather than giving the DHA an entirely free hand with spending, and it will provide services from which East Yorkshire's residents will benefit. The continuing capital development at Castle Hill should not be affected.

1323
As my hon. Friend said, a full-option appraisal will be undertaken on the optimal long-term pattern of general hospital services on the north bank of the Humber for the total population. Further, the two district health authorities have been asked to report within six months on the opportunities for the management of services for mental illness and mentally handicapped people. Perhaps the report will be made by one authority on behalf of both. The revenue allocation in respect of other services will be reviewed. It will have regard to the most recent information on the cross-boundary flow and it will be monitored thereafter, which should pick up some of the points that my hon. Friend mentioned.
We look forward to further co-operation in the health care of local people, which will benefit everyone, including my hon. Friend's constituents.

Crown Prosecution Service
1.30 pm
Mr. Simon Hughes: I am grateful for the opportunity to initiate this Adjournment debate and I am grateful to the Attorney-General for attending to respond to it.
It is unusual for me to be able to debate legal matters because I act as spokesman on environmental matters for my party. I am grateful to take a break from that activity, particularly as it is Maundy Thursday, which is one of the days in the legal year when the Attorney-General, I and others scan the newspapers to see who have been made Queen's Counsels. We congratulate those who have been appointed.
I entitled my application for a debate "the prosecution policy of the Crown Prosecution Service in cases involving death." The cause for my concern dates back to when I was elected to the House, and is coupled with my experience as a practising member of the Bar. My concern was how decisions to prosecute in the name of the Crown on behalf of the public were taken in particularly important cases.
The three cases that have specifically come my way relate to three young men from south London who were killed or died in dubious circumstances as a result of which criminal proceedings were considered. The first case concern a young man called David Sibun, who was assaulted on 1 January 1984. He was a neighbour of mine in Lynton road, Bermondsey, and I knew him and his family. He died in hospital having spent a short period in a coma. Criminal proceedings flowed from the incident. Pleas were accepted by the Director of Public Prosecutions to charges of assault and affray, and two young men were convicted. At that time the Attorney-General was the Solicitor-General. He did me the courtesy of allowing me to see him about the matters arising from that case, such as whether more substantial charges should have been brought, which was what I was seeking to persuade him about, so that, as a Law Officer, he could direct the DPP to prefer more substantial charges, given that the young man died following the assault and would not have died had it not been for that assault.
The second case concerned another young Bermondsey man, Mark Hogg. On 5 October 1985 he died in hospital in Exeter. He had been a prisoner in Exeter prison and had escaped while being transferred to that prison from Yeovil. He subsequently became ill and died in strange circumstances. His case was the subject of the longest inquest in the history of English criminal law and the result was an open verdict. That raised questions whether charges should have been preferred, although matters are still being considered by solicitors and proceedings might yet be taken, but they will probably be private proceedings.
The third case concerned the death on 29 June 1986 of another young man from south London called Robert McHayle. Last Saturday, a private summons was issued. The case is now sub judice, so it would be wrong for us to debate the issues and evidence until the matter has been resolved. Therefore, I will try to steer well clear of those matters while raising the general concerns that flow from the three cases and from the policy as a whole.
I think that I can rightly give the facts of the case concerning this young man, to complete the picture. Robert McHayle, who was 20 years old, was stabbed to

1325
death on 29 June 1986. A charge was brought by the police in respect of another young man from south London. After the investigation, the charge was not proceeded with, the inquest was reopened and, as a result of the inquest, a verdict of unlawful killing was reached. The unusual factor was that the coroner asked that the police reexamine the case with a view to proceeding with a charge. I do not propose to go any further. The matter is now potentially back before the courts, with the prosecution being taken privately and not by the Crown Prosecution Service.
The Attorney-General will no doubt remember that there was a substantial public interest, and almost an outcry, at a case in Scotland when the hon. and learned Member for Perth and Kinross (Mr. Fairbairn) was a Law Officer. He decided not to prosecute in a rape case, but a private prosecution, which secured convictions, was taken out. That caused substantial public interest because it raised the same issue. Does not the need for a private prosecution, and the fact of a subsequent conviction, suggest that there should have been a public prosecution and that people guilty of serious offences should have been prosecuted? These three cases of young men from south London all resulted in deaths and the debate is limited to that issue.
The rules, as far as they exist, are clear, in the sense that there is, and has always been, a code governing prosecuting on behalf of the Crown and it is now governed, as the Attorney-General will no doubt confirm, by section 10 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. Section 10(2) provides that a code should be attached to the annual report of the Director of Public Prosecutions to the Attorney-General. One such report was produced last August.
I wish to examine not the way in which the evidence in any of the three cases was considered, but the way in which decisions are generally made about such matters. Does the Attorney-General agree, as many much more learned members of the legal profession than I have argued, that there should be an opportunity for debate, annually or biannually, in the House on the code and on another document, which is not in the public domain in the same way — the manual of policy and practice governing Crown prosecutions?
We often have the opportunity to debate such codes of practice — for example, that for local government. A substantial public interest would be served if the House periodically debated these matters, so that concerns about the way in which prosecutions on behalf of the public are carried out can be subject to scrutiny here and we can helpfully advise Law Officers of the Crown, officers under them and holders of public office, such as the Director of Public Prosecutions and the head of the Crown Prosecution Service, of the view of the legislature. That is my first specific request. That would be beneficial, and there is considerable demand for such a move.
My second request is to ask the Attorney-General whether he can help the House to identify the level at which decisions about whether to prosecute are made in cases involving death. I would argue that it is right and fair, and is seen to be so, if decisions on such cases are made at the highest level—by which I mean that, after advice has been sought in the normal way from the Treasury counsel, the DPP himself reviews the case. Cases
1326
that result in death are potentially in the category of the most serious crimes, and should be treated with appropriate seriousness by those to whom we entrust responsibility. It would be helpful if the Attorney-General could tell us about the level at which decisions are made in different types of case.
Thirdly, there is the ability to review initial decisions. That, I suggest, can be done in either of two ways: when there is specific cause for review, they can be put into the public domain—when, for example, a coroner asks for that to be done in his statement, summing up or comments after an inquest verdict; or the police can ask for it to be done. There are, of course, provisions for discretion to take account of the public view, but I ask for a specific procedure whereby it can clearly be seen that a review is taking place. That would be either at the instigation of the DPP, the Attorney-General or the Solicitor-General, as the code would provide, or by application to the courts from someone who considered that the proper way to proceed. It would be a form of judicial review. That, I think, would alleviate the concern of my constituents, the family of the deceased David Sibun, that the case had not been heard.
I should like briefly to explore a fourth issue: the tests that are used. There are two tests—the test that the evidence is sufficient, and the test that the matter is in the public interest. It is clear from the code that the Crown prosecutors have substantial discretion, and I do not quibble with that. There must be a realistic prospect of conviction. But paragraph 8 of the code states:
"The factors which can properly lead to a decision not to prosecute will vary from case to case, but broadly speaking, the graver the offence, the less likelihood there will be that the public interest will allow of a disposal less than prosecution, for example, a caution."
I feel that there should be a possibility in the second test —the public interest test—that, when death has resulted, the balance of the moment — generally a better-than-evens prospect of a conviction, in the public interest and on the evidence—should be reviewed to ensure that the public interest is served. The fear of possible additional evidence—especially after an inquest—or a feeling by the family of the deceased that there has not been enough inquiry into matters that concern them should be brought before the courts and seen to be reviewed.
One of the problems is that in any criminal case dealt with by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service the prosecution is by definition out of the hands of private citizens, be they family or other. Those personally affected feel excluded, and often are excluded in practice.
I feel that if, after the series of events that I have described, a decision is made to issue a private prosecution and a summons is sought and granted—as in the case that has prompted me to speak today — specific consideration should be given by the Attorney-General or the Solicitor-General to whether the case should be taken over, as is perfectly permissible, on behalf of the public, so that the prosecution becomes a public prosecution. There are practical reasons for that; not least the cost of pursuing a private prosecution, which can be considerable and often prohibitive. Once it has been decided that a summons is acceptable, and the summons is issued, the matter should normally go into the public domain, subject to clearly certified exceptions.
I ask the Attorney-General to consider whether he or, by direction, the head of the Crown Prosecution Service

1327
will consider taking the McHayle case into the public domain and prosecute on behalf of the public for the convenience of both the public and of the family of the deceased.
1.45 pm
The Attorney-General (Sir Patrick Mayhew): I congratulate the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) on his success in the ballot, and especially upon the careful and reasonable way in which he dealt with such important and difficult subjects. In some cases, they occasion deep anxiety and strong feelings among our constituents, and they need to be ventilated. They must always be addressed with the greatest care and sensitivity by those who have jurisdiction over them.
Three questions are relevant to my reply. First, what criteria does the Director of Public Prosecutions and, through him, the Crown Prosecution Service apply in deciding whether to institute or to continue criminal proceedings? Secondly, when, in the public interest, should cases be brought before a court by the prosecuting authorities—notwithstanding that they reckon that there is no realistic prospect of conviction? Thirdly, in what circumstances and on the basis of what criteria should the Director of Public Prosecutions intervene and assume responsibility for the conduct of a private prosecution?
The hon. Gentleman referred to the code for Crown prosecutors, and in recent months I have referred to it on a number of occasions in answer to parliamentary questions. As it states in its introductory paragraph, it is:
"A public declaration of the principles upon which the Crown Prosecution Service will exercise its functions."
That code reflects the guidelines published by my predecessor, now Lord Havers. He was the first Attorney-General to publish the criteria upon which prosecuting decisions were taken by him, and which he recommended to all prosecuting authorities.
That code is now issued pursuant to section 10 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. It is included in the annual report which the director makes to me under the Act, and which is laid before Parliament. There is a copy of the code in the Library. It makes it perfectly clear that the Crown prosecutor must ask himself two basic questions, as the hon. Gentleman correctly said, before deciding whether to institute or to continue criminal proceedings. The first is, is the evidence sufficient? Secondly, does the public interest require a prosecution?
It is important to note the order in which those questions are posed. It is fundamental to our system of criminal justice that a person should not be made to stand trial unless there is a sufficiently strong case against him before the proceedings are commenced. It is an important rule of fairness and of practice that someone is not made to stand trial merely because, for example, some might like to see him in the dock, no matter how much sympathy that feeling might reasonably attract. Prosecutions are not, and should not be, instituted simply to clear the air.
The sufficiency of evidence criterion has long been part of our criminal process. It has been explained and described in different ways at different times. In recent years it was expressed thus:
"Whether a reasonable jury, properly directed in the law, would be more likely to convict than to acquit."
In layman's terms, that was sometimes described as the "51 per cent. rule".
The test is now expressed another way, and again I quote fom the code:
1328
"A prosecution should not be started or continued unless the Crown Prosecutor is satisfied that there is admissible, substantial and reliable evidence that a criminal offence known to the law has been committed by an identifiable person. The Crown Prosecution Service does not support the proposition that a bare prima facie case is enough, but rather will apply the test of whether there is a realistic prospect of a conviction. When reaching this decision the Crown Prosecutor as a first step will wish to satisfy himself that there is no realistic expectation of an ordered acquittal"—
that is ordered by the court—
"or a successful submission in the Magistrates' Court of no case to answer. He should also have regard to any lines of defence which are plainly open to, or have been indicated by, the accused and any other factors which in his view would affect the likelihood or otherwise of a conviction."
The code expands on this, in setting out a number of matters to which the Crown prosecutor should have regard when evaluating the evidence. They all go towards that first essential decision: is there a realistic prospect of a conviction?
Having satisfied himself that the evidence can justify proceedings, the Crown prosecutor moves then — and only then— to the second question : does the public interest require a prosecution? I have already this year had cause to remind the House of the universality of that test. The code rightly pays great attention to that important question. It sets out a number of factors that might properly be taken into consideration in a list that is exemplary but not exhaustive.
The hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey referred to offences resulting in death. It is hard to conceive of circumstances in which it would not be in the public interest to prosecute a defendant for murder, provided that there was a realistic prospect of conviction. As I understand it, that matter is not in issue today. The real question is how that first test is satisfied.
The Crown Prosecution Service was set up to ensure that decisions in the great majority of criminal cases were taken by qualified lawyers, independent of the police. Members of the service are charged with the duty to ask themselves those two essential questions to which I have referred. The hon. Gentleman asked whether there should be circumstances in which prosecutions might be allowed to go ahead notwithstanding the fact that the Crown prosecutor is not satisfied that there is a reasonable prospect of conviction.
I do not think that that would be compatible with the purposes for which the Crown Prosecution Service was established. We have a Crown Prosecution Service to ensure that all cases are properly evaluated and that only those likely to result in a conviction are allowed to proceed. The exercise of the power to bring criminal proceedings against someone can be highly invasive of the citizen's liberties. It is not to be undertaken lightly; it must be undertaken upon the application of established principles by a trained mind, and never merely in response to clamour.
I am coming to the specific questions that the hon. Gentleman asked. First, he asked in what circumstances the service would intervene and assume responsibility for the conduct of proceedings that had been started privately. There is no straightforward answer to that question. Each case, inevitably, must be judged on its own facts. The director has the power to take over the conduct of such proceedings at any time, should he think it appropriate,

1329
but, at the same time, section 6 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 expressly reserves the right of private citizens to institute criminal proceedings.
There may be circumstances where, even though there would appear to be a realistic prospect of a conviction, it would not be in the public interest for a prosecution to proceed. In such circumstances, the director might well assume the responsibility for those proceedings and discontinue them. Examples of such circumstances are set out in the passage of the code to which I have referred. Moreover, in rare circumstances I might myself enter a nolle prosequi and bring such proceedings to an end.
However, I do not think that the hon. Gentleman is concerned with such cases today. Where the director's decision not to prosecute or to discontinue proceedings is based solely on the sufficiency of the evidence, it would be highly unlikely that he would intervene so as to discontinue a subsequently instituted private prosecution. There may be cases of such prosecutions where examining justices consider that there is a case on which the defendant should be committed for trial at the Crown court. In such circumstances it would not be unusual for the director to assume responsibility for the conduct of those proceedings and to prosecute them in the Crown court, notwithstanding his own earlier decision not to prosecute.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether, in a case where death has resulted and a private prosecution has been instituted, the almost invariable rule ought to be that the director should take over the proceedings. In those circumstances, the question whether the prosecution should be taken over by the director is always very carefully considered. There are substantial advantages in the director taking over such a prosecution, which I do not need to spell out here; in many cases, they are obvious. However, there may be rare occasions when the director, having taken the decision that the evidence is insufficient, will not wish to take it over. Therefore, I cannot accede to the proposal that it should be an almost inevitable rule, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that most careful consideration is given to that question in the circumstances that he posed. It is quite right that that practice should continue.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether there ought to be an opportunity for an annual or regular debate on the application of the code. I am always happy to be given an opportunity to give the facts about the performance of the Crown Prosecution Service. The hon. Gentleman knows that the allocation of parliamentary time is for my right
1330
hon. Friend the Leader of the House, not me, but when an opportunity is offered I always find it valuable to tell the House about what the Crown Prosecution Service has been doing and to draw a much better picture of it than is portrayed by the media. I should be happy to have an opportunity to explain the operation of the code, but that does not rest with me.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the level at which decisions are taken to prosecute when offences have resulted in death. It is taken at a high level. One of the advantages of the Crown Prosecution Service is that decisions have been decentralised. Decisions that were taken in almost every case by the Director of Public Prosecutions in London are now taken at chief Crown prosecutor level in the regions. It affords a better opportunity to take into account local considerations, and that change is therefore to be welcomed. It would always be at chief Crown prosecutor level that a decision of that kind would be taken, and in a particularly difficult or sensitive case it would properly be taken by the director, sometimes in consultation with one or other of the Law Officers.
I was asked about the ability to ask for a review of a specific decision if a coroner or the police asked for such a review. That can best be done without referring to me or to the Director of Public Prosecutions. There is no inclination to hold to a decision simply because it has been reached at a certain level and in certain circumstances. In all reasonable circumstances, there is complete readiness to review a decision, not least because everyone concerned recognises the importance of retaining public confidence in the Crown Prosecution Service.
Lastly, I was asked about the tests applied in relation to the rule about sufficiency of evidence and the rule in relation to the public interest. The hon. Gentleman suggested that where death has resulted there ought to be a review always to ensure that the public interest has been served. I think that I dealt with that at the beginning of my reply when I said that it is universally recognised within the Crown Prosecution Service that a case where death has taken place in potentially criminal circumstances needs to be treated with special care and particular sensitivity. Not every case that results in death, however, can properly be prosecuted if the rules are to be adhered to. It is important that we exercise the power of prosecution with care because, as I have already said, it is a highly invasive power with marked effects upon the liberties of the citizen.
I hope that I have replied satisfactorily to the points raised by the hon. Gentleman about this extremely important subject.

Exercise Fire Focus
2 pm
Mr. Cyril D. Townsend: I am grateful for this opportunity to initiate a debate on exercise Fire Focus and, in particular, on its diplomatic consequences. I was present when the Minister of State for the Armed Forces told the House on 11 February during the debate on the Royal Air Force:
"Next month we intend to hold the first full-scale reinforcement exercise, known as Fire Focus. The exercise will be directed by HQ RAF Strike Command at High Wycombe, and will take place between 7 and 31 March. It will involve the reinforcement of the garrison's air defences and an airlift of troops to the Falklands, followed by unit exercises to take advantage of the excellent training facilities in the islands." —[Official Report, 11 February 1988; Vol. 127, c. 532.]
It is possible that the phrase "full-scale" gave the impression that the exercise was to be bigger than was in fact intended. The Ministry of Defence press release mentioned
"significant numbers of troops and quantities of equipment."
As my hon. Friend the Minister knows, the announcement caused a considerable diplomatic flurry — greater, I suspect, than had been envisaged by the Foreign Office. Air Chief Marshal Sir Peter Harding, no less, told an international press conference on 8 March that the announcement had created
"enormous ructions around the world."
In the Argentine, according to the Financial Times of 9 March,
"Political groups from the far-right and far-left held separate demonstrations in the capital, condemning not only `British imperialism', but also the Argentine Government for its supposed weak posture and its seeming lack of clear military contingency plans."
That Government, in a statement put out on 3 March, said of the exercise:
"In addition to violating the sovereign rights of Argentina, such action is in direct contradiction to the United Nations and OAS resolution on this question … In case of need the relevant defence plans shall be put in operation."
The armed forces were put on what was described
"defensive alert".
On 17 March Senor Dante Caputo, the Argentine Foreign Minister, told a special meeting of the United Nations Security Council that the exercise created tension and insecurity and threatened international peace. The Organisation of American States officially condemned the exercise, as did the Andean foreign ministers. The Group of 8 — the Contadora group — called for it to be cancelled. Brazil asked my hon. Friend the Minister to postpone his visit. A Foreign Office spokesman described bilateral relations with this increasingly important country as "awkward". United States' concern was clear. The Latin American editor of The Independent wrote on 18 February:
"The British exercises have caused a diplomatic flurry in Latin America, and irritation in the US State Department, where officials make no secret at their annoyance with what they see as Mrs. Thatcher's intransigence over the Falklands. The United States has been anxious to reduce tensions in the South Atlantic and restore its relationship with Argentina. Their frustration with Britain is exacerbated by specific differences of policy and interests between the two countries. Some US officials, for instance, wish to help Argentina to reequip its armed forces".
Other countries saw the exercise as a demonstration of force. In Britain, there was a surprising number of hostile comments in the press, and not just in The Guardian. The Times said that the Foreign Office was left
1332
"with some catching up to do—and at a time when Britain is anxious to raise its trading profile on the South American continent. One must question therefore whether the ground was well enough prepared through Britain's embassies in Argentina's Latin neighbours … Britain should act to repair this damage quickly."
The Daily Telegraph headlined its editorial, "Act of Folly". It described Fire Focus as
"an insensitive piece of sabre-rattling".
It went too far. The exercise has undoubtedly restored the issue of the Falklands to international prominence and a number of points and questions arise from that fact.
I have no hesitation in saying that exercise Fire Focus, which finishes today, was a sensible and legitimate military measure and that there was an over-reaction in Argentina and some other Latin American countries.
The garrison in the islands has been reduced from some 5,000 to about 1,500—the figures are not made public. The other side of the coin is that rapid reinforcement by long-haul troop transport aircraft must be possible, and be seen to be possible, through practice. If such exercises do not take place, the Chief of Defence Staff would be right to call for a larger garrison. That is clearly not in the interests of Britain or of Argentina and certainly not in the interests of the islanders.
Exercise Fire Focus, which had been planned by the Ministry of Defence for several months and which involved a battalion of my old regiment — the Light Infantry—and did not involve the Royal Navy, had, I presume, been timed to coincide with the islands' summer, such as it is. In diplomatic terms, however, the timing was unfortunate. The United States has been mediating to try to avoid incidents between fisheries patrol vessels of Argentina and the United Kingdom and, it is hoped, perhaps to obtain a multinational fisheries agreement.
In Argentina, twice in the past year President Alfonsin has had serious problems with elements of the Argentine military which, according to today's papers, are still not completely over. Without doubt, the impression has been given at home and abroad that our Foreign Office played an insufficient part in the planning stages of the exercise. Perhaps its views were not sufficiently pressed home and taken into account. It had inadequately prepared the ground in Latin America—that is clear.
What advance notice was given to the Argentine Ministry of Foreign Affairs by the Swiss ambassador acting on our behalf? We have complained in the past that Argentina has not given us sufficient notice of important developments. How much discussion took place with the United States' State Department beforehand? We clearly had a duty to keep our allies well briefed, and one wonders why it was necessary for the US Deputy Assistant Secretary for Latin American Affairs to make an unscheduled visit to Argentina after our official announcement. I trust that the exercise was a success in defence terms.
What is my hon. Friend doing to repair that diplomatic damage and to tidy up the diplomatic debris? Has a new date been agreed for his visit to Brazil? Where does that leave United States mediation on the fisheries regime? Are there draft plans for any such exercises in the future and, if so, how will the Foreign Office improve its performance next time around?
The events of the past few weeks also remind us, if any reminder is needed, that, although the guns stopped firing in the south Atlantic one cold morning almost six years ago, depressingly little progress has been made in patching

1333
up our historic quarrel with Argentina, a democratic pro-Western, potentially friendly nation. The Government have not yet achieved the restoration of diplomatic links, even at the most lowly level. How right was a previous Select Committee on Foreign Affairs, which had a Conservative majority and Chairman, when it told the House, following a visit to the islands in January 1983:
"Your Committee do not believe that present policy, however necessary it may be in the short term, offers a stable future for the Islands. Not only are its material and political costs burdensome, but the policy itself is reactive and inflexible, and carries with it unfortunate implications for the wider conduct of foreign policy both now and for the future."
The passage of time has made the shortcomings of that policy even more apparent. Starting from a position of real moral and military strength, we are now on the defensive and find ourselves over this exercise — and, for that matter, every year in the United Nations General Assembly—widely criticised, even by our European and Commonwealth partners. The world does not support us over the question of the islands. It votes against us. The diplomatic initiative has been passed to the Argentine, which has also been inflexible.
The total cost for the financial years 1983–84 to 1987–88 is about £3,340 million, or about £160 per taxpayer. To put it another way, over four years, £3·3 billion was spent on behalf of the 400 families who make up the islands' population, when expatriates and their families are discounted. That was during a time of financial restraint at home.
Some 8 per cent. of the total efforts of the Royal Navy's dwindling number of destroyers and frigates is committed to the south Atlantic. In this country, the opinion polls suggest that, even among Conservative voters, the Government's policy is out of step with public attitudes. The public clearly want to see diplomatic relations restored and do not have a hang-up over the future of the region.
That part of the world is crying out for the diplomatic skills that the Government have been able to deploy and display over Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, and Hong Kong and over negotiations with Spain on Gibraltar. That part of the world is well suited to a timely, vigorous and well-prepared intervention by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister so that we can move on in this Parliament to a new, profitable and, above all, peaceful period of cooperation with all the countries and people concerned with the future of the south Atlantic.
Mr. Jacques Arnold rose—
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): Order. Does the hon. Gentleman have the consent of the hon. Member for Bexleyheath (Mr. Townsend) and the Minister to speak?
Mr. Townsend indicated assent.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Tim Eggar)indicated assent.
2.14 pm
Mr. Jacques Arnold: My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath (Mr. Townsend) considerably overrates the damage that the exercise has done to
1334
Britain's relationship with Latin America. It is well known that Latin American solidarity is based on a different scale of priorities in considering its diplomatic position.
The only real tangible reaction that we have seen to the exercise has been the postponement of my hon. Friend the Minister's visit to Brazil. We should note carefully the reaction in Brazil to that decision to postpone his visit. The three major Brazilian newspapers based in Rio de Janeiro strongly criticised the cancellation of that visit and referred to what Brazilians and the Brazilian business community felt was the powerful relationship between Britain and Brazil.
My experience of Latin America is that the solidarity between Latin American countries is as wide as the River Plate, but it is only ankle-deep. Far more important to the individual countries of Latin America is their relationships as individual countries with Britain as one of the leading economies of the western world.
2.15 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Tim Eggar): I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath (Mr. Townsend) for raising this subject and to my hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Mr. Arnold) for joining in.
A great deal has been said in the press and in international fora about exercise Fire Focus. Sadly, much of the speculation about its purpose and scope has been inaccurate and exaggerated. Perhaps, as a result, some of the international reaction has been ill-judged and inappropriate. Therefore, I particularly welcome this opportunity once again to set the record straight.
Let me begin by putting the exercise firmly in context. The Government are pledged to the defence of the Falkland Islands. Everybody recognises that. It is not a pledge that we take lightly. Our strategy for the defence of the islands depends crucially, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath has said, on an ability rapidly to reinforce our military presence there. We made that strategy absolutely clear in the White Paper in 1982.
Mount Pleasant airport was completed in 1985, allowing wide-bodied transport aircraft to land in the islands. Since then we have halved—I repeat halved— the size of the garrison. The garrison is now at the lowest minimum level consonant with a realistic defence capability.
Of course, that major reduction in force levels has been possible only because of the knowledge that we could, and would, be able to fly in reinforcements at short notice. But we cannot take that reinforcement capability on trust. We have to test it regularly. We hope never to have to reinforce the garrison in earnest, but that is an eventuality that no responsable Government can lightly leave to chance.
Many other nations conduct similar, routine reinforcement exercises. Those exercises are accepted as a normal part of the process by which we work to maintain our security. That is well understood. No one can seriously suggest that the holding of such exercises brings us somehow to the brink of hostilities.
Accordingly, let me emphasise that exercise Fire Focus was not in any way a response to an increase in tension in the area. It was not conceived abruptly, or with any provocative intent. On the contrary, as I have already said, we made it clear in 1982 in a White Paper on the Falklands campaign that reinforcement exercises would be carried out as and when necessary—a fact which, I have to say,

1335
some commentators, and even hon. Members, seem conveniently to overlook. I exempt my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath from that.
Following the completion of Mount Pleasant airport, the austral summer of 1988 was timely for operational, logistical and weather reasons. As my hon. Friend has said, my hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces announced the exercise in the House on 11 February. He made it plain that the exercise was routine. He also pointed out that, by its very nature, it contributed to an overall lowering of tension in the region as an integral part of a policy of maintaining a reinforcement capability, and, hence, only a minimum permanent garrison in the island.
My hon. Friend has claimed that a decision to hold the exercise shows a lack of co-ordination at the very least between the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence. I want to assure my hon. Friend that the Foreign Office was consulted about the exercise at an early stage. I cannot for one moment agree that the responsibility for maintaining our commitment to the Falkland Islands is incompatible with maintaining and developing our good relationships in the region as a whole.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath asked whether we had informed the Argentine Government in advance about the exercise. The Swiss ambassador informed the Argentine authorities on the morning of 12 February, the announcement having been made in the House the previous evening. My hon. Friend would have been surprised if the Argentine Government had been informed before the House of the decision to hold the exercise. We must remember that the Argentines have been aware for many years of our policy of practising exercises for the reinforcement of the garrison.
Fire Focus was conducted deliberately with the smallest number of troops and aircraft required to provide a realistic test of reinforcement capability. Fewer than 1,000 men and only a small number of aircraft were involved. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath said, the exercise was concluded today. The garrison has now returned to its former size. There has been no permanent increase in force levels. I am happy to say that Fire Focus has been a success and we have shown that we can and will honour our commitments to the Falkland islanders.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath referred to the reaction in Argentina to the reinforcement exercise. Following its announcement, the Argentine Government called for the cancellation of the exercise. They sought to apply pressure in the international ora and through third countries. They tabled a resolution before the Organisation of American States and called for a debate in the Security Council. That was a quite unjustified reaction to a purely routine and defensive exercise. The exaggerated nature of the Argentine response was reflected in their public statements. The Argentines spoke of the involvement of 5,000 troops and large numbers of aircraft, figures which frankly were simply plucked out of thin air and did not bear any relation to reality.
Accusations were also made that the exercise was contrary to the spirit of the United Nation's resolution creating a south Atlantic zone of peace. That resolution was instigated by Brazil and we, of course, supported it. Yet the resolution in no way limits the right of states to take adequate precautions to defend their territory.
The exercise was not the result of any increase in tension in the area. We welcome statements by the
1336
Argentine Government that they will seek to resolve differences between Britain and Argentina only by peaceful means. We wish Argentina's democratic Government well. We look forward to the day when the Argentine Government will recognise the democratic right of the Falkland islanders to live in peace and security under a Government of their own choosing. However—and this is a very important point—we must recognise that the Argentine Government do not recognise that democratic right at present. So long as the Argentines maintain their claim to the Falklands, we shall have to retain a capacity to deal with the unexpected. The House would rightly criticise us if we shirked that clear national responsibility.
We fully recognised that exercise Fire Focus would arouse interest and perhaps concern in Latin America, even though our policy of carrying out such exercises was already well known. We took considerable care to explain our position to some Governments most closely concerned with the exercise. If some of the public statements from the Organisation of American States failed to reflect what we said to it, of course we regret that. However, I must tell my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath that some of the speeches came as no surprise to us.
My hon. Friends referred to the decision by the Brazilian Government to postpone my visit to Brazil. We have already made clear our attitude to that postponement. Personally, I very much regret the postponement, especially in view of our good bilateral relations and because I wished Brazil to be the country of my first visit to Latin America. It was unfortunate that I was denied an opportunity to explain clearly and to discuss our policies on the Falklands and a wide range of other issues, but I am confident that the overall quality of our relations with the countries of Latin America will not be affected. Other opportunities for interchange will be found in the not-too-distant future.
Mr. Townsend: Looking back on it, does my hon. Friend agree that it would have been better if the initial statement had spelt out the small size of the force taking part?
Mr. Eggar: Of course, my hon. Friend has the benefit of hindsight. My hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces made it clear in his statement that it was a limited, routine exercise, and there was an overreaction to that statement. I believe that my hon. Friend recognises that.
Finally, since 1982, we have sought ways of restoring more normal relations with Argentina. We see no contradiction between improving our bilateral relations with Argentina and defending the rights of the Falkland islanders to decide their future. To the Argentines, negotiations on sovereignty mean simply the transfer of the islands to Argentina, irrespective of the wishes of the islanders. But the search for more normal relations with Argentina has always been our aim, and it will remain so. My right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary has repeatedly made it clear that the desk of the Argentine Foreign Minister is groaning under the weight of our proposals. I regret that the Argentine Government's response has been so disappointing.
Let us consider the facts. In September 1982, we agreed with Argentina to abolish the financial restrictions that both sides had introduced at the time of the conflict. We

1337
honoured our undertaking immediately and in full. Argentina has implemented that undertaking only partly, and there are still restrictions against British companies in Argentina. In 1983, we proposed the resumption of air links, but the Argentine Government have yet to reply. The Argentines have failed to respond to our frequent demonstrations of readiness to return Argentine military dead to Argentina. Nor have they taken up our offer to accept a bona fide visit to the islands by Argentine next-of-kin. Further, in 1985, we unilaterally lifted all trade restrictions on Argentina. Once again there has been no reply.
If my hon. Friend wishes to effect an improvement in Anglo-Argentine relations—that has been his objective for several years and he has pursued it assiduously—he should direct his efforts to encouraging a more positive attitude in the Argentine Government. They must respond to the many initiatives that we have taken.
I end on a more positive note. My hon. Friend mentioned the exchanges that have taken place, via the Americans, on fisheries. He knows that more than a year ago we began to exchange ideas with Argentina on how both countries could co-operate on fisheries conservation in the south Atlantic. That exchange stemmed directly from an initiative that we took at the Food and Agriculture Organisation in Rome because we were concerned about the conservation of fish stocks in the south Atlantic. I am happy to say that that exchange on fisheries with Argentina continues. I can assure the House and my hon. Friend that we shall do all we can to help that exchange succeed. We very much hope that the Argentine Government will respond positively.
We hope that six years after the Falklands conflict the Argentines will recognise that the only realistic way to improve relations is through co-operation on practical measures of benefit to both our countries.

The Executive (Powers)
2.30 pm
Mr. Chris Mullin: I welcome the Minister of State, Privy Council Office. I understand that there has been some difficulty in rustling up a Minister to respond to the debate and that the buck has been back and forth between the Minister of State, Privy Council Office and the Minister of State, Home Office and has finally come to rest with the right hon. Member for Shoreham (Mr. Luce) in the Chamber. In the absence of the Prime Minister, I welcome him.
The "Powers of the Executive" is a title that I alighted upon after sound advice from the Table Office. My preferred title would have been, "The drift towards a one-party state". I understand that that would not be entirely in order. I am seeking to draw attention to the growing trend towards authoritarianism in the government of this country over the past 10 years. That has become a matter of concern to people of all political persuasions, including some Conservative Members, and was recently the subject of a debate in the other place.
There is concern that the Government have used their office to dismantle or neutralise legitimate opposition to them and that respected institutions have been reduced to instruments of the state or, in some cases, instruments of the Tory party. There is also concern that the interests of the state and the Tory party are, to some extent, becoming synonymous. There is a growing tendency among persons in office to denounce dissenters as mad, loony or the enemies within, without addressing the issues that such people raise. That is an unhealthy trend and it reverses the long, but by no means complete, journey to democracy in our country over the past 200 years.
Contrary to what has sometimes been alleged, democracy in this country was not a gift from the Conservative party. Indeed, it was seized from long periods of Conservative government after a lengthy period of popular uprising. I and others are under no illusion. We know that the power of the ruling power party in this country is unmatched in the industrial world and probably unmatched outside the countries of the Stalin system. Most of us recognise that, although hon. Members come up for re-election every four or five years, our ruling class does not come up for re-election, any more than does the ruling class in the Soviet Union.
Although from time to time the Conservative party is obliged to concede control over the House of Commons, Tory control over most other institutions in this country is permanent and overwhelming. I do not seek to be controversial but that is a statement of fact which probably would not be disputed, at least in private, by many Conservative Members. Our judiciary, senior levels of the police force, the officer corps of the armed forces, leading elements in industry and finance, many senior civil servants and diplomats, the media, the board of governors of the BBC and, of course, the other side of the House are dominated by persons whose political persuasions are those of one party. That is how it has always been for as long as anyone can remember. It has become more so rather than less so in recent years, despite the appearance of several accountants and estate agents on the Conservative Benches.
Regardless of who is in control in the House of Commons at any given time, the commanding heights of

1339
our society have always been run by people whose loyalty to their class has taken precedence over their loyalty to the elected Government. I accept that there are exceptions and that there are persons of integrity in all walks of life. As I said, I do not seek to be controversial because, privately, many Conservative Members would recognise what I say.
Despite all their rhetoric about their love of democracy, many Conservative Members have a deep distrust of the democratic process. When the electorate fails to deliver, they never hesitate to call upon the vast array of extra-parliamentary forces that are always at the disposal of the Conservative party. Labour Governments have been tolerated as long as they posed no threat to the class interests of those who have ruled us since time immemorial. Anti-democratic forces have never been far below the surface. For example, all of us can remember the attempted coup by Cecil King in 1968 to set up a business men's Government, presided over — I am sure reluctantly, in the face of his objections — by Lord Mountbatten. We can all remember, during the time of the 1974–79 Labour Government, General Sir Walter Walker's efforts to set up some kind of private army, and the rather more sinister operation by, I believe, the founder of the Special Air Service, Colonel David Stirling, and a organisation called GB75. Although General Walker was the subject of some ridicule at the time, he was, after all, a former commander of NATO forces in northern Europe. Of course, more recently, we have learnt from the memoirs of a former senior member of the intelligence services of an attempt by up to 40 members of the intelligence services to destabilise the Government of Lord Wilson.
I and others of my persuasion are under no illusions. The anti-democratic forces that have always been present have at least, on the whole, been kept below the surface. Over the past two centuries the trend has been towards making this country more democratic, more open, less authoritarian and more tolerant. That was the case until seven or eight years ago. The Government have reversed that trend. They have gone over and above what any of their predecessors in our lifetime have done, and are systematically undermining the means by which legitimate opposition and dissent can function. They have shamelessly degraded our democratic institutions. We have a Prime Minister who talks not of defeating the Opposition, but of eliminating the Opposition.
That has happened most in local government. Vigorous local government was one of the hallmarks of our democracy. Very often, the parties in power in the town halls and civic centres in the country were different from the one that was in power in Government. That remains the case. Some local authorities are good, some are bad, but all are accountable to the electorate that put them there.
Since the Government came to power, they have waged a continual war against local government. That war has been cynically targeted against local authorities controlled by the Labour party. Spending figures have been gerrymandered to penalise local authorities controlled by Labour. Perhaps the most cynical example was the abolition of the metropolitan authorities. It was the first time this century — certainly during my lifetime — that any Government had seen fit to abolish elections. All those seven metropolitan authorities were controlled by the Labour party. If just one had been controlled by the Conservative party the exercise might have been a little more credible. It was impossible to avoid concluding that
1340
it was merely an attempt to stifle effective opposition because the Government could not rely on the electorate to do that.
One of the more depressing sights of recent times was Lords—many of whom were feudalists, never mind Conservatives — being summoned from their stately homes and castles to abolish elections in London. I have seen members of the other place lecturing the Soviet Union about the need for greater democracy and openness. That was rather rich coming from people who were in the other place because of hereditary title or appointment. Our masters are nothing if not unembarrassable.
The other major sector in which the Government have abused their power against sources of legitimate dissent has been the trade unions. Any student of history knows that the trade unions have not fared well from Tory Governments or Tory judges over the years. But until 10 years ago, trade unions were accepted within the Tory party as being legitimate and as having legitimate functions. We are now beginning to see a return to the days of effective trade unionism becoming illegal.
The political fund ballots rather backfired on the Government because they were intended—this is what made them different from previous trade union legislation — to undermine the source of the funding of the Opposition party. What undermined the Government's rhetoric at that time was that those ballots applied only to trade unions and what they should do with their political funds. There was no hint of any similar obligation on corporations that donated funds to the Conservative party. That was widely regarded as an attempt to bankrupt the Opposition.
Secondary picketing has been outlawed. In so doing it has struck at one of the fundamentals of trade unionism, because solidarity between persons who are not necessarily directly affected by a dispute is fundamental to British trade unionism. It is interesting to note that the judges are increasingly placing a narrower interpretation on what constitutes secondary picketing, with the result that effective trade unionism is becoming very difficult
At GCHQ, trade unionism has been banned —perhaps on instructions from the other side of the Atlantic. For whatever reason, that was the first time for many years that a Government had seen fit to outlaw trade unionism. It is unusual in the industrial world for such a thing to happen.
Strike ballots have been introduced. No one objects to fair ballots, which, if properly carried out, strengthen and legitimise an industrial dispute. In the past few days the National Union of Seamen has been taken to court and threatened with sequestration of all its assets.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker)rose—
Mr. Mullin: I am aware that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are probably about to mention the sub judice rule.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I was not only about to mention that but to remind the hon. Gentleman that the subject to which he has chosen to address himself is "The Powers of the Executive". I fear that several times he has wandered well away from it.
Mr. Mullin: I shall do my best to keep to what you say is the point, Mr. Deputy Speaker. However, we have seen in the past few days the remarkable spectacle of a trade

1341
union being threatened with sequestration of all its assets if it held a ballot, and that exposes the false rhetoric behind the Government's legislation.
In many industrial workplaces today there is a climate of fear similar—I do not pretend that it is the same—to that which prevails in some eastern European countries. With a number of my hon. Friends, I received yesterday a delegation from the train drivers at King's Cross railway station. They spoke of their members being afraid even to distribute leaflets advertising the ballot that they wanted to hold for fear of the sack. There was a recent unexplained break-in into their trade union office, and such incidents have become more frequent. This is an unhealthy trend, which is getting worse.
Many people not necessarily of my persuasion fear that recently the Government have grossly misused the police. Many police themselves are unhappy. They are in the unenviable situation of having to enforce unjust laws. They have been turned, on some occasions, into the paramilitary wing of the Tory party and I know that that is deeply resented by many policemen. Some six or seven years ago, police were obliged, as the result of a court order, to surround an engineering works in Manchester while the work force stood by and watched machinery being evacuated by helicopter to be sold off in Spain.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I find it difficult to see what relevance these matters have to the subject that the hon. Gentleman has chosen for the debate.
Mr. Mullin: The subject that I have chosen to debate is the concentration of power in the Executive and I am alleging, and no doubt the Minister will respond—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman is referring to disputes between employers and trade unions and workers. It is difficult to see how the hon. Gentleman can raise these matters, particularly events that happened several years ago.
Mr. Mullin: They arise from legislation passed by the House and I am alleging, although I am sure that the Minister will respond robustly, that the Government have accumulated to themselves many powers which were unusual by the standards of previous Governments, both Conservative and Labour. We saw the use made of the police during the recent coal miners' strike when fantastic violence was unleashed in the coalfields. All of us were struck by a picture that was not published widely in this country, although it appeared abroad, of a mounted policeman attacking an unarmed civilian woman. As far as I know, no action followed that incident, which would have been inconceivable several years ago. After the coal strike, there were mass trials of 80 or 90 people at a time in Mansfield and massive perjuries were committed. Those charged were acquitted, but no charges were laid against those who committed the perjuries. Meanwhile, away from the picket line, crime soared.
Another aspect of the Government's exceptional concentration of powers has been a misuse of the courts, which has undermined the credibility of the judicial system. All of us remember that during the miners' strike a member of the Conservative party, or at least a supporter of it, Mr. David Hart, persuaded a number of working miners to take action under the Government's legislation
1342
against the National Union of Mineworkers and the judges moved in immediately with massive penalties, including sequestration of property. This has induced a fear of, but not respect for, the courts, which is regrettable. In 10 years, we have gone back beyond Taff Vale to the Combination Acts and many people now feel scared of becoming involved in union activity. That is an unhealthy development.
The manipulation of the news media has been another hallmark of the present Government. As I think is commonly understood, this country has a uniquely servile media, although there are many honourable exceptions. I recollect that the hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Shepherd)—who is not a member of my party—described the media as the Hallelujah chorus, and I cannot improve on that description. In many instances, they seem to be here not to protect our liberties, which are under unprecedented threat, but to be used as an arm of the ruling party to trivialise, distort, lie and distract people from the realities of life with a diet of television soap opera and stories about the royal family.
Two of our newspapers are now featuring massive headlines with words like "rats" to describe their enemies. That is unfortunate; it has the ring of Fascism. The newspapers are used remorselessly, and at times cynically, by Ministers to hound enemies of the ruling party.
The BBC has always paid lip service to impartiality, which many Opposition Members regard as phoney. At times of rejoicing or national crisis, it has often become an arm of the state—for example, during the Falklands war or at royal weddings. It has always been possible, and still is to some extent, for dissenters to be heard without a Government health warning such as "hard Left", "extremist", or "terrorist" prefixed to their names, but that is now coming under serious threat. The BBC board has been blatantly stacked with supporters of the ruling party. There was a coup against the director-general, Alasdair Milne; there have been raids on the BBC in Scotland; we have seen pictures in our papers of members of the special branch kicking down—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that it is a convention of the House to allow the Minister time to reply.
Mr. Mullin: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I shall wind up my remarks.
I do not wish to be melodramatic. I acknowledge readily that in this country we enjoy liberties that are unknown in many parts of the world. I merely wish to draw attention to what has become an unmistakable trend over the last 10 years. I thought it right to identify that trend while time remained, and while it was still permitted.
2.52 pm
The Minister of State, Privy Council Office (Mr. Richard Luce): Let me start by congratulating the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin) on choosing the powers of the Executive as the subject of the debate. That, however, is as far as my congratulations can go. The rest has been thorough entertainment.
I have noted down some of the language used by the hon. Gentleman. He referred to the development of a one-party state; to authoritarianism; to servile media; to extra-parliamentary activities; to anti-democratic forces; to

1343
degraded democratic institutions; to a climate similar to that in East European countries; to paramilitary wings; and to the misuse of the courts.
I have been looking at the hon. Gentleman to see how sincere he is. I believe that he is very sincere. I think that he believes what he is saying, and that, to my mind, is the most extraordinary thing of all. My only suggestion to the hon. Gentleman is that he is in need of a very long holiday, and I therefore wish him a very happy Easter. He deserves a holiday after a speech like his. He is living in cloud-cuckoo land if he believes what he has just been saying.
I accept that opponents of the Government are looking desperately for ammunition, which often takes the form of what might be described as hackneyed and mindless campaigns to suggest that the Government of the day—and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister—do not care about democracy, are becoming more authoritarian and dictatorial and are taking more power unto themselves. The hon. Gentleman has fallen into that trap —in so far as I could understand any of what he was trying to say.
For the remaining few minutes allowed to me, I should like to show the hon. Gentleman exactly what we have achieved in the past nine years—and I shall do it in five minutes. It is the very opposite of what the hon. Gentleman suggested.
I shall cite two examples that show that we are not concentrating power in the Executive. First, there are fewer central controls and, secondly, we have dispersed more power to individuals. The hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) is longing for examples, so I shall give him some. There has been a real bonfire arising from the elimination of central Government controls. We have ended the price and dividend controls, a whole range of controls in planning and industrial development, and exchange controls. We have pursued a sustained policy of deregulation. We have removed unnecessary restrictions on business to the particular benefit of small businesses. We have removed taxes that hamper enterprise, such as the development land tax.
During the past few years, all our policies have been geared towards disposal of central Government control over the individual—[interruption.] If the hon. Member for Newham, North-West would listen, he would hear even more examples. It is all very exciting. We have been doing a great deal while he has been concentrating on other issues during the past nine years.
There has been a diffusion of power away from the Executive and towards the people. Our privatization
1344
policies have removed 16 major businesses from central control—that is a dispersal of power from the centre. The state-owned sector has been reduced by almost 40 per cent. There has also been a dispersal of power to individuals through the introduction of employee share ownership schemes that allow the individual to participate in business. The number of individual shareholders has increased from 3 million in 1979 to more than 9 million—20 per cent. of the adult population.
There has been dispersal of power to the individual in housing matters. More than 1 million householders have had the opportunity to buy their council homes. We are currently strengthening the rights of occupiers of rented property.
The hon. Member for Sunderland, South mentioned the trade unions. Our legislation has strengthened the powers of the individual trade unionist. There must now be elections of union officials, which gives more power to the individual member. Legislation is going through the House to establish a commissioner for the rights of trade union members.
Our education legislation will strengthen the position of parents who are concerned about their children's education. It will bring more autonomy to schools. We are dispersing power and authority to schools, parents and individuals.
The hon. Gentleman, in his quite extraordinary speech, mentioned local government. The abolition of the tiers of local government does not concentrate power at the centre, but rather gives more power to local authorities, such as borough councils, and makes them more accountable to their electorates.
The Civil Service has a policy of devolution of managerial authority, so that managers can take decisions — although Ministers should, of course, remain responsible.
What did the Government do first when they took office in 1979? They established a stronger Select Committee system that allows the legislature to challenge the Executive of the day. That is yet another example of this Government's interest in and concern for the right of a democratic society to challenge the Executive. As for the hon. Gentleman's views about the judiciary, there is clear evidence of our commitment to an independent judiciary which is at the heart of our system. Much has been done to strengthen that. Altogether, the hon. Gentleman lives in a world of his own, because everything that has happened in the past year has been in the opposite direction to that which he has alleged.

Planning in Towns and Cities
2.59 pm
Mr. Graham Riddick: I am very pleased to have the opportunity to introduce a short debate on the subject of planning in towns and cities. I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Mr. Trippier) is here. As he is a conscientious and diligent Minister, he will be delighted to be here at this late hour on the last day before the recess when many of our hon. Friends are jetting away to the sun or the slopes in Switzerland.
I have not initiated a debate on the issue of planning per se because the issues surrounding planning in the countryside and in rural areas are complicated, difficult and contentious. I do not wish to get involved in the great debate about how far we should encroach on the green belt and how far we should allow house building into the countryside, but I should point out that it is not only the south of England which is under pressure to provide more houses in green field sites. Areas such as the Holme valley in my constituency are also increasingly sought after and popular. My concern is specifically about how the planning system relates to towns and cities in Britain.
Despite the fact that economic prosperity is increasing and spreading rapidly under the present Government, there is clearly a major problem of deprivation and decay in many of our cities and towns. As we all know, the Government have embarked on a number of significant programmes to reverse that trend. Clearly, the Government, with their many schemes, are doing all they possibly can to improve the fabric and conditions of those areas of urban decay.
There are many reasons for the rundown in inner cities and certain parts of the towns. The decline of the old traditional industries and the appalling municipal housing policies of the 1960s created so many social problems such as increasing lawlessness.
A number of factors are hindering the resurgence of those areas. Not least is the fact that the vast majority of them are dominated by Left-wing Labour councils which spend more of their resources on the policies of social engineering and less on essential services such as road repairs. Included in the factors holding up progress are the planning regimes which do so much to decide the future of developments within those areas. My experience of talking to industrialists and entrepreneurs is that the planning regulations and restrictions cause them more problems than practically anything or anybody else when they are trying to set up new enterprises or expand existing ones.
My hon. Friend is aware of my interest in this matter as I have raised it in the House on a number of occasions. I make no apology for raising it once again. While planning is not a particularly exciting or sexy subject, particularly when compared with setting up a new enterprise zone or a new urban development corporation or handing out millions of pounds in urban development grants, I believe that planning plays a vital part in the regeneration of our inner cities and towns.
Good, imaginative and helpful planners who do not stick rigidly to the regulations will certainly help to oil the wheels of economic progress. By the same token, however, inflexible planners can do more than probably anything or
1346
anybody else to hinder economic development, to stop enterprises getting off the ground and to stop the process of urban regeneration.
I included "towns" in the title of the debate because towns such as Huddersfield have problems similar to those that are to be found in the inner cities, yet they do not enjoy the benefit of urban development corporation, enterprise zone, or assisted area status. The Colne valley is another example. That old industrial valley has taken something of a hammering because of the decline of the textile industry over the last 20 years. Huddersfield and the Colne valley are good examples of the fact that not all Britain's problems are confined to the inner cities. Unemployment is still in double figures—10 per cent.—in the Huddersfield travel-to-work area.
When I referred in my maiden speech last July to planners impeding progress—and what a long time ago that now seems to be—I was stongly criticised by a few local Labour councillors. It appears that I had touched on a raw nerve. A number of other people, particularly business men, congratulated me on voicing sentiments that they had never ventured to express. I acknowledge that it was perhaps unfair of me to single out Labout councils alone as having been responsible for creating planning obstacles. There are restrictive planners in Conservative councils and there are progressive planners in Labour councils. For example, Conservative-controlled Harrogate council harassed the marvellously innovative dairy farm in Weeton when it started to be too successful at producing an alternative product, ice cream. Another example is a small vilage shop in Killinghale, where I have lived for many years. It was told to remove a sign outside the shop that simply said, "News." The fact that it had been there for at least 15 years and had drawn the attention of passing motorists to the fact that newspapers were on sale was wholly irrelevant to the bureaucrat who decided that the sign should come down. The proprietor of that village shop appealed to the Department of the Environment and won his case but not before he had suffered a great deal of worry, hassle and expense.
I know of a brewery in Manchester that wanted to expand one of its pubs. It made an appropriate planning application but then had to wait two years before it could get any sense out of the council. The lesson to be learnt is that eventually the brewery decided that it was not prepared to put up with the hassle. It said, "To hell with this development" and dropped the proposed extension to the pub. The jobs that would have been created by building that extension and increasing the bar staff were never created, not to mention the increased social amenities that were lost to the local people.
Such problems can arise all over the country, but it is natural that I should talk about the ones in my constituency and in the surrounding areas. I referred in my maiden speech, all that time ago, to a small printing company that had been refused planning permission to move into larger premises because its application went against the local plan that specifies that any change of use of existing buildings for office purposes will not be allowed unless the buildings are in the town centre. That was despite the fact that those premises had been used for commercial purposes, though not as office space, for more than 20 years. I regret that the Department of the Environment also refused permission on appeal.
The firm is still in its cramped offices looking for somewhere to move to and unable to expand and develop

1347
its business as it would wish. Who knows how many jobs might have been created by now had that firm moved into larger premises and had it been able to chase the extra business that it would undoubtedly have needed to survive in its expanded form? That is just one example of planning regulations having stopped a firm expanding.
One cannot directly blame the planners for sticking strictly to the local plan, although one would wish them to show more flexibility. My concern is that the planners want to be too involved with development at times and that they sometimes impose conditions that can reduce the effectiveness of the enterprise. Let me give an example. A garden centre in my constituency was granted planning permission, but with the proviso that the majority of the products that it sold had to have been grown on the premises. On the face of it, that may seem a reasonable enough request, but it was a direct and unnecessary interference in the commercial life of the enterprise, and it could have seriously jeopardised the firm. The proprietor is extremely unhappy that he has to abide by the conditions.
On the subject of garden centres, it seems extraordinary to me that the Colne valley local plan should say :
"garden centres will be acceptable within rural locations and on land not allocated for development only if retailing is ancillary to the main activity of plant production".
That is a wholly unnecessary bureaucratic restriction. The plan further states:
"retailing of goods from farm shops, mill shops and similar establishments"—
the very sort of activity that we need to encourage to develop new jobs—
"will only be permitted if the goods are produced wholly or mainly on the premises, and if the area devoted to sales is small."
That seems to me an unnecessary interference in a company's commercial life, which should be a matter entirely for its manager or owner.
I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will reconsider the drawing up of local plans. Perhaps there is an argument for the Government's laying down that unnecessary restrictions which interfere with the commercial running of an enterprise must not be included in the local plan.
Mr. Hugo Summerson: Does my hon. Friend agree that all too often planning is looked upon as a professional discipline in itself, rather than as a means of serving local communities?
Mr. Riddick: My hon. Friend makes an excellent point, and I fear that that is true in many areas of the country. Clearly that needs to change. The planners must realise that they are part of the economic process : that is one of the important lessons to be learnt.
I hope that I have explained why I am concerned about the planning regulations. I have mentioned only a small number of the problems that people have brought to my attention. I could have cited many more. In all the cases that I have described business men, enterpreneurs and industrialists are having unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles placed in their way, which either completely halt new developments or slow them down.
Having outlined the problems, let me suggest some solutions. I fully recognise the Government's efforts to simplify the planning process. The circular issued to local planning authorities by the Department of the Environment in 1980 clearly recognises the important part
1348
that planning has to play in economic development and calls for efficiency and speed in decision-making. That is wholly admirable, and I agree with practically everything that the circular says.
The Government have taken a number of initiatives to reduce planning obstacles still further. Firm planning policy guidance on development and employment was given to local authorities in 1985 and the Housing and Planning Act 1986 tried to simplify and improve the planning system.
The Government have recognised that there is a problem. More changes are needed. Planning restrictions are still too great. One of the key components of an urban development corporation or an enterprise zone is an enormously simplified planning system. That demonstrates that the Government are aware of the problems.
Neither Huddersfield nor the Colne valley is designated as a special area, so they have to live under the full panoply of planning regulations. I welcome the introduction of simplified planning zones, and I strongly urge Kirklees council to consider whether it would be appropriate to turn some of its area into SPZs.
The problem with all these designated areas is that they apply only to certain areas. The advantages of a simplified planning system are not enjoyed by other areas. My hon. Friend the Minister should consider how we can make planning law, especially that which affects built-up areas, more relevant, responsible and positive in terms of the development of enterprises.
Planning authorities should be stopped from making any commercial judgments or imposing conditions on how an enterprise is run. They should not be allowed to impose conditions that relate to how an enterprise takes commercial decisions.
We must put the onus on planning authorities to justify refusals and the conditions that they impose when they grant permission. I realise that reasons have to be given already, but it should be for planning authorities to justify each negative decision.
We must reduce non-essential and petty regulations and change the environment in which decisions are made. We must make planning officers and councillors realise how important they are to the economic development of their area. They should feel more responsible for economic development. Perhaps an authority which refuses a permission should have to calculate and publicise the number of jobs that have been lost because of the refusal.
Councils with economic development departments —most have them in some form — should put their planning departments under the direct responsibility of the economic development people. We might thus encourage a more responsible and positive attitude.
Planning is an immensely complicated subject. Having put a bit of work into the subject this week as a result of getting this debate, I have come to realise just how complicated it is. The fact remains, however, that the application of planning law will continue to play an important part in the country's economy. In my experience, entrepreneurs are good at saying what can be achieved and why new jobs will be created. Planners can be just as good at saying why something cannot be done, perhaps because a plan does not comply with a certain regulation.
If today's planning controls existed 150 years ago, Britain would never have enjoyed the industrial revolution. We cannot have a development free-for-all,

1349
but the restrictions have gone too far and planners have too much power. Although the Government have made excellent endeavours, more must be done to free entrepreneurs so that they can create the extra wealth and employment in areas such as Colne valley which we all want.
3.20 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. David Trippier): I am delighted to respond to the matters raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Riddick) and I congratulate him on obtaining this Adjournment debate. I know, both from his maiden speech last July and from the questions that he has put to me in the House, that he takes a close interest in this topic. He has quickly earned himself a reputation as a first-class constituency Member and a powerful advocate for those whom he represents.
I set the scene for my response by emphasising that the Government are committed to lifting the burden of regulation on industry. My hon. Friend mentioned several times the importance of small businesses or enterprises and I hope that it will be a comfort to him that, in the four years preceding the general election — when, I am delighted to say, he was elected to this House—I was responsible for small businesses and for deregulation. I am delighted to say that I played quite a part in the two White Papers introduced by the Government, "Lifting the Burden" and "Building Businesses … not Barriers". Given my present responsibilities for inner cities, it is important that I should recognise that development has an important role to play in regenerating our inner cities through providing offices, factories and homes and in creating an environment in which people will want to invest.
I also stress that there is no conflict between that objective and our equal concern to conserve the environment of urban and rural areas alike. It is the responsibility of local planning authorities, when they determine proposals for development, to achieve a reconciliation between the twin aims of enabling development and protecting the environment.
On one hand, there is a general presumption in favour of development. That has come with this Government and my hon. Friend has acknowledged that. That has been inherent in the system of town and country planning since the Town and Country Planning Act 1947, but has been emphasised in the White Papers to which I referred. It was included in a Government circular to local planning authorities as far back as 1949. We reiterated it in a planning policy guidance note issued in January this year.
On the other hand, it has long been recognised, and the Government fully accept, that the presumption in favour of development does not give developers carte blanche. It is subject to a proviso that development should not cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.
What does that mean in practice? It means that those who decide whether to grant planning permission —whether local authorities or my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on appeal—have the important and critical task of weighing various factors before they reach a conclusion. They have to consider what weight to give to local policies in development plans, which may be
1350
several years old, or may have been adopted or approved only recently. They have to assess the importance to attach to relevant national planning policies. Against this background, they have to appraise the intrinsic merits of the particular development proposal because the courts have held that every planning application must be determined on its merits in the light of all material considerations.
I hope my hon. Friend will agree that in some respects the judgments which have to be made about individual development proposals are very daunting. It is pithily, if not glibly, said that one man's development opportunity is another man's chance to raise an objection. That may be true in some instances, but I believe the beneficial effect of development is generally acknowledged, especially, as I have said, when it brings investment and jobs to a deprived area.
I should like to deal with the specific points raised by my hon. Friend. He said that he would like to see every planning application form contain a space to show how many jobs would be lost if the proposed development does not proceed. That is an interesting idea which, I am sure, local authorities will consider. The Government have considered a standard application form in the past. We want to avoid imposing uniformity just for the sake of it, but there could be advantages to large developers and we are continuing to consider that.
My hon. Friend also mentioned urban development corporations. Although I understand the point that he is trying to make in regard to UDCs, I have only a limited budget. As he well knows, there are now 11 UDCs, one in Cardiff bay and 10 in England. The Government are supporting the UDC programme with funding in excess of £200 million in 1988–89, but there is a limit to how much we can spend effectively in this way. Alternative approaches are necessary. I shall turn to one of them in a few moments.
I recognise that the developer and the local planning authority will not always agree about the merits of development proposals. Often, that can be a failure of communication. The developer may not have discussed his proposal with the local authority. If he had done, he might have been able to modify it to meet points to which the authority attached considerable importance and which the developer regarded as mere trifles.
Equally, the authority may operate a policy which discriminates in favour of one kind of development and against another. I know that some authorities are seeking to restrict office development because they want to preserve sites for industry. That may be understandable in some parts of the country, but in general the Government believe that the planning system should reflect the reality of the national economy in 1988. That is why we introduced a new business use class in the Use Classes Order 1987. It means, broadly, that a developer can change between general office use, use for research and development, and use for a light industrial process, without obtaining planning permission. My hon. Friend will welcome that.
Inevitably, there will be some weak spots in the way in which policies are translated into practice. Some local planning authorities may be slow to come to terms with the reality of economic life in 1988—my hon. Friend touched on that and what he said was right—just as, no doubt, some developers will obstinately withstand reasonable argument and refuse to accept that the

1351
development control system cannot, by its nature, say yes to each and every development proposal. But to be fair to my hon. Friend, he was not suggesting that. He did not want a free-for-all.
Urban development corporations have successfully encouraged, physically, the redevelopment of large tracts of land in inner-city areas. I have already mentioned that there are 10 in England and one in Wales. Six UDCs are already under way in England and we have announced proposals for another four. Obviously, other initiatives will be coming forward which will contribute considerably to inner-city development.
Three weeks ago further initiatives were announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and I am sure that my hon. Friend will welcome those. In particular, I am sure that he will welcome the new city grant within the Department of the Environment, which streamlines the grant mechanism and gives easier access to the private sector, particularly those in the construction industry—the developers—and cuts out much red tape, very much in line with what my hon. Friend would wish.
We are also stepping up our drive to bring on to the market unused and under-used publicly owned land — not just that of local authorities but of some of the large public organisations which are part of the Government. We introduced the land register system in 1981. Since then, some 50,000 acres of publicly owned land recorded on the register have been sold or brought into use. But the new proposals announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will, I hope, speed up the process and bring land that is currently not in use on to the open market.
My hon. Friend mentioned simplified planning zones. The measure we introduced to bring those about has obviously gone through and we are looking now to Derby as the first local authority to be granted SPZ. The Act places a duty on local planning authorities to consider as soon as practicable whether part or parts of their area could, with benefit, be designated an SPZ, to prepare schemes for those parts, and to keep the matter under review. It is important that Kirklees should comply with that Act. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend will make sure that it does.
1352
However, my hon. Friend may not be aware that individuals or a private sector company can also apply for an SPZ. The Act provides specifically an opportunity for any person to request the local planning authority to make an SPZ. If the authority refuses to do so, or does nothing within three months of the request, that person can require the authority to refer the matter to the Secretary of State. Following proper consideration of the issues, the Secretary of State can direct the planning authority to make a scheme. That might be appropriate in my hon. Friend's constituency. We shall have to see.
Criticism has been directed at the procedures which the statutes lay down for consulting the public, prior to designation by the local council, but those are necessary safeguards to protect the wider public interest in the absence of any requirement for approval of SPZ schemes by the Secretary of State. After all, SPZs provide planning permission for 10 years.
The SPZ mechanism is a very flexible one. Authorities can choose to designate schemes at any time, unrelated to progress on their development plans. Alternatively, they can prepare SPZ schemes in tandem with the preparation of local plans and unitary development plans in metropolitan authorities.
I mentioned earlier the changes that we made in the use classes order last year. They were only part of many reforms that we have made to the planning system. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for referring to the progress that we have made.
I hope that my hon. Friend agrees that this is a useful, even an impressive, list of achievements. I want to reassure him that we are by no means complacent. We shall constantly, and with vigilance, look at all the proposals, including those that he has put forward in this excellent debate today. I thank him for once again bringing this important subject to the attention of the House with his customary skill.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at half-past Three o'clock till Tuesday 12 April, pursuant to resolution [25 March].

PRIME MINISTER

  Unused Land
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will pay an official visit to a publicly owned site of unused land.

  The Prime Minister
  I have at present no plans to do so.

  Community Care
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Prime Minister what proposals she has arising from the publication of the Griffiths report for improving the co-ordination of Her Majesty's Government's policies on community care.

  The Prime Minister
  We are considering Sir Roy Griffiths' recommendations and will bring forward our own proposals in due course.

  Terrorists (Surveillance)
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Prime Minister if, in the light of the killings in Gibraltar, she will make it her policy that future surveillance and apprehension of suspected terrorists be carried out by police officers.

  The Prime Minister
  It will remain the Government's policy that military assistance may be requested by a chief constable in the United Kingdom or the competent authority in a dependent territory, where this is appropriate.

  Health Insurance
  Mr. Winnick
  To ask the Prime Minister if the views expressed by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, the hon. Member for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie) on the ITV "This Week" programme, regarding elderly people remortgaging their houses in order to pay for private health insurance, represent Government policy.

  The Prime Minister
  My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security pointed out that many elderly people have substantial capital assets. They have the option, if they choose to pursue it, of considering private health care.

  Agricultural Stabilisers
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Prime Minister what progress has been made on the details of the agricultural stabilisers following the recent European Council provisional agreement on extra funding; and if she will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  I refer my hon. Friend to the replies which my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, Ministry of Argriculture, Fisheries and Food gave to my hon. Friend the Member for York (Mr. Gregory) on 10 March, at columns 323–24, and to my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, North-East (Mr. Moss) on 30 March.

  European Council
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Prime Minister what proposals have been tabled for discussion at the next meeting of the European Council.

  The Prime Minister
  The agenda for the European Council will be established by the German presidency. No formal proposals have yet been made. Completion of the single market is expected to be the main item of discussion.

  EC Expenditure
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Prime Minister what is her latest estimate of the amount to be spent by the EEC in the current year, in the light of currency movements since the meeting of the European Council; and if she will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  The draft budget for 1988 established by the Council of Ministers on 7 March for total expenditure of 44·7 billion ecu (£31·0 billion) in commitments and 43·4 billion ecu (£30·1 billion) in payments. Both sums include 1 billion ecu (£693·6 million) for a monetary reserve to cover the effects on agricultural guarantee expenditure of substantial unforeseen movements in the ecu/dollar exchange rate. The European Parliament has the right under the treaty to add a further 380 million ecu (£263·6 million) in commitments and 341 million ecu (£236·5 million) in payments to the Council's figures.

  Scottish Electricity Boards
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Prime Minister whether the speech of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of Stale for Energy, the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Mr. Spicer), in Miami on 28 March represents Government policy in respect of the privatisation of the two Scottish electricity boards; and if she will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  The Government's policy on the privatisation of the Scottish electricity industry is set out in the White Paper (Cm. 327) presented to Parliament by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland on 2 March 1988.

  Companies (Names)
  Mr. Harry Ewing
  To ask the Prime Minister what guidelines are in force concerning contracts or dealings between Departments and companies trading under the name of serving Ministers of the Crown.

  The Prime Minister
  There is no guidance on dealings with companies on the basis of how they are named.

  Engagements
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.

  Mr. Stern
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.

  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.

  Mr. Butler
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 31 March.
  573
  The Prime Minister
  In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today, including one with the President of Cyprus.

THE ARTS

  China
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Minister for the Arts whether he will list the British arts companies who have performed in China in each of the last five years.

  Mr. Luce
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The following list comprises only those British arts companies which have visited China with British Council assistance. Other companies may have made their own arrangements. There are no centrally kept comprehensive records.

  British Council visitors to China—Arts, 1983–87

  Companies

  1983–84

  Royal Ballet

  19 Performances, Beijing, Shanghai Guangzhou

  Sir Anton Dolin

  Ballet

  John Alldis

  Master classes, Beijing and Shanghai

  Music Group of London

  Master classes and concerts

  Jane Glover and Martin Isepp

  Master classes

  Sir Michael Tippett and Meirion Bowen

  Simone Michelle

  Dance workshop

  Poster Art Exhibition

  Tuckwell Wind Quintet

  1984–85

  Belinda Wright and Jelko

  Production of "Giselle" with

  Yuresha

  Central Ballet

  Photographic Exhibition

  "The Petroleum Story" (five cities tour)

  Rodney Slatford

  Double bass player

  Royal Ballet School

  Exchange with Central Dance Academy, Beijing

  European Community Youth

  Orchestra

  1985–86

  Albion Wind Quintet

  Music Group of London

  John Alldis

  Choral conductor

  David Glass

  Mime

  Noelle Barker

  Voice specialist

  Royal Ballet School

  Continued exchanges

  John Giorgiardis

  Master classes with the China Youth Orchestra

  1986–87

  Gabrieli Brass Ensemble

  Alberni String Quartet

  Graphics UK Exhibition

  Jane Glover

  Master classes

  Shakespeare Display

  At Shakespeare Festival, Shanghai

  Little Angel Marionette Theatre

  Norman Morrice

  Choreographic workshop

  David Glass

  Mime

  British History Exhibition

  Figures for 1987–88 are not yet available.

  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Minister for the Arts whether he will list the Chinese arts companies who have performed in the United Kingdom in each of the last five years.

  Mr. Luce
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The following list comprises only those Chinese arts companies which have visited the United Kingdom with grants from
  574
  Visiting Arts. Other companies may have visited under their own funding arrangements. There are no centrally kept comprehensive records.

  Visiting Arts

  Visits to Britain by Chinese arts companies (in receipt of V A grants)

  Year

  Arts group

  Venue

  1983–84

  —

  —

  1984–85

  Chinese National Dance Company

  Billingham Festival

  1985–86

  Two Chinese Musicians

  Appearance with BBC

  Welsh Symphony

  Orchestra at Cardiff

  Festival of Music

  "Theatre du Petit Miroir"

  Prema Project

  Chinese Puppet Theatre

  The Emperors Warriors

  Edinburgh

  Chinese Terracottas

  Exhibition

  1986–87

  Peking Opera

  10 City tour

  Fujian Hand Puppet Co

  Various venues

  A Pictorial History of

  Colchester—Royal

  Chinese Dance—Lecture

  Festival Hall London

  Demonstration and Exhibition

  1987–88

  Zigong Sichwan Opera

  Troupe

  Chinese Picture Stories

  Museum of Modern Art

  Shanghai Kunju Theatre

  Cardiff

  Company

  Rylands Library (Manchester)
  Mr. Robert Sheldon
  To ask the Minister for the Arts what action he proposes to take to ensure that books from the Rylands library in Manchester are retained in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Luce
  I do not control sales from individual libraries. However, any book which has been in this country more than 50 years and which is valued at over £16,000 requires an individual export licence. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has statutory responsibility for export licensing.

  Library Subscription Services
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Minister for the Arts, pursuant to his oral answer to the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) of 28 March,Official Report, column 722, how many letters he has received from members of the public saying that they would like libraries to provide subscription services.

  Mr. Luce
  I receive many letters from the public about the public library service either directly or through hon. Members. I regret it is not possible to count and analyse all of them. A significant proportion however recommend the replacement of the present free book loan service by a system of charging, often involving an annual subscription. Some letters, recognising the educational role of the service, have suggested that charges are limited to novels.

  Libraries (Premium Lending Service)
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Minister for the Arts, pursuant to his oral answer to the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) of 28 March,Official

  575
  Report, column 722, which library authority recently drew up proposals to set up a premium lending service for newly published novels and biographies.

  Mr. Luce
  It is not my practice to disclose the identity of library authorities that seek my advice in confidence.

  South Bank Arts Estate
  Mr. Baldry
  To ask the Minister for the Arts what arrangements are being made for the future of the South Bank arts estate.

  Mr. Luce
  The Chairmen of the Arts Council and of the South Bank board have asked my consent to the setting up of an independent charitable trust to administer the south bank. With the agreement of the Lord President of the Council I have given my consent, to be effective from 1 April 1988. The charitable trust to be known as the South Bank Centre will assume the powers hitherto exercised by the South Bank board as a committee of the Arts Council. The sole trustee of the South Bank Centre will be a public limited company to be called the South Bank Board Limited, and the Arts Council will grant a lease of the south bank estate to that company, in its capacity as trustee, at a nominal rent.

  A report on the discharge of the responsibilities of the South Bank Centre, and its accounts, will be laid before Parliament annually, as provided by section 47 of the Local Government Act, 1985. The Accounts will of course continue to be certified by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

  I have appointed Mr. Ronald Grierson, who is at present chairman of the South Bank board, to be the chairman of the South Bank Centre for three years from 1 April 1988. The other members of the South Bank board have been appointed, with my approval, to be members of the South Bank Board Limited.

  As I undertook in an answer to a question by the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) on 14 March, at column 432, I shall be placing a copy of the trust deed setting up the South Bank Centre in the Library as soon as it has been executed.

WALES

  Education Maintenance Allowance
  Mr. Rowlands
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many households are in receipt of an education maintenance allowance for 16 to 19-year-olds in full-time school or further education; what is the average payment; which local education authorities are making such payments; and how many each authority has made in the last financial year.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  Not all of this information is held centrally in the form requested. The only authorities which have reported expenditure on such payments in 1986–87 are Clwyd, Gwent, Mid Glamorgan and Powys.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what proportion of his Department's budget is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  Separate figures are not readily available for spending in inner city and other urban areas 576
  in Wales. However, the budget or allocations for specific bodies and programmes which concentrate on urban areas for 1987–88 include; the Welsh Development Agency, £77 million; Cardiff Bay Development Corporation, £11·5 million; the urban programme, urban development grant (including URG) and special measures for the South Wales valleys, £32·4 million.

  In addition, expenditure provision for main local authority programmes in Wales makes a significant contribution to spending in urban areas.

  Export Breakfasts
  Mr. Alan Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much of the £29,488 spent on his two Welsh export breakfasts was spent, respectively, on(a) the equipment, (b) the road crews, (c) the speakers and (d) the presenter.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  Following the competitive tender, the contract for the two breakfast time export seminars was given to the Central Office of Information and much of the work was subcontracted. Details of the costs of the various elements of the work are commercially confidential.

  Press Office
  Mr. Alan Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what has been the annual cost, at constant prices, since 1985 of his Department's press office; and what is the planned future budget provision for 1988–89.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  Expressed in real terms as measured by the GDP deflator at market prices using 1986–87 as the base year. the information requested is as follows:

  1985–86

  1986–87

  1987–88

  1988–89

  £ Thousands

  £ Thousands

  £ Thousands

  £ Thousands

  145

  147

  154

  156

  Forestry
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy that grant money will not be paid by his Department, or through the Forestry Commission, in respect of its activities in Wales, for schemes whereby broadleaf forests are replaced by confier forests.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  There is already a strong presumption in operation against the payment of grants for the conversion of broadleaved forests to conifer forests.

  House Condition Survey
  Mr. Roy Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he expects to publish the Welsh house condition survey.

  Mr. Grist
  On 6 May.

  Local Authority Services (Competition)
  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the results of the consultation exercise undertaken in November 1987 on competition in the provision of local authority services.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  All responses to the consultation exercise have now been carefully considered. As a result I
  577
  propose to make the following changes to the initial proposals circulated in the consultation document. These take account of the fact that a decision on the possibility of adding sport and leisure management to the list of defined activities has not yet been taken, and therefore, if this activity is added by order, some delay in implementing competition for it is inevitable.

  1. The initial implementation date will be deferred from 1 April to 1 August 1989, with the second phase of implementation starting on 1 January 1990 and so on thereafter.

  2. The implementation of ground maintenance competition will be by five annual tranches of 20 per cent. instead of six monthly tranches of 10 per cent. as originally proposed. The initial implementation date for ground maintenance will be 1 January 1990.

  3. Refuse collection has been separated from other cleaning such as street cleaning, thus enabling authorities to let these activities on a different time scale from each other.

  4. The implementation of school and welfare catering and building cleaning will be separated by at least one year. This will reduce the burden on education authorities in the implementation of school catering and school building cleaning competition.

  Those local authorities which responded to the consultation exercise were content with the grouping of local authorities for implementation purposes detailed in the consultation document. As a result, I do not intend to make any changes. Nor do I intend to change the £100,000 "de minimis" level suggested in the document, below which work carried out by authorities is exempt from competition.

  I have arranged for copies of a revised schedule arising from the proposed changes, giving details of phasing in of competition by authority, date and activitiy, to be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

  Foreign Investment
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) if he will publish in the Official Report a table showing the number of foreign-owned plants established each year in Wales since 1983, and the number in each zone which have been closed down since 1983;

  Manufacturing units in Wales 1986

  Gross Value Added as a percentage of gross output

  Payments to ATC's as a percentage of gross output

  Payments to Operatives as a percentage of gross output

  Payments to ATC's in pounds per head

  Payments to Operatives in pounds per head pounds per head

  (per cent.)

  (per cent.)

  (per cent.)

  (pounds)

  (pounds)

  All units

  31·0

  5·0

  9·9

  10,960

  8,181

  Japanese-owned units

  18·8

  3·0

  6·0

  8,979

  6,659

  All United Kingdom units classified:

  "Electronic consumer goods and other electronic equipment not elsewhere specified"·

  16·6

  4·6

  5·3

  10,304

  6,527

  Source: Annual Census of Production, 1986.

  Notes:

  ATC = Administrative, technical and clerical staff. These payments have been used to indicate salaries, and payments to operatives to indicate wages.

  The third line of figures is a more appropriate comparison for Japanese-owned units in Wales since the category is the dominant one for these units.
  578
  (2) if he will publish in the Official Report a table showing for each year since 1983 the number of new plants established in Wales by foreign-owned firms which were not already manufacturing in other countries in the United Kingdom and the total numbers now employed in such plants compared to the numbers employed in 1983.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The number of new plants and major new developments and expansions by overseas companies commenced during the period 1983 to 1987 were as follows:

  Number

  1983

  21

  1984

  45

  1985

  43

  1986

  36

  1987

  52

  TOTAL

  197

  In addition to this investment, a further 17 companies were acquired by overseas investors during the period.

  Of the six plants which subsequently closed, three were located in Gwent, and one each in the counties of Gwynedd, Mid Glamorgan and South Glamorgan. In 1987 plants established by foreign firms since 1983, and still open, employed 3,500 as compared with 100 in 1983. However, it is not possible to say which of these firms were already manufacturing elsewhere in the United Kingdom without incurring disproportionate costs.

  Manufacturing
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish in the Official Report a table showing for manufacturing plants in Wales generally and for those which are owned by Japanese firms(a) the gross value added as a percentage of gross output, (b) wages and salaries, respectively, as a percentage of gross output, and (c) average wages and salaries, respectively, per head.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The information is given in the following table:

  Consultancy Contracts
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list each management or computer consultancy contract awarded by his Department in 1987, giving in each case the name of the consultancy firm and the subject of the assignment.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: The following centrally managed contracts were awarded by my Department in 1987.

  Firm

  Subject of assignment

  Inbucon Management Consultants Ltd.

  Financial, management and policy review of the National Museum of Wales

  Frank Griffiths Associates

  Review of Departmental Purchasing

  R. A. Pengclly

  Review of Welsh Dental Advisory Committee

  Burgoynes Consultants

  Atlantic Trading Estate and Barry Dock Public Inquiry

  It is not possible to identify without disproportionate costs management or computer consultancy contracts awarded in respect of projects not centrally managed.

  Nurses
  Mr. Robin Cook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish a table showing(a) the establishment figures, (b) the funded establishment figures and (c) the in-post figures of each health authority in Wales for the following nursing grades: regional nursing officer 1 and 2, regional nurse 1 and 2, district nursing officer grades 1 to 7, director of nursing services grades 1 + to 6, senior nurse grades 1 + to 8, sister I, sister II, health visitor, deputy nursing sister, staff nurse, senior enrolled nurse, enrolled nurse and nursing auxiliary/assistant; and if he will publish, for each grade category, the number of employees in full-time posts, the number of part-time employees and the whole-time equivalent of those part-time employees.

  Mr. Grist
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: Only information regarding staff in post is available centrally and is given in the following table (as at 30 September 1987).

  Part-time

  Health authority/Grade

  Whole-time number

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Clwyd

  Chief administrative nursing officer1

  1

  —

  —

  Director of nursing services grades 1+ to 6

  5

  —

  —

  Senior nurses grades 1+ to 8

  133

  2

  0·9

  Sister I

  17

  1

  0·8

  Sister II

  480

  45

  29·4

  Health visitor

  59

  15

  8·3

  Deputy nursing sister

  3

  37

  28·6

  Staff nurse2

  547

  390

  245·6

  Senior enrolled nurse2

  Enrolled nurse

  494

  316

  208·8

  Nursing auxiliary/assistant and NNEB's3

  443

  584

  412·5

  East Dyfed

  580

  Part-time

  Health authority/Grade

  Whole-time number

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Chief administrative nursing officer1

  —

  —

  —

  Director of nursing services grades 1+ to 6

  4

  —

  —

  Senior nurses grades 1+ to 8

  53

  —

  —

  Sister I

  19

  —

  —

  Sister II

  324

  40

  27·1

  Health visitor

  46

  10

  5·0

  Deputy nursing sister

  —

  —

  —

  Staff nurse 2

  271

  273

  150·4

  Senior enrolled nurse2

  Enrolled nurse

  276

  268

  155·3

  Nursing auxiliary/assistant and NNEB's3

  383

  333

  213·3

  Pembrokeshire

  Chief administrative nursing officer1

  1

  —

  —

  Director of nursing services grades 1+ to 6

  —

  —

  —

  Senior nurses grades 1+ to 8

  17

  —

  —

  Sister I

  3

  —

  —

  Sister II

  103

  27

  20·2

  581

  Part-time

  Health authority/Grade

  Whole-time number

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Enrolled nurse

  663

  658

  413·0

  Nursing auxiliary/assistant and NNEB's3

  850

  820

  537·8

  Powys

  Chief administrative nursing officer1

  1

  —

  —

  Director of nursing services grades 1+ to 6

  3

  —

  —

  Senior nurse grades 1+ to 8

  23

  —

  —

  Sister I

  10

  —

  —

  Sister II

  179

  70

  40·0

  Health visitor

  22

  9

  5·2

  Deputy nursing sister

  2

  —

  —

  Staff nurse2

  70

  101

  43·3

  Senior enrolled nurse2

  70

  101

  43·3

  Enrolled nurse

  163

  122

  64·5

  Nursing auxiliary/assistant and NNEB's3

  174

  355

  228·3

  South Glamorgan

  Chief administrative nursing officer1

  1

  —

  —

  Director of nursing services grades 1 + to 6

  5

  —

  —

  Senior nurse grades 1+ to 8

  114

  2

  1·3

  Sister I

  5

  —

  —

  Sister II

  571

  171

  105·3

  Health visitor

  66

  44

  23·7

  Deputy nursing sister

  1

  25

  18·4

  Staff nurse2

  738

  493

  260·3

  Senior enrolled nurse2

  Enrolled nurse

  531

  356

  210·3

  Nursing auxiliary/assistant and NNEB's3

  689

  1,018

  641·3

  West Glamorgan

  Chief administrative nursing officer1

  1

  —

  —

  Director of nursing services grades 1+ to 6

  5

  —

  —

  Senior nurse grades 1 + to 8

  77

  —

  —

  Sister I

  9

  —

  —

  Sister II

  511

  34

  20·9

  Health visitor

  67

  18

  8·7

  Deputy nursing sister

  3

  —

  —

  Staff nurse2

  610

  580

  333·5

  Senior enrolled nurse2

  Enrolled nurse

  429

  423

  260·4

  Nursing auxiliary/asssistant and NNEB's3

  301

  476

  331·4

  1 This is the highest in Welsh Health Authorities and is equivalent to a district nursing officer in England·

  2 It is not possible to give a reliable split between these two grades·

  3 NNEB's are staff holding the Certificate of the National Nursery Examination Board·

  Hospital Beds
  Mr. Robin Cook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the number of beds available in Wales in each specialty in(a) 1979 and (b) for the last year for which figures are available; and if he will give the percentage increase or decrease.

  Mr. Grist
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: The information is given in the following table:
  582

  Average daily available beds

  Specialty

  1979

  1986

  Percentage2

  General medicine

  1,620·6

  1,697·0

  + 4·7

  Paediatrics

  513·8

  473·1

  - 7·9

  Infectious diseases

  92·6

  19·3

  -79·2

  Diseases of the chest

  725·8

  231·2

  -68·1

  Dermatology

  135·3

  131·6

  - 2·7

  Neurology

  79·1

  72·7

  - 8·1

  Cardiology

  53·7

  50·6

  - 5·8

  Physical medicine/Rehabilitation

  76·0

  66·8

  -12·1

  Sexually transmitted diseases

  4·0

  1·5

  -62·5

  Rheumatology

  69·7

  91·4

  +31·1

  Geriatrics

  4,090·2

  4,164·8

  +1·8

  Younger disabled

  37·2

  33·5

  - 9·9

  General surgery

  1,873·0

  1,768·7

  - 5·6

  Ear, nose and throat

  360·5

  340·1

  - 5·7

  Traumatic & orthopaedic surgery

  1,379·4

  1,281·5

  - 7·1

  Ophthalmology

  266·9

  240·0

  -10·1

  Radiotherapy

  140·1

  166·2

  +18·6

  Urology

  98·9

  158·9

  +60·7

  Plastic surgery

  78·4

  90·3

  +15·2

  Thoracic surgery

  36·5

  19·0

  -47·9

  Dental surgery

  63·2

  74·0

  +17·1

  Neurosurgery

  66·2

  83·5

  +26·1

  Gynaecology

  686·2

  654·2

  - 4·7

  Obstetrics

  981·9

  9110

  - 7·2

  Special care baby unit

  237·3

  220·7

  - 7·0

  Mental illness children

  37·0

  30·1

  -18·6

  Mental handicap

  2,484·9

  2,089·4

  -15·9

  Mental illness

  5,263·9

  4,210·4

  -20·0

  Adolescent psychiatry

  45·5

  32·0

  -29·7

  Pre-convalsecent

  303·9

  168·0

  - 44·7

  General practitioner—maternity

  187·4

  117·2

  -37·5

  General practitioner—medical

  9085

  1,019·4

  +12·2

  General practitioner—dental

  0·1

  0·1

  0·0

  Unclassified

  52·0

  27·5

  -47·1

  Staff wards

  11·4

  1·3

  -88·6

  Intensive therapy units

  17·3

  81·1

  +368·8

  Renal dialysis

  4·0

  21·1

  -427·5

  Burns surgery

  36·0

  34·7

  -3·6

  Short stay unit

  11·2

  38·9

  -247·3

  Cardiac surgery

  15·9

  23·3

  -46·5

  Psycho-geriatric

  184·7

  458·2

  +148·1

  Chronic sick

  4·3

  8·0

  +86·0

  Haematology

  17·7

  58·9

  +232·8

  Continuing care (cancer)

  8·3

  34·3

  +313·3

  Medical Research Council

  9·8

  8·1

  -17·3

  Spina bifida unit

  11·5

  11·6

  +0·9

  Polish patients

  —

  74·0

  n·a·

  Elderly mentally infirm

  10·0

  10-0

  0·0

  Pain clinic

  —

  2·2

  n·a·

  Programmed investigation unit

  —

  3·1

  n·a·

  Coronary care

  —

  13·2

  n·a·

  War pensioners

  56·7

  19·8

  -65·1

  High dependency unit

  —

  10·0

  n·a·

  Spinal injuries

  —

  39·1

  n·a·

  Miners treatment centre

  7·3

  —

  -100·0

  Total1

  23,456·1

  21,686·2

  -7·5

  1 Individual specialty figures may not add to total due to rounding·

  2 Increase/decrease·

  n.a. Not applicable.

  Mink Farms
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he is taking to ensure that all mink farms in Wales comply with the terms of the Mink Keeping Order 1987; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: The Mink (Keeping) Order 1987, prohibits the keeping of mink on certain offshore islands of Great Britain and in certain areas of Scotland and prohibits the keeping of mink in the rest of Great Britain except under licence. Any new premises to he used as a mink farm are inspected after an application for a licence is received or if it becomes known that mink are being kept in captivity. In considering an application for a licence my officials would wish to be satisfied that the mink are to be kept in the manner prescribed in the Mink (Keeping) Regulations, 1975, as amended. Any other relevant factors would also be taken into account including the likely impact on farming and wildlife if mink were to escape from captivity. Licences are valid for a period of up to 12 months. There are powers of revocation.

ENERGY

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what proportion of the energy programme is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Parkinson
  This information is not available in the form required.

  Parliamentary Questions
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if, in the light of the new £250 limit on resourcing the answers to parliamentary questions, he will review all replies given since June 1987 that gave no substantive answer on the grounds that such were only possible at disproportionate cost, to ascertain whether substantive replies may now be given following the resource increase.

  Mr. Parkinson
  No.

  Ministerial Interview
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will seek to obtain from the BBC copyright permission to place in his departmental library a copy of the interview on the Radio Four "Today" programme broadcast on 28 March, with the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Mr. Spicer) the Under-Secretary of State, on opportunities for United States commercial investment in the privatised United Kingdom nuclear programme.

  Mr. Parkinson
  No. I understand that the Library of the House does obtain transcripts from the broadcasters on behalf of hon. Members.

  Power Station Statistics
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what is the uranium charge of each operating Magnox and advanced gas-cooled reactor in the United Kingdom; what will be the expected figure for the pressurised water reactor 584
  plants to be constructed; and how much plutonium he estimates will be produced by each during the effective life of the stations.

  Mr. Parkinson
  For the uranium charges for Magnox and advanced gas-cooled reactors, I refer the hon. Member to the reply by the hon. Member for Midlothian (Mr. Eadie) to my hon. Friend the Member for Bedfordshire, North (Sir T. Skeet) on 14 December 1977 at column 218. I understand that the core of a pressurised water reactor of the type under construction at Sizewell B requires approximately 500 tonnes of natural uranium in its manufacture.

  The lifetime production of plutonium during the life of any nuclear station is dependent on its load factor and assumed lifetime. In evidence to the Sizewell inquiry, a copy of which has been placed in the House Library, British Nuclear Fuels plc estimated that the total lifetime production of plutonium from the United Kingdom's civil Magnox and advanced gas-cooled stations will amount to some 78 tonnes. The amount of plutonium produced by a PWR station similar to Sizewell B during its lifetime was estimated to be about 8 tonnes.

  Nuclear Waste
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy, assuming that no fuel elements were reprocessed in the United Kingdom, what accumulated tonnage of untreated nuclear fuel elements would have to be stored; and on the basis of reprocessing, what tonnage of waste will have accumulated in the United Kingdom by 1991, taking into account all types of operating nuclear power plants.

  Mr. Parkinson
  Spent fuel currently stored under water in the United Kingdom will have to be reprocessed for safety reasons. Details on the volumes of raw wastes arising from reprocessing to the year 2029 were published in the eighth annual report of the Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee. This is available in the House Library. The relevant table is table 5, appendix F.

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy (1) what was the total throughput of spent Magnox fuel, expressed in terms of uranium content, which was reprocessed at BNFL Sellafield in each year from 1979 to 1987, by financial year;

  (2) what was the total throughput of spent Magnox fuel, expressed in terms of uranium content, which was reprocessed at the Windscale reprocessing works in each financial year from 1963–64 to 1969–70;

  (3) what was the total throughput of spent Magnox fuel, expressed in terms of uranium content, which was reprocessed at the BNFL Sellafield in each of the financial years 1977–78 and 1978–79.

  Mr. Parkinson
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) to the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) on 11 December 1985 at columns 638–39, to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Mr. Spicer) to the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) on 1 February 1988 at columns 473—74, and the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Riddick) on 16 December 1987 at column 516.
  585
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy, what is his estimate of the likely stockpiling of plutonium resulting from reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from United Kingdom reactors over the next 10 years.

  Mr. Parkinson
  Production of plutonium from reprocessing of irradiated fuel from United Kingdom civil magnox reactors is expected to continue at a rate of 1·5 to 2 tonnes per year for the next 10 years. Reprocessing of irradiated fuel from United Kingdom AGR reactors, which is expected to commence in the 1990s is expected to produce up to 5 tonnes of plutonium over the next 10 years.

  Bradwell Reactor
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what are the implications for other electricity board Magnox reactors on the grid of the decision to close the Central Electricity Generating Board Magnox reactor at Bradwell; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Parkinson
  The Health and Safety Executive's nuclear installations inspectorate has listed a number of measures that the Central Electricity Generating Board will need to take to allow continued operation of the Bradwell reactors after certain dates. I understand that the CEGB is considering what action to take: no decision to close Bradwell has been taken. Work on long-term safety reviews of other Magnox reactors is in hand and the NII's decisions on these will be announced in due course.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Industry Regeneration (Lewisham)
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will put forward proposals to regenerate industry in Lewisham.

  Mr. Atkins
  Industry in Lewisham, as elsewhere, stands to benefit from all we are doing to create a climate that stimulates enterprise, cuts red tape, encourages healthy competition and expands markets for British products and services. The business consultancy scheme which we launched earlier this year, under the enterprise initiative, can help small and medium-sized firms improved their performance and profitability. Lewisham is an urban programme area with a programme of £1·95 million proposed for 1988–89. As a result of this status, eligible companies there qualify for the higher rate of assistance under the enterprise initiative and may also submit projects for city grant. The borough was also the finishing point this year for our national US roadshow, offering detailed guidance on the United States' market to local exporters.

  British Steel (Privatisation)
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what progress has been made in the preparations for the privatisation of British Steel.

  Mr. Atkins
  The British Steel Bill is currently in Committee. Other preparations for privatisation are also proceeding, and a number of Government advisers have been appointed.

  Manufacturing Industry (Exchange Rate)
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what assessment he has made of the effects of a high exchange rate on British manufacturing industry; and what is his expectation of the effect on Anglo-German trade in manufactured goods of a sustained exchange rate of the pound sterling equalling over 3 deutschmarks.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  The exchange rate is only one of many factors affecting performance in manufacturing, as Germany's experience confirms. The outlook for United Kingdom manufacturing output, investment and exports generally is one of continuing growth. Our improved performance in areas such as quality, design, and reliability is particularly relevant to the demands of the German market.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what proportion of the trade and industry programme is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  My Department plans to spend £1,250 million in 1988–89. All its programmes take account as appropriate of the needs of the inner cities. Inner cities will in particular benefit from the enhanced rate of support for business development consultancies under the enterprise initiative. But it is not possible in every case to identify that proportion of the budget which is spent in the inner cities. However expenditure by the inner cities unit and grant in aid for English Estates new managed workshop programme are solely directed at inner city areas and this will amount to £27 million in 1988–89.

  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (1) if he will list in the Official Report which wards of which local authorities he treats as part of the inner cities;

  (2) which local authorities, or parts of local authorities, are covered by the inner cities;

  (3) which areas of the United Kingdom are not eligible for assistance under the action for cities programme.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  The areas for action for most of the cities programmes are shown in the map in the "Action for Cities" document, copies of which have been placed in the Library and Vote Office, and distributed to Members of the House with urban constituencies. Some programmes or initiatives, such as the urban development corporations, urban programme, enterprise zones, and inner city task forces, operate within precisely defined boundaries. For urban programme purposes, priority areas are either formally defined, in the case of partnership areas, or agreed with local authorities in order to target resources through inner area programmes. Urban programme areas are also used to target some other forms of support including special assistance under the enterprise initiative. Support through other programmes, such as housing association grant and estate action is available more widely, but is concentrated in inner cities.

  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will give for each inner city area, and for inner cities in total, the population, employment, unemployment, child population, school population and pensioner population.
  587
  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  Figures are available only for urban programme areas and not for any other definition of inner city areas. Those figures are shown in the tables. Table 1 gives the latest available estimates of numbers of employees, taken from the September 1984 census of employment. The results of the September 1987 census are expected to become available next year. Table 2 gives estimated district level unemployment percentage rates for November 1987, using 1981 census data on population as the denominator. Table 3 gives the usually resident self-employed population aged over 16, drawn from the 1981 census. Table 4 gives OPCS population estimates for mid 1986, broken down (i) for under 15s, (ii) for those of pensionable age.

  Employees in employment:1 September 1984

  Local authority district2

  Number (thousands)

  Birmingham

  473·9

  Hackney

  79·9

  Islington

  114·5

  Lambeth

  129·1

  Liverpool

  219·7

  Manchester

  270·0

  Salford

  89·1

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  152·1

  Gateshead

  67·5

  Barnsley

  73·0

  Blackburn

  55·4

  Bolton

  87·9

  Bradford

  173·6

  Brent

  97·4

  Bristol

  197·6

  Burnley

  33·1

  Coventry

  124·7

  Derby

  106·2

  Doncaster

  94·8

  Dudley

  92·9

  Greenwich

  64·8

  Halton

  41·8

  Hammersmith

  77·2

  Haringey

  58·4

  Hartlepool

  29·0

  Kensington and Chelsea

  83·6

  Kingston upon Hull

  105·4

  Kirklees

  121·5

  Knowsley

  53·5

  Langhaurgh

  44·2

  Leeds

  294·7

  Leicester

  159·5

  Lewisham

  59·6

  Middlesbrough

  50·0

  Newham

  68·3

  North Tyneside

  63·7

  Nottingham

  156·2

  Oldham

  69·4

  Plymouth

  94·8

  Preston

  66·6

  Rochdale

  68·9

  Rotherham

  77·1

  St· Helens

  59·4

  Sandwell

  129·1

  Sefton

  79·7

  Sheffield

  218·0

  South Tyneside

  42·6

  Southwark

  130·7

  Stockton-on-Tees

  60·4

  Sunderland

  94·4

  The Wrekin

  42·6

  Tower Hamlets

  81·1

  Walsall

  102·5

  Wandsworth

  83·3

  Wigan

  85·7

  Wirral

  88·1

  588

  Local authority district2

  Number (thousands)

  Wolverhampton

  101·6

  Total all 57 districts

  6,040,100

  1 The figures exclude the self employed and members of Her Majesty's forces·

  2 The districts are defined in terms of ward boundaries as at 1984

  District level unemployment: percentage rates

  per cent.

  Birmingham

  15·85

  Hackney

  21·06

  Islington

  17·57

  Lambeth

  16·65

  Liverpool

  20·98

  Manchester

  19·01

  Salford

  13·44

  Newcastle

  16·87

  Gateshead

  13·61

  Barnsley

  15·01

  Blackburn

  11·46

  Bolton

  11·39

  Bradford

  11·61

  Brent

  11·63

  Bristol

  10·95

  Burnley

  94·8

  Coventry

  13·85

  Derby

  12·46

  Doncaster

  15·86

  Dudley

  10·49

  Greenwich

  11·57

  Halton

  16·05

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  13·80

  Haringey

  14·35

  Hartlepool

  17·35

  Kensington and Chelsea

  11·20

  Kingston upon Hull

  16·74

  Kirklees

  9·36

  Knowsley

  19·71

  Langbaurgh

  16·28

  Leeds

  10·50

  Leicester

  11·47

  Lewisham

  13·00

  Middlesbrough

  19·44

  Newham

  14·27

  North Tyneside

  13·46

  Nottingham

  15·56

  Oldham

  10·10

  Plymouth

  12·09

  Preston

  10·96

  Rochdale

  10·92

  Rotherham

  14·65

  St. Helens

  13·87

  Sandwell

  14·00

  Sefton

  12·88

  Sheffield

  14·82

  South Tyneside

  17·54

  Southwark

  17·26

  Stockton on Tees

  15·38

  Sunderland

  17·67

  The Wrekin

  14·25

  Tower Hamlets

  20·28

  Walsall

  12·16

  Wandsworth

  9·90

  Wigan

  12·34

  Wirral

  14·38

  Wolverhampton

  15·50

  Usually resident population aged 16+

  Self-employed

  District

  Number

  Birmingham

  25,035

  Hackney

  6,438

  589

  District

  Number

  Islington

  6,740

  Lambeth

  9,078

  Liverpool

  10,543

  Manchester

  11,341

  Salford

  6,637

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  6,147

  Gateshead

  4,207

  Barnsley

  5,521

  Blackburn

  4,969

  Bolton

  9,483

  Bradford

  15,901

  Brent

  12,061

  Bristol

  12,163

  Burnley

  3,324

  Coventry

  7,288

  Derby

  5,141

  Doncaster

  7,615

  Dudley

  9,355

  Greenwich

  6,371

  Halton

  2,197

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  6,933

  Haringey

  9,503

  Hartlepool

  1,877

  Kensington and Chelsea

  9,433

  Kingston upon Hull

  4,763

  Kirklees

  13,401

  Knowsley

  2,755

  Langbaurgh

  2,979

  Leeds

  23,026

  Leicester

  8,175

  Lewisham

  7,781

  Middlesbrough

  2,582

  Newham

  5,744

  North Tyneside

  4,613

  Nottingham

  6,373

  Oldham

  8,007

  Plymouth

  6,868

  Preston

  4,334

  Rochdale

  7,534

  Rotherham

  5,892

  St. Helens

  4,265

  Sandwell

  6,381

  Sefton

  10,295

  Sheffield

  14,222

  South Tyneside

  3,060

  Southwark

  6,510

  Stockton-on-Tees

  3,508

  Sunderland

  5,587

  The Wrekin

  3,569

  Tower Hamlets

  4,853

  Walsall

  7,883

  Wandsworth

  10,631

  Wigan

  9,028

  Wirral

  9,882

  Wolverhampton

  6,318

  Total

  436,120

  Source: 1981 Census of Population.

  Mid-1986 Population Estimates (OPCS)

  (Thousands)

  Local Authority Area

  Total Population

  Age Group

  0–15

  60–65+

  Birmingham

  1,004·1

  219·4

  177·0

  Hackney

  187·1

  41·6

  30·0

  Islington

  168·0

  30·9

  28·1

  Lambeth

  245·0

  47·1

  40·1

  Liverpool

  483·0

  99·0

  92·1

  Manchester

  451·4

  92·6

  81·7

  Salford

  239·3

  48·7

  46·1

  Newcastle

  281·4

  54·2

  54·9

  Gateshead

  207·3

  40·7

  38·9

  Barnsley

  222·2

  46·4

  39·4

  Blackburn

  139·1

  33·5

  24·0

  590

  Local Authority Area

  Total Population

  Age Group

  0–15

  60–65 +

  Bolton

  261·6

  58·8

  45·1

  Bradford

  463·1

  108·5

  78·9

  Brent

  255·7

  51·8

  39·9

  Bristol

  391·5

  74·7

  76·9

  Burnley

  88·2

  19·5

  16·3

  Coventry

  310·4

  66·2

  54·4

  Derby

  216·2

  46·5

  38·9

  Doncaster

  289·3

  61·7

  47·8

  Dudley

  300·9

  60·2

  50·8

  Greenwich

  217·8

  46·3

  38·5

  Halton

  123·2

  30·1

  17·6

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  150·8

  25·6

  26·8

  Haringey

  196·1

  38·8

  30·8

  Hartlepool

  90·7

  19·6

  15·2

  Kensington and Chelsea

  137·4

  19·7

  21·7

  Kingston upon Hull

  258·0

  56·6

  47·0

  Kirklees

  376·6

  82·3

  65·6

  Knowsley

  163·8

  39·6

  23·1

  Langbaurgh

  146·8

  32·6

  22·9

  Leeds

  710·9

  142·7

  131·4

  Leicester

  281·1

  63·9

  49·4

  Lewisham

  232·0

  45·6

  43·6

  Middlesbrough

  144·3

  43·8

  22·5

  Newham

  205·2

  46·6

  32·9

  North Tyneside

  192·3

  37·8

  38·2

  Nottingham

  277·8

  57·1

  50·4

  Oldham

  220·0

  48·7

  38·4

  Plymouth

  256·0

  52·4

  44·4

  Preston

  125·0

  26·8

  23·5

  Rochdale

  206·6

  47·6

  33·8

  Rotherham

  2521

  54·8

  40·9

  St· Helens

  187·9

  39·9

  31·0

  Sandwell

  301·1

  63·5

  55·9

  Sefton

  298·0

  59·8

  57·9

  Sheffield

  534·3

  97·9

  1079

  South Tyneside

  156·9

  30·7

  30·7

  Southwark

  216·0

  42·5

  40·6

  Stockton on Tees

  175·8

  39·5

  25·3

  Sunderland

  297·7

  65·6

  48·0

  The Wrekin

  130·2

  30·8

  18·4

  Tower Hamlets

  152·8

  33·6

  25·3

  Walsall

  261·8

  55·6

  42·5

  Wandsworth

  257·1

  47·0

  45·9

  Wigan

  306·6

  66·2

  50·1

  Wirral

  334·8

  69·7

  65·1

  Wolverhampton

  251·9

  54·0

  44·8

  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (1) what was the expenditure of each Department in the inner cities in each year since 1978–79;

  (2) what was the expenditure of each Department on the inner cities planned for 1988–89; and what is the estimated outcome for 1986–87 and 1987–88;

  (3) if he will state the expenditure for 1988–89 and all the years of the public expenditure White Paper spent by each Department as part of the inner cities programme.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  Information on inner city expenditure by Departments is not available on a consistent basis before 1988–89. Final decisions have not been taken on the proportion of planned expenditure which will be directed to inner cities for later years of the public expenditure survey. My right hon. Friends are responding individually to the hon. Member on the proportion of their Department's expenditure directed at inner cities. We estimate that some £3,000 million will be directed to the inner cities through the programme and initiatives described in the "Action for Cities" document, copies of which are available in the Library of the House.

  Mr. Peter Luff
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will specify what steps he has taken to ensure that the departmental duties of the special adviser, Mr. Peter Luff, are not compromised by the investigation of his former employers by his Department into possible illegal takeover conduct; and when these steps were taken.

  Mr. Butcher
  It has been established practice, followed in Mr. Luff's case, that special advisers should not at any time have access to information about companies for whom they worked.

  Export Credits Guarantee Department
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will reinstate Export Credits Guarantee Department cover to Nicaragua; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  Cover is available for short term business (up to 180 days credit) subject to the security of confirmed irrevocable letters of credit. The position on cover for medium-term business is kept under review.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster which Central and South American countries are currently covered by the Export Credits Guarantee Department.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  Some cover is currently available, subject in some cases to payment security, for all Central and South American countries except Argentina.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when Nicaragua ceased to be covered by the Export Credits Guarantee Department; and how long cover had been provided prior to its cessation.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  Medium-term cover for Nicaragua was withdrawn in October 1978 because of the economic problems caused by the war and the acute shortage of foreign exchange. Prior to that date such cover had been available over a continuous period. Short-term cover (up to 80 days) remain available subject to the security of confirmed irrevocable letters of credit.

  Fida 88 Exhibition, Chile
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what level of support was given to British companies exhibiting at Fida 88 in Chile; and what companies were involved.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  The Government provided no financial support for companies exhibiting at the Fida trade fair.

  Action for Cities Initiative
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he expects to hold the first working breakfast in his action for cities initiative; and what is the location.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  The first working breakfast following the announcement of the Government's action for cities initiative will be held at Newcastle on Wednesday 13 April 1988.

  EC Countries
  Mr. Robertson
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many committees have been established under the process of unifying standards throughout the European Community, on which subjects and how many of the chairmen are British.

  Mr. Butcher
  Standardisation in Europe is carried out by two bodies — the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) for non-electrical products, and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation (CENELEC) for electrical products.

  According to our latest information, CEN has 90 technical committees, of which 11 are chaired by the United Kingdom, while CENELEC has 44 technical committees of which 11 are chaired by the United Kingdom.

  Letter Post
  Mr. Page
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what progress has been made by the Post Office in the implementation of the recommendations made in the Monopolies and Mergers Commission's report on the letter post service; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  The Monopolies and Mergers Commission's report on the letter post service of the Post Office in the head post office areas of Glasgow, Belfast and Cardiff and in the numbered London postal districts (Cmnd. 9332) was published in September 1984. The report made 78 recommendations covering quality of service, financial control, costing and forecasting, mechanisation and manpower and industrial relations. Of the 78 recommendations, 76 were accepted by the Post Office. The Commission was also asked to include in its report a view on whether the Post Office was pursuing a course of conduct which operated against the public interest. It concluded that it must suspend judgment on this since so much depended on what was achieved in the following years.

  The Post Office has now produced its three-year report on progress in implementing the MMC's recommendations and I am placing copies in the Library of the House. The Post Office reports that it has implemented the great majority of the 76 recommendations it accepted.

  There are still certain recommendations where further work is required, several of which the Post Office declared at the outset would take longer to implement, and my Department will continue to monitor progress. The Post Office reports eight recommendations as still undischarged. One of these recommendations, that the Post Office should seek to increase post code usage to 70 per cent. of all mail, has been accomplished since the Post Office reported on progress in September. Of the remainder, three concern the establishment of standard times and costs and a productivity scheme based on standard times. This is an area in which the Post Office has experienced many industrial relations problems, but I am glad to say the work measurement scheme is now proceeding well and I understand that the new bonus scheme introduced as part of the agreement concluded between the Post Office and its unions in December on a shorter working week will form a better basis for the introduction of a full standard-based scheme.

  The other recommendations which remain undischar-ged concern quality of service, the introduction of a

  593
  computerised system for manpower statistics, the computerisation of the system for recording and notifying weights of airmail bags and the replacement of sorting machines at the Post Office's foreign section with modern equipment. While there has been an improvement in quality of service since the report was made, both in the intra-London service and nationally, it is disappointing that the Post Office has continued to fail to meet its targets. As the Post Office comments in its progress report, a factor in this has undoubtedly been the high level of unofficial industrial disputes in recent years. On the other recommendations, although there are plans for their implementation, it is disappointing that the introduction of the new systems and machinery required has been so long delayed.

  There are also several recommendations recorded as discharged, particularly those relating to the introduction of better costing information for management, on which, while I acknowledge that the Post Office has done much towards carrying out the MMC's recommendations, further long-term work remains to be done. I shall continue to monitor progress in all these areas.

  I do, however, acknowledge and welcome the significant progress that has been made over the three years since the MMC reported, particularly in the introduction of mechanisation and improved working methods. It was largely because of failure to implement recommendations in these areas made in its 1980 report on the inner London letter post that the MMC was led to conclude that it should suspend judgment on the question whether the Post Office was operating against the public interest. I also acknowledge the Post Office's creditable track record over the period in terms of price control, growth in business, profitability and employment creation.

  Consultancy Contracts
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will list each management or computer consultancy contract awarded by his Department in 1987, giving in each case the name of the consultancy firm and the subject of the assignment.

  Mr. Butcher
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: The following is the list for the 1987 calendar year:
  Human Resource Development Ltd.— Footwear Industry Study.
  Technical Change Centre—The success of R & D projects.
  Admiral Management Services Ltd., Software Sciences Ltd. —Commercial Computer Security work.
  Patrick Associates—Vanguard Awareness.
  Computer Sciences Co. Ltd. — Patent Office Computer project.
  General Technology Systems Ltd. — Co-ord of IT programmes.
  Metron Technology Ltd.—Computer Capacity Planning.
  PA Technology (Cambridge)—Study of Industrial Growth Industry.
  GEC Transportation Projects Ltd.—Transport study.
  Software Sciences Ltd.—Computer study.
  Coopers & Lybrand Associates — Effectiveness of Innovation centres.
  National Computing Centre Ltd.—Starts Programme.
  Expertech Ltd.—Expert Systems Feasibility.
  C. M. I. (UK) Ltd.—Study of management, education and training.
  A. S. I. UK Ltd.
  National Computing Centre Ltd.—Information Systems.
  John Drew Tucker Associates—High Definition Television.
  P A Technology (Cambridge) — Advice on Inner Cities initiative.
  Price Waterhouse Associates—Organisational studies.
  594
  Agriconsult—Safety study: Fire resistance.
  Best Grange Ltd.—Efficient Ship programme.
  Admiral Computing Group — Software Standards & Quality advice.
  Organisation and System Innovation Ltd. — Application Study
  FRH Associates—Intelligent Knowledge based systems
  Taylor Nelson Applied Futures — Home of the future project
  AMP Systems Ltd.—Company Information Database
  Sherington Software Ltd.—Trade Fairs Computer Schemes
  Concurrent Computer Corporation Ltd. — Capacity plan-ning study
  PA Computers and Telecommunications — Evaluation of UK Communications
  Technical Change Centre—Engineering Research in EEC
  Logica UK Limited—Computer Project for Fixed Services
  Technical Change Centre — Study of UK Science in key areas of research
  Logica UK Limited—Satellite Communications Study
  T. William Olle Associates—Database Standards
  PA Technology—Sets Study
  Cap Industries Ltd.—OSI Upper Layer Architecture
  British Telconsult—Advisory Services
  Segal, Quince Wickstead—Support for Design Scheme
  Prognosis Ltd.—Semi-conductor study
  Ewbank Preece Group Ltd.—Overseas Project Monitoring Advice
  Patrick Consulting Associates—Quality Assurance Study
  Neotech Associates—Large Scale Demonstrator project
  The Institute of Mechanical Engineers — Demonstrator project
  Prognosis Ltd—Semi-conductor layers on silicon study
  Scientific Generics Ltd.—Nanotechnology Project
  National Computing Centre Ltd. — Computer graphics study
  KPMG Peat Marwick McLintock — OSI Demonstration project
  Kennedy and Donkin Power Systems Ltd. — Overseas project evaluation
  Hollobone Hibbert and Associates—Computing Database preparation
  General Technology Systems Ltd.—Space Cost Study
  Mott, Hay and Henderson International—Overseas project study
  Computer Market Communications — Super Computer Research
  British Telecom Research Laboratories — Cellular Radio consultancy
  Spicer and Pegler Associates—Strategy study
  Metron Technology Ltd.—Computer Capacity Study
  Xionics Limited—Internal Network
  Inbucon Management Consultants Ltd. — Awareness Statistical Survey
  March Consulting Group—Maintenance UK Study
  Brown and Root Vickers Ltd.—Purchasing Consultancy
  Met Ocean Consultancy Ltd. — Resources from the Sea Study
  PA Technology—Programme advice
  CAP Ltd.—Advice on use of RPCTE implementation
  WS Atkins and Partners—Advice on EC Public Purchasing procedures
  Alpha Industrial Electronics Consultants Ltd. — Large demonstrator programme
  British Telecom Research Laboratories—OSI Opportunity Study
  Organisation and System Innovations Ltd.—Strategy for Expert EC Systems
  Human Resource Development Ltd.—Footwear Industry project
  Further Education Unit—CNC Machine Tools in Further Education Study
  Price Waterhouse Associates — Software Standards and certification study
  HR International — Top management programme and advice on deregulation assistance
  Coopers & Lybrand Associates — Organisation of DTI Surface Mount Club

  595
  March Consulting Ltd. — Managed Workshop Feasibility Study
  Logica Ltd.—Quality Management Systems study
  Laser-Scan Labs Ltd.—Advice on computer graphics
  Telecomputing PLC—Interface Standard
  Coopers & Lybrand Associates — UK Electronic Components Industry Survey
  Communications Complex Design Ltd. — Product Design Trends & Accidents Study
  Collins Oil & Gas Consultancy Ltd. — Purchasing consultancy
  Touche Ross & Co.—Feasibility Study
  Technical Audit Ltd. — Register of UK Quality Assessed Companies Study
  Organisation and System Innovations Ltd. — VADS Training Study
  London Transport International — Overseas Transport Study
  Data Dictionary Systems Ltd.—Draft ISO Standard
  Organisation and System Innovations Ltd.—Guidelines for Selection of expert Systems Applications
  Logica UK Ltd—Vanguard-computer studies
  ISC Electronic Systems Ltd.—Vanguard-UK Construction Industry Study
  Plessey Telecommunications & Office Systems Ltd. —Cellular Radio Study
  Coopers & Lybrand Associates; Ernst & Whinney Management Consultants—Enterprise initiative services
  KPMG Peat Marwick McLintock — Review of Foreign Inward Investment Agencies
  International Computers Ltd. (UK)—ICL advice on MAIL Network
  Wallace Ltd.—Radio Spectrum Review
  Organisation & System Innovations Ltd. — VanguardVADS Communities
  Arthur D. Little Ltd.—Vanguard-VADS Communities
  KPMG Peat Marwick McLintock — Vanguard-VADS Communities
  Langton Ltd.—Vanguard-VADS Communities
  Hoskyns Group Plc—Vanguard-VADS Communities
  PA Computers & Telecommunications Ltd. — VanguardVADS Communities
  CAP Ltd.—Vanguard-VADS Communities
  SCICON Ltd.—Vanguard-VADS Communities
  Price Waterhouse Associates — Vanguard-VADS Communities
  Coopers & Lybrand Associates — Vanguard-VADS inter-working study
  Baker & Smith Ltd.—Vanguard Community Development Programme

  Regional Aid
  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what has been the total spending, and the number of cases assisted in Houghton and Washington, through(a) regional selective assistance and (b) regional development grant from 1984 to 1987, broken down into manufacturing and service industries.

  Mr. Atkins
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The information requested on regional selective assistance and regional development grant in Houghton and Washington' from 1984 to 1987 is as follows:

  Manufacture

  Service

  Regional Selective Assistance2

  Expenditure (£ million)

  3·6

  0·5

  Number of cases assisted

  Regional Development Grant3

  40

  3

  Expenditure (£ million)

  3·7

  0·8

  Number of cases assisted

  215

  41

  1 Interpreted as the parliamentary constituency of Houghton and Washington.

  2 Project and training grants only. Information on the Business

  596

  Improvement Services and Exchange Risk Guarantee Schemes is not available at the local level.

  3 Detailed data are available only for the revised scheme, introduced in November 1984. However, £15·7 million was paid under the original scheme to companies in the Houghton and Washington employment office areas during the period in question.

EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

  Capitation Payments
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what information he has as to capitation paid to(a) primary and (b) secondary schools in (i) the Inner London education authority and (ii) outer London boroughs in each of the last five years; what information he has as to such payments to be made in the coming year; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  Authorities have submitted some details of their per capita allowances for 1985–86 and 1986–87 as part of Her Majesty's inspectorate's 1986 review of LEA provision for education. However, it is not possible to set out accurate comparable data for individual LEAs because each authority has its own type of scheme. Comparisons can be misleading because the allowances do not always cover the same area of expenditure or class of pupils and they are often combined with additional amounts for certain subjects or departments.

  ILEA (Abolition)
  Mr. Sedgemore
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received about the proposed abolition of the Inner London education authority; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Dunn
  We have received some 1,650 letters from hon. Members, organisations and individual members of the public about the proposals announced by my right hon. Friend on 4 February.

  Testing
  Mrs. Gorman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science how much the introduction of testing for seven, 11, 14 and 16-year-olds will cost; what is the estimated annual cost; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  The costs will depend on the nature of the tests and assessment arrangements required for various national curriculum subjects. My right hon. Friend will be reaching decisions on these matters, in the light of advice from subject working groups and the task group on assessment and testing. Overall, the Government expect the implementation of the national curriculum and assessment to be contained within its planned level of provision for education, where necessary by redeploying and using resources more effectively.

  School Meals
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what are the results of the October 1987 census of school meals; arid what are the comparable figures for the previous census.

  Mr. Dunn
  The information is as follows:
  597

  Maintained Schools (Including Nursery and Special): England

  October 1987

  October 1986

  Number

  Per cent.

  Number

  Per cent.

  Pupils in attendance

  6,210,640

  1000

  6,351,870

  100·0

  Pupils taking meals on payment

  1,989,746

  32·0

  1,956,310

  30·8

  Free

  1,101,132

  17·7

  1,143,817

  18·0

  Total

  3,090,878

  49·8

  3,100,127

  48·8

  Pupils bringing own food

  2,008,172

  32·3

  1,937,151

  30·5

  Pupils having other arrangements

  1,111,590

  17·9

  1,314,592

  20·7

  An analysis of the returns shows the following proportions for primary and secondary pupils, as percentages of pupils in attendance:

  Primary

  Secondary

  1987

  1986

  1987

  1986

  Pupils taking school meals

  51·9

  51·8

  46·2

  44·5

  Pupils bring own food

  39·4

  37·3

  24·4

  23·3

  Pupils having other arrangements

  8·7

  11·0

  29·4

  32·1

  Detailed tabulations on the returns from local education authorities in England, from which these national totals were derived, are being placed in the Library.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Official and Library Corridors
  Mr. Onslow
  To ask the Lord President of the Council under what circumstances access to the Official Corridor and the Library Corridor is permitted to anyone other than right hon. and hon. Members.

  Use of guillotine since 1979

  Bills guillotined in standing committee

  Bills guillotined in committee of whole House

  Session/Bill

  Hours for 2nd Reading

  Hours in committee before guillotine

  Hours in committee after guillotine

  Hours in committee before guillotine

  Hours in committee after guillotine

  Time allotted for report and 3rd Reading

  Number of hours allotted for Lords Amendments1

  1979–80

  Education (No. 2)

  7

  82

  21

  —

  —

  2 days until midnight

  4 hours

  Social Security

  6

  60

  32

  —

  —

  2 days until midnight

  3 hours

  Housing

  6

  110

  34

  —

  —

  2 days until midnight

  1 day until midnight

  Social Security (No. 2)

  6

  44

  20

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight

  —

  1980–81

  Transport

  7

  55

  41

  —

  —

  1 day until 1 am

  1 day until 10 pm

  British Nationality

  8

  90

  46

  —

  —

  3 days until midnight

  1 day until 10 pm

  1981–82

  Oil and Gas (Enterprise)

  6

  70

  29

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight and 1/2 day until 7 pm

  1 day until 10 pm

  Employment

  7

  91

  19

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight

  1 day until 10 pm

  Northern Ireland

  7

  —

  —

  54

  10

  1 day until midnight

  —

  1982–83

  598
  Mr. Wakeham
  I shall write to my right hon. Friend.

  Guillotined Measures
  Mr. Rowlands
  To ask the Lord President of the Council whether he will list the Bills guillotined since 1979; at what stage each Bill was guillotined; for how many hours such Bills had been debated(a) on Second Reading and (b) in Committee; and how many hours were subsequently allowed for each of the remaining stages.

  Mr. Wakeham
  The information is as follows:
  599

  Bills guillotined in standing committee

  Bills guillotined in committee of whole House

  Session/Bill

  Hours for 2nd Reading

  Hours in committee before guillotine

  Hours in committee after guillotine

  Hours in committee before guillotine

  Hours in committee after guillotine

  Time allotted for report and 3rd Reading

  Number of hours allotted for Lords Amendments1

  Transport

  6

  80

  16

  —

  —

  1 day until

  —

  Telecommunications

  6

  110

  39

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight

  —

  Housing and Building Control

  6

  90

  18

  —

  —

  1 day until 1 am

  —

  1983–84

  Telecommunications

  6

  80

  26

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight

  —

  Rates

  7

  80

  29

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight

  —

  Rating and Valuation (Amendment) (Scotland)

  6

  82

  18

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight

  —

  1984–85

  Local Government

  15

  86

  59

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight and 1 day until 10 pm

  1 day until midnight

  Transport

  5

  76

  53

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight and 1 day until 10 pm

  1 day until 11 pm

  1985–86

  Gas

  7

  75

  39

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight and 1/2 day until 7pm

  2 hours

  Social Security

  5

  100

  41

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight and 1 day until 10 pm

  4 hours

  European Communities (Amendment)

  3

  —

  —

  18

  4

  1 hour

  —

  1986–87

  Abolition of Domestic Rates Etc (Scotland)

  6

  101

  18

  —

  —

  1 day until midnight and 1 day until 10 pm

  3 hours

  Local Government Finance

  6

  —

  —

  15

  6

  1 day until midnight

  —

  1987–88

  Education Reform

  7

  88

  75

  —

  —

  4 days until 10 pm

  —

  Local Government Finance

  12

  72

  64

  —

  —

  4 days2, last day until 10 pm

  —

  Social Security3

  7

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  6

  [Hours rounded to nearest whole.]

  1 Including debate on supplementary order.

  2 To be confirmed.

  3 Allocation of time moved on Lords Amendments.

  "The House Magazine"
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Lord President of the Council what forms of access to the precincts are given to employees of Parliamentary Communications Ltd. for the purposes of the operation of "The House Magazine"; if any advance information is given to the magazine by staff of the House; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Wakeham
  Three representatives of "The House Magazine" have access to the Press Gallery. In addition, two research assistants have registered an interest in connection with that magazine, as required by the
  600
  Resolution of the House of 17 December 1985. The only advance information provided to the magazine, m common with that provided generally to the Press Gallery, is on the future activities of Select and Standing Committees.

  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Lord President of the Council when "The House Magazine" was granted permission by the House of Commons (Services) Committee to use the portcullis associated with the House as its insignia.

  Mr. Wakeham
  I am advised that a record of the information requested cannot be traced.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

  Non-military Aid
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what was the change in the total value of Her Majesty's Government's overseas nonmilitary aid between 1979 and 1987 in real terms; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  Figures for gross public expenditure on overseas aid for 1987 are not yet available. Between 1979 and 1986, expenditure in real terms fell by 16 per cent. In the period since 1982, however, it has been more than maintained and, as the recent public expenditure White Paper made clear, the aid programme is now planned to grow in real terms.

  Biwaters Project (Malaysia)
  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs who carried out the independent check that established value for money in the Biwaters Malaysian project.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  The value-for-money check was carried out by consultants Coopers and Lybrand, in association with Sir William Halcrow and Partners.

  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the Overseas Development Agency appraisal mission to Malaysia reviewed the performance of Biwater projects elsewhere, particularly in Nigeria; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  The appraisal mission was concerned specifically with the project in Malaysia. In the light of its findings, and other investigations carried out, the Government were content both with the viability of the project and with the capability of Biwater to implement it. A review of other projects carried out by the same contractor is not normally practicable, particularly where the Overseas Development Agency is not involved in funding them.

  Aid Projects (Single Contractors)
  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if the Governments of Cameroon, Chile and Thailand have insisted on negotiating a contract with a single contractor for United Kingdom aid projects; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  No. Where assistance is sought from the aid and trade provision, the nature of contracts is primarily a matter for the contractual parties concerned in the light of the circumstances of each case.

  Ethiopia
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a further statement on aid by the United Kingdom to Ethiopia.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  British commitments for famine relief in Ethiopia, through bilateral and European Community channels, total over £45 million since the beginning of 1987. This includes the cost of 94,500 tonnes of bilateral food aid to help in meeting needs during 1988 and £3602
  million to support airlift operations by the office of the United Nations disaster relief co-ordinator. It also includes assistance with transport, port handling equipment, medicines and grain storage.

  The United Kingdom also maintains a technical cooperation and training programme for Ethiopia and is assisting with famine rehabilitation including a £1.2 million well rehabilitation project in Welo region.

  Khmer Rouge
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he has taken to prevent aid provided by Her Majesty's Government for refugees at the Thai-Cambodia border from being diverted for use by the Khmer Rouge.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  Our assistance, which is provided through the relevant United Nations agencies, is subject to the stipulation that it should go only to the occupants of those camps controlled by the non-communist elements of the Cambodian resistance. We have received assurances that this stipulation is observed.

  Nicaragua
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when the last technical assistance training award was made to Nicaragua; how many were made in the previous five years; and why they have ceased.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  The last technical co-operation training award was made to Nicaragua in 1982. We have no separate statistics of new awards made to Nicaragua in the five years previous to 1982. After 1982, we provided assistance to Nicaragua only for disaster relief or through voluntary agencies or international relief organisations; the European Community has provided substantial aid of which Britain's share is around 20 per cent.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if Her Majesty's Government will resume technical assistance training awards to Nicaragua; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  We have no plans to do so.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Tax Revenue
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been raised under the main heads of tax in 1986–87 and 1987–88.

  Mr. Brooke
  Following is the information :

  £ million

  1986–87

  1987–88 latest estimate

  Income tax

  38,500

  41,400

  Corporation tax1

  13,500

  15,600

  Petroleum revenue tax2

  1,190

  2,330

  Capital gains tax

  1,060

  1,350

  Development land tax

  55

  25

  Inheritance tax

  990

  1,070

  Stamp duties

  1,860

  2,440

  603

  1986–87

  1987–88 latest estimate

  Total inland revenue

  57,200

  64,200

  Value added tax

  21,400

  24,100

  Petrol, derv, etc.

  7,500

  7.800

  Cigarettes and other tabacco

  4,800

  4.800

  Spirits, beer, wine, cider and perry

  4,200

  4,400

  Betting and gaming

  780

  810

  Car tax

  960

  1,150

  Other excise duties

  20

  20

  EC own resources customs duties etc.

  1,300

  1,470

  agricultural levies

  250

  190

  Total customs and excise

  41,100

  44,700

  Vehicle excise duties3

  2,580

  2.700

  Gas levy

  520

  500

  1 Includes net ACT.

  2 Includes advance petroleum revenue tax.

  3 Includes driving licence receipts.

  Special Advisers (Payments)
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what rules govern the receipt of payments by special advisers from former employers; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Brooke
  All special advisers, including those on secondment from outside employers, are subject to the provisions of the Civil Service Pay and Conditions of Service Code—except for the rules governing acceptance of outside appointments after resignation or retirement, and certain aspects of the rules on political activities.

  EC Budget (United Kingdom Contribution)
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the total net contribution made by the United Kingdom to the European Economic Community in the financial year 1987–88; and by what amount this total had to be reviewed in light of the recent European Council agreement.

  Mr. Brooke
  Final information on the outturn of our net payments to European Community institutions in 1987–88 is not yet available. An estimate was contained in table 3.1 of the latest public expenditure White Paper. On the question of revisions to that estimate, I refer my hon. Friend to the information given by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary in the debate on the White Paper on 24 February, at columns 316–17.

  Inheritance Tax
  Mr. Gordon Brown
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will list all those representations he has received to amend the exemption limit for inheritance tax on donations to political parties; and if he will place the submissions in the Library;

  (2) what was the basis on which he calculated that there will be no loss in revenue from his decision to amend the exemption limit for inheritance tax on donations to political parties;

  (3) how many estates in which donations were made to political parties in each year since 1979 have been subject to inheritance tax liability or capital transfer tax;
  604
  (4) how much (a) inheritance tax or (b) capital transfer tax has been paid in each year since 1979 on donations to political parties.

  Mr. Major
  Information is not kept of the number of estates paying inheritance tax or capital transfer tax on gifts to political parties or of the amount of tax paid, but it is not thought that under present rules gifts of £100,000 or more are normally made, so the loss in revenue from abolishing the limit is likely to be negligible. No representations have been received to amend the exemption limit.

  Loans (Tax Relief)
  Mr. Butterfill
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer under what circumstances any interest on loans qualifying for tax relief during a lifetime has obtained tax relief for any interest paid after death in any of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Brooke
  Generally speaking, relief for interest paid ceases to be available when the borrower dies. However, in certain circumstances, interest on a loan to buy a borrower's main residence may continue to be eligible for relief where paid after the borrower's death by his personal representatives or the trustees of his will settlement, provided the home continues to be the main residence of the deceased's spouse or dependent relative. No figures are available of the claims made under this provision.

  Elderly Home Owners
  Mr. Butterfill
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what information he has regarding the number of elderly home owners who have raised money by means of(a) home reversionary schemes, (b) mortgage annuity schemes and (c) building society maturity loans in each of the last five years; and what total sums are involved in each case.

  Mr. Lilley
  The information requested is not readily available in the form requested.

  Privatisation
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list, for each privatisation measure since 1983, the Government's merchant bank advisers, brokers and reporting accountants, and details of any advertising agency involved; and if he will state whether any form of competitive tendering was undertaken in each case for each service.

  Mr. Brooke
  The Government's merchant bank advisers and brokers in each of the privatisation sales since 1983 are as follows. Reporting accountants and advertising agencies employed in the sales were usually joint appointments with the company, and are also listed. In addition, a number of sales of subsidiaries were carried out by nationalised industries. Details of the advisers for these sales are not held centrally.

  In each of the privatisation sales, except for British Airways, the appointment of merchant bank advisers, brokers and advertising agencies was subject to competition. In the case of British Airways, Hill Samuel (the merchant bank advisers) had advised when privatisation was first considered in 1980 and were retained for the sale because of their knowledge of the company—a competitive rate having been negotiated.
  605
  The appointment of reporting accountants was subject to competition in the case of Enterprise Oil, British Telecom and the Plant Breeding Institute/National Seed Development Organisation. In the other privatisation sales the companies' auditors were appointed without

  Company

  Date of Sale

  Government Merchant bank Adviser

  Government Brokers

  Reporting Accountant

  Advertising Agency

  (Joint appointment unless otherwise stated)

  Associated British Ports

  1983

  J. Henry Schroder Wagg

  W. Greenwell & Co.

  Price Waterhouse

  —

  Enterprise Oil

  1984

  Kleinwort Benson

  Cazenove De Zoete and Bevan

  Peat, Marwick, Mitchell

  —

  British Telecom

  1984

  Kleinwort Benson

  Hoare Govett De Zoete and Bevan

  Coopers and Lybrand

  Dorlands

  British Gas

  1986

  N. M. Rothschild

  Cazenove Wood MacKenzie James Capel

  Price Waterhouse

  Young & Rubicam1

  British Airways

  1987

  Hill Samuel

  Cazenove Wood MacKenzie

  Ernst and Whinney

  Allen Brady & Marsh2

  Royal Ordnance

  1987

  N. M. Rothschild

  Hoare Govett

  Coopers and Lybrand

  —

  Rolls Royce

  1987

  Samuel Montagu

  James Capel

  Coopers and Lybrand

  Collett, Dickinson Pearce3

  BAA

  1987

  County Nat West

  Cazenove County Nat West

  Touche Ross

  J. Walter Thompson

  Plant Breeding Institute/ National Seed Development Organisation

  1987

  Lazards

  —

  Touche Ross

  —

  1 Dewe Rogerson were also employed for the advertising of the collection of the second instalment.2

  2 Government only. The company employed its own agency.

  3 Binns Vereka were also employed for the advertising of the collection of the second instalment.

  Age Allowances
  Mr. Andrew Bowden
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the number of retirement pensioners(a) aged 65 to 79 years and (b) aged 80 years or over who will be better off by (i) £1 per week, (ii) £1 to £2 per week, (iii) £2 to £3 per week, (iv) £3 to £4 per week, (v) £4 to £5 per week, and (vi) £5 per week or over as a consequence of the increase in the age allowances to £3,180 and £3,310 for a single person and £5,035 and £5,205 for a married couple.

  Gain1 per week

  Number of tax units2 who gain as a result of the increase in personal allowances (thousands)

  Number of tax units2 who gain from the Budget proposals for income tax rates and allowances (thousands)

  Aged 65–79

  Aged 80 +

  Aged 65–79

  Aged 80 +

  up to £1

  230

  65

  115

  30

  £l-£2

  1,510

  290

  515

  120

  £2-£3

  235

  15

  560

  85

  £3-£4

  80

  15

  230

  35

  £4-£5

  75

  5

  130

  20

  Over £5

  10

  Nil

  600

  80

  TOTAL

  2,120

  400

  2,120

  400

  1 Compared with 1987–88 tax regime.

  2 Married couples counted as one unit.

  Computer Services
  Ms. Gordon
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the computer services of(a) the Department of Health and Social Security, (b) the Inland Revenue, (c) the Home Department or (d) Her Majesty's Customs and Excise are to be contracted out.
  606
  obtaining alternative tenders, to take advantage of their knowledge of the companies where this was expected to give rise to worthwhile savings in terms of time and costs. In each case a competitive rate was negotiated.

  Mr. Brooke
  Estimates are given in the table. The first two columns analyse tax units by the gains in 1988–89 due to the proposed increases in the age allowances and, where appropriate, the main personal allowances. The final two columns analyse tax units by the gains in 1988–89 due to all the reductions in rates of tax and increases in allowances proposed in the Budget. Estimates are based on a projection of the 1985–86 Survey of Personal Income and are provisional.

  Mr. Norman Lamont
  Her Majesty's Customs and Excise announced recently that the Department's proposed new entry processing system (CHIEF) would, subject to satisfactory contractual negotiations, be
  607
  developed and operated by British Telecom Applied Technology. This company already runs the existing departmental entry processing system (DEPS).

  Apart from this, and the use of IT consultancy services for specific functions, the Department has no present plans to contract out its computer services.

  The Inland Revenue has for several years made extensive use of the private sector in supporting its computer services and will continue to do so, but there are no plans to contract out any computer services functions.

  Responsibility for computer services in the Department of Health and Social Security is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services and in the Home Office the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

  Higher and Senior Executives
  Mr. Galbraith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make it his policy to ensure that higher executive officers and senior executive grades will receive a pay award in 1988 sufficient to meet the increased cost of living in London and elsewhere; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Brooke
  The Treasury has discussed the 1988 pay claim for the executive grades with the National Union of Civil and Public Servants. An offer of a 4 per cent. increase was made to the NUCPS on 29 March. In response to the claim from the Council of Civil Service Unions the Treasury on 29 March offered an increase of 10 per cent. in London weighting rates. These offers take into account the need to recruit, retain and motivate staff within what can be afforded. Both offers are with effect from 1 April.

  Taxation Changes (Purchasing Impact)
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the net purchasing impact of taxation changes in his Budget on the regional economies of(a) the south-east, (b) the north-west.

  Mr. Brooke
  My right hon. Friend's Budget will provide a stimulus to enterprise and initiative in all regions of the country.

  EC Finance Ministers
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he next expects to meet his counterparts from other European Community states; and what matters he intends to raise.

  Mr. Brooke
  The next meeting of the European Community's Council of Economic and Finance ministers is expected to be held on 18 April. The agenda for the meeting is likely to include the liberalisation of capital movements, a presentation by the Economic Policy Committee on the Commission's indirect tax approximation proposals, and the implementation of the Brussels European Council conclusions on budget discipline.

  Business Expansion Scheme
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will clarify the proposed rules for companies which will carry on qualifying activities for relief under the business expansion scheme, through the letting of homes on assured tenancies; and whether he intends that the 608
  company will be able to give notice to tenants at the end of the five-year qualifying period for relief under the business expansion scheme.

  Mr. Brooke
  The proposed rules for this relief will be set out in the Finance Bill. The tenant under an assured tenancy which qualifies for the purposes of the business expansion scheme will have security of tenure (subject to the right of the landlord to recover possession of his property on certain specified grounds set out in the Housing Bill and the Housing (Scotland) Bill).

  Drugs (Illegal Imports)
  Mr. Rathbone
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of estimated illegal imports of drugs are now seized by Customs and Excise or intercepted prior to distribution, by category of drug for each of the last five years for which information is available.

  Mr. Lilley
  I regret that this information is not available.

  Mr. Rathbone
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportions of seizures of illegally imported drugs, by category of drug, come from EEC countries and from each of the other major source countries for each of the last five years for which information is available.

  Mr. Lilley
  I regret that this information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Income Tax (Higher Rates)
  Mr. Alan Williams
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much in tax concessions has been received by those on tax rates above 40 per cent. since June 1979 at constant prices to the latest available date; what estimates are available of the amount that has gone to each region and of the regional numbers of taxpayers in the tax bands above 40 per cent.; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lawson
  [holding answer 21 March 1988]: Income tax due from the top 2½ per cent. of taxpayers in 1978–79, the group liable at rates above 40 per cent., amounted to £3·4 billion, equivalent in real terms in 1988–89 to some £7·1 billion. In 1988–89, the tax due from the top 2½ per cent. of taxpayers will be about £9·0 billion — an increase of £2 billion, despite the reductions in tax rates and real increases in allowances since 1978–79. If the taxable incomes of the top 2½per cent. of taxpayers in 1988–89 were as they are now forecast to be, and at the same time were subject to 1978–79 income tax rates and allowances indexed to 1988-S9 levels by reference to the statutory formula, their liability would increase by £6 billion. However, the assumption on which this estimate is based is inherently implausible.

  I regret that corresponding information for each region is not available. Estimates of the number of taxpayers paying tax at the 45 per cent. rate or above in 1985–86, the latest year for which regional information is available, are given in the table.

  Number of taxpayers1 in 1985–86 paying tax at the 45 per cent, rate or above

  Region

  '000

  Northern

  17

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  29

  609

  Region

  '000

  North West

  39

  East Midlands

  25

  West Midlands

  38

  East Anglia

  21

  South East

  291

  South West

  37

  Wales

  15

  Scotland

  40

  Northern Ireland

  11

  United Kingdom2

  570

  1 Married couples counted as one unit.

  2 Includes members of the forces and Merchant Navy and a small number of civil servants serving abroad who have not been allocated to regions.

  Department

  Cost of London weighting 1£ million

  Number of staff receiving London weighting

  Proportion of staff in department receiving London weighting per cent.

  Non-industrials2

  Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

  3·72

  2,940

  30

  Cabinet Office

  1·78

  1,160

  71

  Central Office of Information

  1·06

  700

  87

  Charity Commission

  0·32

  210

  64

  Crown Estate Office

  0·06

  40

  75

  Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal

  0·00

  0

  0

  Crown Prosecution Service3

  3·35

  2,520

  72

  Customs and Excise

  7·69

  6,410

  25

  Defence

  20·16

  16,540

  18

  Education and Science

  2·01

  1,350

  55

  Employment Group

  12·15

  10,160

  17

  Energy

  1·26

  830

  81

  Environment/Transport/PSA

  15·27

  12,160

  34

  Export Credits Guarantee Department

  1·11

  760

  42

  General Register Officer (Scotland)

  0·00

  0

  0

  Government Actuary

  0·08

  50

  92

  Health and Social Security

  20·06

  17,010

  18

  Home Office

  12·28

  9,730

  28

  Inland Revenue

  15·21

  12,940

  19

  Intervention Board for Agricultural Produce

  0·00

  0

  0

  Land Registry

  1·09

  1,230

  17

  Law Officer's Department

  0·03

  20

  94

  Lord Advocate's Department

  0·03

  20

  89

  Lord Chancellor's Department

  5·30

  3,940

  38

  National Investment and Loan Office

  0·08

  50

  100

  National Savings

  0·24

  160

  2

  Northern Ireland Office

  0·16

  110

  65

  Office of Arts and Libraries

  0·08

  60

  98

  Office of Fair Trading

  0·43

  310

  98

  Office of Gas Supply

  0·02

  20

  100

  Office of Population Census and Surveys

  1·11

  730

  35

  Ordnance Survey

  0·12

  140

  5

  Overseas Development Administration

  1·40

  950

  64

  Paymaster General

  0·00

  0

  0

  Privy Council

  0·05

  30

  97

  Public Record Office

  0·43

  400

  98

  Registers of Scotland

  0·00

  0

  0

  Registry of Friendly Societies

  0·17

  110

  99

  Royal Mint

  0·02

  10

  4

  Scottish Courts Administration

  0·00

  0

  0

  Scottish Courts Service

  0·00

  0

  0

  Scottish Office

  0·03

  20

  0

  Scottish Records Office

  0·00

  0

  0

  Stationery Office

  0·54

  360

  18

  Trade and Industry

  10·76

  7,770

  64

  Treasury

  2·76

  2,070

  80

  Treasury Solicitor's Department

  0·62

  410

  95

  Welsh Office

  0·07

  40

  2

  London Weighting Allowance
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what was the total value of that part of salaries paid as London weighting of the employees of each Government Department during the last year for which full figures are available; and what proportion of the total value of salaries paid by each Department of London employees the London weighting payments account for;

  (2) how many and what proportion of the employees of each Government Department receive London weighting payments.

  Mr. Brooke
  [holding answers 25 March 1988]: The information is as follows, for non-industrial and industrial staff separately. There is no central record of the total salaries paid by each Department to London employees and this could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
  611

  Department

  Cost of London weighting 1£ million

  Number of staff receiving London weighting

  Proportion of staff in department receiving London weighting per cent.

  Industrials4

  Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

  0·05

  80

  14

  Defence

  2·86

  3,420

  5

  Employment Group

  0·05

  60

  10

  Environment/Transport/PSA

  3·73

  3,070

  29

  Health and Social Security

  0·03

  30

  13

  Home Office

  0·22

  210

  7

  Stationery Office

  0·94

  660

  48

  Trade and Industry

  0·08

  120

  36

  Treasury

  0·23

  180

  23

  Others

  0·05

  40

  2

  1 Estimated cost in 1987–88 financial year.

  2 As at 1 April 1987 (Source: Mandate).

  3 The numbers for the Crown Prosecution Service are an estimate.

  4 As at 1 January 1987 (Source: Departmental returns).

  Pensions
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received seeking changes to reduce the effective 41·6 per cent. rate of tax for pensioners in receipt of age allowance.

  Mr. Major
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]There have been a number of representations on this subject.

  The situation to which my hon. Friend refers affects fewer than 2 per cent. of pensioner households, and has nothing whatever to do with the Budget changes. The age allowance has always been withdrawn progressively for taxpayers with incomes above a certain limit. This income limit is at its highest ever level in real terms, and the effective rate within the withdrawal band, at 41·6 per cent., is in fact at its lowest ever level. Those few taxpayers who have incomes within the withdrawal band will gain an extra £2·50 per week from the increase of £800 in the income limit proposed in the Budget, on top of the benefit they receive from the double indexation of the personal allowances and the basic rate cut.

  Consultancy Contracts
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list each management or computer consultancy contract awarded by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise in 1987, giving in each case the name of the consultancy firm and the subject of the assignment.

  Mr. Lilley
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: Following is the available information:

  Firm and assignment
  Arthur Andersen—Design of VAT work planning systems BIS Systems—Review of planning and control procedure for Customs Handling Import and Export Freight (CHIEF); advice on data cabling of HQ offices (2 contracts)
  British Telecom—Technical study of new electronic tariff Calidus Systems — Advice on data administration for CHIEF
  Comshare — Development of management information systems
  Datafit—Development of various computer programmings
  Ernst Whinney—Development of management information systems; review of part of IT strategy
  Expert Systems International—Advice on expert systems Honeywell—Study of extension to computerised intelligence system
  Hoskyns—Support to CHIEF system (2 contracts)
  Hunterskil South—Computerisation of registry
  612
  ICL—Support to CHIEF system (4 contracts)
  Inforem—Business Systems Analysis methodology
  Keith London Associates—Testing of VAT management information system
  LBMS—Software design study
  Logica—Review of Departmental Entry Processing System requirements; advice on Structural Systems and Design Methodology
  Mindworks — Development of management information systems (2 contracts)
  National Computing system—Advice on computerisation of personnel records
  PActel — Production of project control guidelines for CHIEF
  Peat Marwick McLintock — Development of Mainframe links with micro-computers; activity costing and decision support programmes
  Regional Computer Systems—Computerisation of personnel records
  Soft Option—Computerisation of personnel records
  Systems Concepts—Computerisation of personnel records; development of management information system
  System Designers—Development of management information systems
  Timeslice — Development of accounting system for Solicitor's Office
  Yale Data Management—Establishment of CHIEF System Test Branch

  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list each management or computer consultancy contract awarded by the Inland Revenue in 1987 giving in each case the name of the consultancy firm and the subject of the assignment.

  Mr. Brooke
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: The Inland Revenue awarded the following consultancy contracts in 1987:

  Touche Ross—Contingency Planning

  Cullinet—Data Management and Database Design

  Oracle UK Ltd.—Database Products

  Park Avenue Productions PLC—Communications

  Celtechnology—Organisation, Management

  J. Pincus—Specialist Management Training

  Peat Marwick McClintock—Financial Systems

  Job Dispersal
  Mr. Arnold
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the outcome of the programme for dispersing Government work out of London and the south-east announced in 1979; and whether the Government intend further initiatives on the location of Civil Service work.
  613
  Mr. Brooke
  In 1979 we announced a programme designed to disperse 5,900 posts, mainly to Scotland and the north. Over 5,500 posts have been dispersed under this programme, and planning is in hand for the remainder. Over the same period, and on their own initiative, Departments have relocated well over 6,000 other posts out of London and the south-east. About four fifths of the Civil Service is now located outside Greater London.

  No further central targets for relocation are being set, but Departments will be reviewing their location of work with a view in suitable cases to finding locations offering advantages in terms of recruitment and retention of staff, value for money and other considerations relevant to service delivery and management. In their reviews, Departments will consider localities which offer such advantages, including where appropriate areas which are the focus of the Government's regional and urban policies. A copy of the guidelines issued to Departments for these reviews has been placed in the Library of the House.

  Exchange Rate
  Mr. Barron
  To ask the Chancellor of Exchequer if he will estimate the effect of unsterilised exchange rate intervention on the growth of monetary aggregates over the last 12 months; and if he will estimate any consequent effect on the retail prices index.

  Mr. Lilley
  The impact of intervention on MO is offset automatically by the Bank of England's daily money market operations. There is no simple relation between the intervention and broad monetary growth. The Government's policy is to fund all intervention, that is, to sterilise it. The published provisional figures for February 1988 indicate that all intervention and other borrowing has been fully funded in the 12 months to that date.

  Overseas Investments
  Mr. Cran
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the amount of earnings from overseas investments in 1987–l88; what proportion this constitutes of the national income; and what are the comparable figures for the preceding five years.

  Mr. Major
  The figures are shown in the table.

  Year

  Net earnings1on overseas assets £ million

  Per cent. of GDP

  1982–83

  2,056

  0·7

  1983–84

  2,678

  0·9

  1984–85

  4,493

  1·4

  1985–86

  2,905

  0·8

  1986–87

  5,629

  1·4

  1987–882

  4,196

  1·3

  1In respect of United Kingdom investments overseas less overseas investments in the United Kingdom.

  2 First three quarters only available.

  Interest and Exchange Rates
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the connection between interest rates and the exchange rates.

  Mr. Lilley
  I refer the hon. Member to paragraph 2.11 of the 1988–89 "Financial Statement and Budget Report".

  Income Tax
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the weekly gain of a single person earning £150,000 a year from his Budget tax changes.

  Ms. Mowlam
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the weekly gain of a single person earning £100,000 a year from his Budget tax changes.

  Mr. Norman Lamont
  [pursuant to his reply, 30 March 1988]: I regret the figures given were incorrect. The answer should have been as follows:
  "The weekly gain from the Budget of a single person earning £100,000 and £150,000 a year, with no other income, would be £271·92 and £463·23 respectively. The figures refer only to income tax and assume that the taxpayer is entitled to no income tax reliefs or allowances other than the single person's allowance. The calculation is made by comparing the taxpayer's income tax liability under the 1987–88 tax regime with that under the proposed regime for 1988–89."

TRANSPORT

  Aviation Safety
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what studies of aviation safety have been made by his Department in the last year; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  The Department's air accidents investigation branch is responsible for investigating aircraft accidents and their reports are published. The following accident reports have been published during the last 12 months.

  No. 1/87 Bell 212 G-BJJR in the North Sea. Issued on 28 April 1987.

  No. 2/87 Lockheed Tristar G-BBAI at Leeds. Issued on 25 September 1987.

  No. 3/87 Turbo Commander EL-BGL at Eastbourne. Issued on 29 July 1987.

  No. 4/87 DHC-6 Twin Otter G-BGPC at Laphroaig. Issued on 10 December 1987.

  No. 5/87 Chinook G-BISO in the North Sea. Issued on 20 January 1988.

  No. 6/87 Short SD3 EI-BEM at East Midlands. Issued on 20 January 1988.

  No. 7/87 Twin Squirrel G-BKIH at Swalcliffe. Issued on 29 February 1988.

  No. 8/87 Boeing 747 G-AWNB at Heathrow. Issued on 29 February 1988.

  No. 9/87 Bell 214ST G-BKFN in the North Sea. Issued on 28 March 1988.

  No. 1/88 DH 89A Dragon-Rapide G-AGTM at Duxford. Issued on 28 March 1988.

  Otherwise, the regulation of air safety is the responsibility of the Civil Aviation Authority.

  British Rail (Electrification)
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what Government subsidies have been made available to British Rail in each year since 1979 towards its electrification programme.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  The Government do not give BR specific investment grants. The public service obligation grant includes provision for the appropriate share of revenue investment and depreciation on capital assets used in the grant-aided railway. A significant proportion of electrification expenditure has, therefore, been eligible for
  615
  grant. No grant will however be available for inter-city services from 1 April this year: their investment will be expected to show a commercial rate of return.

  Road Bridges
  Mr. Mudd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many road bridges currently in use were constructed before the introduction of national design standards in 1922; and how many of these are recognised as requiring replacement or strengthening to answer the needs of modern vehicle weights.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  The bridge census and sample survey report, which was published in March 1987, shows that there are about 25,000 bridges on local roads in England built before 1922. There are also about 900 pre-1922 bridges on trunk roads in England. The sample survey indicates that about a quarter of these bridges may require to be strengthened to meet the requirements of the new bridge assessment code BD 21/84. In November the Government announced a programme for the rehabilitation of bridges on motorways and all-purpose trunk roads including the assessment and strengthening of the older bridges. Discussions are taking place with the owners of bridges off the national road system about a similar programme for their bridges.

  InterCity
  Mr. Stern
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what are the latest available figures for the proportion of British Rail InterCity trains that arrive on time; and to what extent these figures differ from the figures published by British Rail according to its definition of on time.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  We have agreed with BR its objective that 90 per cent. of InterCity trains should arrive within 10 minutes of the timetabled time. I understand that in the four weeks to 27 February, the latest period for which figures are available, 86 per cent. of InterCity trains arrived within 10 minutes of right time. My Department does not monitor figures for arrival at timetabled times.

  M25
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he will make a further statement about improvements planned for the M25.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  The motorway is being widened to four lanes between junctions 11 and 13. Consultants are investigating ways of widening the length between junctions 15 and 16. No other major improvements are planned between completion of the review of the motorway as a whole. Details of the review will be announced soon.

  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what progress there has been in establishing responsibility for the problems in construction of the M25 between Leatherhead and Reigate.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  Under the conditions of contract it is for the engineer to decide where responsibility rests. He has determined that responsibility rests partly with the Department and partly with the contractor. The Department is considering its position. I shall make a statement as soon as possible.

  A51 (Clotton)
  Mr. Goodlad
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will introduce a speed limit for Clotton on the A51.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  No. Conditions on this part of the A5I still do not meet the nationally applied criteria for a speed limit.

  A6 (Disley-High Lane Bypass)
  Mr. Tom Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport why the special landscape areas of(a) Cheshire and Derbyshire were, and (b) Stockport and the Etherow-Goyt River Valley Park were not, included in his published map of the proposed A6 Disley-High Lane bypass; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  The special landscape areas of Cheshire and Derbyshire were shown diagramatically in the consultation brochure because they formed part of those councils' planning policie. Although the Greater Manchester structure plan designated an area that falls within Stockport MBC's boundary as land of special landscape policy it was only on 12 January, six days before the public consultation bagan, that the areas were included in the Stockport borough local plan after committee approval. We shall take account of the special designation in our further consideration of options for a High Lane-Disley bypass.

  Mr. Tom Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport on what date he saw a delegation from the High Peak borough council in connection with the proposed A6 Disley-High Lane bypass; what was discussed at the meeting; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  I met a delegation from High Peak borough council on 21 March. The delegation explained its concern about the effects of the "Brown Route" and sought more information on the alternatives.

  It was agreed that officials from the Department would meet council members and officials to explain the bypass alternatives in more detail. I confirmed that the council's views together with many others we have received would be fully considered in reaching decisions on whether to add a scheme to the national trunk road programme and on choice of route.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proportion of the transport programme is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  Around 40 per cent. of the value of the national road programme is accounted for by schemes under construction or in preparation which will benefit inner cities.

  About 30 per cent. of the value of all local road schemes accepted for transport supplementary grant consist of schemes costing over £1 million in or assisting inner cities. In addition, there are a large number of smaller schemes which will help transport and provide safety benefit in inner cities.

  Over 80 per cent. of grants paid in respect of schemes currently being undertaken under section 56 of the

  617
  Transport Act 1968 and nearly 60 per cent. of grants paid in respect of current schemes under the Industrial Development Act are supporting inner city projects.

  Inner cities also benefit from a substantial, though unquantifiable, proportion of Government grants to British Rail and London Regional Transport.

  Traffic Growth
  Mr. Mudd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what are his Department's assumptions on growth in traffic(a) overall and (b) on motorways in percentage terms in 1988–89 over 1987–88.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  (a) The Department of Transport's national road traffic forecasts predict average rates of annual traffic growth over periods of several years; they are not calibrated for year-on-year forecasting. Since the forecasts were made, traffic has grown at about the upper end of the forecast range. Given a continuation of economic growth, recent trends in traffic growth are likely to continue.

  (b) The Department does not forecast traffic by road type.

  Road Schemes
  Mr. Mudd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many major road schemes have been announced as due to start in 1987–88 or 1988–89; and how many of these are now scheduled to be started in the current year; how many in 1988–89; if he will list those schemes now likely to be delayed until at least 1989–90; and how many trunk road and local bypass schemes announced and scheduled since 1984–85 have now experienced major slippage in time scale.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  I refer my hon. Friend to my replies on 2 April 1987 Official Report columns 571–2 and 8 February 1988 Official Report columns 2–4 when I announced that we planned to start work on 40 schemes in 1987–88 and 34 schemes in 1988–89. Work started on 29 schemes in 1987–88 as indicated in my further answer of 8 February Official Report columns 3–4. Of the remaining schemes originally scheduled to start in 1987–88, we now aim to start 10 in 1988–89 and 1, the A140 Dickleburgh bypass, in 1989–90. Two of the 34 I announced as 1988–89 starts are not now expected to start until 1989–90. They are A16 Boston to Algakirk and A43 Blisworth bypass.

  The June 1985 report, "National Roads England", showed 40 bypasses on which work was scheduled to start between June 1985 and March 1987. Of these, 17 have not been started.

  The progress of local bypass schemes is a matter for the appropriate local highway authority.

  White Hart Roundabout, Northolt
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action he is taking to improve the flow of traffic and the environment at the White Hart roundabout, Northolt, during current and future work on the Hayes bypass and related works; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  Any proposals to improve the flow of traffic and the environment at the White Hart roundabout are a matter for the London borough of 618
  Ealing, which is the highway authority responsible for this scheme. I understand that the opening of a section of the new roundabout today together with associated traffic management should improve the situation. The scheme includes environmental measures.

  Central London Rail Study
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer of 25 March,Official Report, column 264, if the central London rail study will take account of (a) his forthcoming announcement concerning the financial objectives of London Regional Transport, (b) the cross-rail proposals of the British Railways Board, published in November 1980 and (c) the type of cost-benefit analysis applied to capital investment on the Victoria line.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  I expect to receive initial results from the central London rail study in July, in advance of setting any new objectives for London Regional Transport. The terms of reference are sufficiently wide to embrace any relevant scheme. Detailed appraisal of any such scheme will be in accordance with established appraisal criteria and techniques.

  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer of 25 March,Official Report, column 264, if he will make it his policy to direct the central London rail study to take account of, and report on (a) whether any benefits are to be obtained from increasing the volume of rolling stock and train staff on British Rail and London Underground Limited, (b) whether any benefits are to be gained by improvements in the standards of, and number of persons employed in maintenance of track, signalling and rolling stock of British Railways and London Underground Limited, (c) whether there are any benefits for line capacity and punctuality of more platform staff and (d) what are the costs and benefits of dual voltage electrification of the line from Willesden junction to Clapham junction.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  The existing terms of reference expressly require the study to examine the scope for improving services and to have regard to the need to make the best use of existing assets.

  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer concerning the central London rail study of 25 March,Official Report, column 264, (a) which bodies or representatives, or other persons will constitute the membership of the review body, (b) which persons or bodies will be eligible to present evidence to the review body, (c) from which official or other bodies he expects the review body to receive information concerning future levels of passenger demand and if such information will be publicly available, (d) what assumptions the review body will be required to make concerning the level of fares relative to the general cost of living, and the method of ticketing or passes to be used within the Greater London travel-to-work area, (e) what assumptions the review will be required to take account of concerning strategic planning policies of Her Majesty's Government and county councils within the London travel-to-work area and its impact on the growth of daily passenger travel to and from and within London, and (f) what changes in travel demand or pattern the review will

  619
  be required to take account of consequent on the plans of Her Majesty's Government for the de-regulation of bus services in the area now served by London Buses Limited.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  The study will be conducted by LRT, BR and my officials. It is not envisaged that the study team will call for outside evidence. I have not laid down a set of assumptions for the study, but would expect the team to consider how variations in all major assumptions—particularly those relating to demand—would affect its conclusions.

  Summer Time
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents about the impact of summer time changes on road accidents; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  I have not had any recent representations from the society on this subject. I am aware of its views. My right hon. Friend, the Home Secretary, is today issuing a consultation document which will set out the options under consideration.

  Airports (Landing Charges)
  Mr. Churchill
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has as to by how much more or less than the retail prices index landing charges at Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Manchester have increased in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  There is no standard index for charges at each of these airports. An approximation is provided by aggregate traffic income per passenger. The table shows aggregate traffic income per passenger for the period 1978–79 to 1986–87 indexed relative to the RPI.

  1978–79 = 100

  Heathrow

  Gatwick

  Stansted

  Manchester

  1978–79

  100

  100

  100

  100

  1979–80

  93

  90

  77

  96

  1980–81

  124

  107

  99

  108

  1981–82

  117

  100

  101

  108

  1982–83

  105

  82

  75

  100

  1983–84

  100

  89

  92

  103

  1984–85

  89

  91

  77

  95

  1985–86

  84

  95

  80

  91

  1986–87

  80

  95

  90

  90

  Note: Figures prior to 1983–84 include security levy paid to the then Department of Trade.

  Radio Beacons
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to announce a national policy for United Kingdom radio beacons; what representations he has made in north-west European discussions on the future of Decca and Loran; which countries are involved in the discussions; when he expects to conclude these discussions; when he expects to make an announcement; if he will list the comparative advantages and disadvantages between Decca and Loran; and if he will detail the total estimated cost of each system.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  The Decca navigator system currently provides the main electronic position-fixed 620
  system in United Kingdom waters. The system is operated under a contract between the general lighthouse authorities and Racal Decca Marine Navigation Ltd. The contract runs to 1994 and is extendable to 1997.

  My right hon. Friend is not yet able to make a statement about the international discussions on the possible adoption of Loran C as a standard civil electronic aid in north-west Europe. Informal feasibility discussions are proceeding between the United Kingdom, Norway, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Denmark, Iceland, Ireland and the Netherlands, but none of the states concerned is yet committed to any change. Examination of the technical and cost aspects of an international co-operative development of Loran C has yet to be completed. If firm proposals for a change emerge from these discussions, my right hon. Friend expects to seek the views of interested parties before reaching a decision. Full account would be taken of user interests and of the relative costs, accuracy and technical suitability of the respective systems.

  Seagoing Craft (Radios)
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has for making(a) VHF radio, (b) Decca or equivalent or (c) radar compulsory for all seagoing craft.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  VHF radio is mandatory on all passenger ships and cargo ships of 300 gross tons and upward. Decca is not mandatory.

  Radar is mandatory on all merchant ships of 1,600 gross tons and upwards and those constructed after 1 September 1984 of between 500 and 1,600 gross tons.

  There are no plans for making any of these equipments compulsory for all seagoing craft.

  Signposting
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what studies his Department has made of French signpost practice on(a) motorways and (b) other roads regarding (i) sites of tourist interest and ill) the availability and quality of hotel accommodation; and what representations he has had on future signposting in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  On signing matters generally, we are in close touch with other member countries of the European conference of ministers of transport. We are aware of practices in France in relation to signing of tourist attractions and hotels. We have received a variety of representations about signing in the context of the review of directional signs which we completed last year. A copy of the report is available in the Library.

  In the light of this review we are conducting an experiment in Kent to assess the benefits to be derived from a limited amount of hotel signing on the highway. We have to balance in all this the need of travellers for information against road safety considerations (too many signs are a distraction to the motorist), and the damage to amenity which would arise if there came to be a clutter of signs on the highway.

  Motor Cyclists
  Mr. Barry Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the relative risk of injury in road traffic accidents for motor cyclists compared with other road users.

  Casualty rates:1by road user type and severity: 1976 to 1986

  Rate per 100 million vehicle kilometres/percentage

  1976

  1977

  1978

  1979

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Pedal cyclists:

  Killed

  7·1

  5·9

  7·4

  8·4

  7·2

  6·9

  5·6

  6·2

  6·8

  6·1

  6·5

  KSI

  117

  98

  112

  138

  132

  123

  113

  123

  130

  121

  125

  All severities

  552

  459

  522

  623

  591

  563

  534

  589

  609

  577

  623

  TWMV riders:

  Killed

  18

  22

  21

  21

  17

  15

  13

  13

  13

  12

  12

  KSI

  378

  406

  406

  388

  344

  296

  290

  288

  286

  293

  281

  All severities

  1,288

  1,353

  1,315

  1,225

  1,073

  920

  920

  917

  916

  915

  898

  Car drivers:

  Killed

  0·8

  0·8

  0·8

  0·8

  0·7

  0·7

  0·7

  0·6

  0·6

  0·5

  0·6

  KSI

  11

  11

  11

  11

  10

  10

  9

  7

  7

  7

  7

  All severities

  46

  46

  46

  45

  40

  40

  40

  34

  36

  37

  38

  Bus or coach drivers:

  Killed

  0·3

  0·3

  0·3

  0·1

  0·1

  0·1

  0·2

  0·1

  0·1

  —

  —

  KSI

  4

  4

  3

  3

  2

  3

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  All severities

  22

  24

  23

  23

  17

  18

  16

  16

  14

  17

  16

  LGV drivers:

  Killed

  0·6

  0·5

  0·5

  0·5

  0·5

  0·4

  0·3

  0·3

  0·3

  0·3

  0·4

  KSI

  9

  8

  8

  8

  6

  6

  6

  4

  4

  5

  4

  All severities

  37

  34

  34

  33

  27

  26

  25

  20

  21

  23

  23

  HGV drivers:

  Killed

  0·4

  0·4

  0·4

  0·4

  0·3

  0·3

  0·3

  0·2

  0·3

  0·3

  0·3

  KSI

  4

  4

  4

  4

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  All severities

  17

  18

  17

  16

  13

  12

  13

  12

  12

  13

  12

  All road users:2

  Killed

  2·9

  2·9

  2·8

  2·7

  2·4

  2·3

  2·2

  2·0

  2·0

  1·8

  1·8

  KSI

  38

  38

  37

  37

  34

  33

  32

  28

  29

  26

  25

  All severities

  151

  151

  147

  141

  130

  127

  126

  115

  118

  110

  106

  Percentage of all road users accounted for above Killed

  43

  45

  44

  48

  47

  48

  48

  46

  46

  46

  45

  KSI

  52

  52

  53

  54

  55

  55

  55

  55

  54

  53

  53

  All severities

  52

  52

  52

  53

  54

  54

  55

  55

  55

  54

  54

  1 1985 rates have been revised.

  2 Includes driver and riders of other vehicles.

  The following table shows for each year the ratio of TWMV riders to car drivers for each of the three caualty severity classifications—killed, killed or seriously injured and all severities. The table is, effectively, the division of each of the three TWMV rider rows by the corresponding car driver row.

  TWMV casualty rates relative to car driver casualty rates: by severity: 1976 to 1986

  Car driver casualty rates = 1

  Year

  Killed

  KSI

  All severities

  1976

  23·0

  34·4

  28·0

  1977

  27·1

  36·9

  29·4

  1978

  26·5

  36·9

  28·6

  1979

  26·1

  35·3

  27·2

  1980

  24·6

  34·4

  26·8

  1981

  21·0

  29·6

  23·0

  1982

  19·1

  32·2

  23·0

  1983

  22·3

  41·1

  27·0

  1984

  21·7

  40·9

  25·4

  622
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The information requested is given for all two-wheeled motor vehicle TWMV riders. It is taken from the annual publication "Road Accidents Great Britain — The Casualty Report, 1986".

  Year

  Killed

  KSI

  All severities

  1985

  24·0

  41·9

  24·7

  1986

  20·0

  40·1

  23·6

DEFENCE

  Aircraft Accidents
  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if the information recorded on the aircraft accident data computer in the Royal Air Force inspectorate of flight safety includes, for each accident(a) the height at which the aircraft was authorised to fly, and (b) the height at which the aircraft was flying immediately prior to the accident.

  Mr. Freeman
  In those cases where the height at which an aircraft was flying just before an accident can be
  623
  determined it is recorded on the computerised database of the Royal Air Force's inspectorate of flight safety. Information about authorised heights is not so recorded.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Bryan Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion of the defence programme is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Ian Stewart
  It would probably not be possible to make a sensible estimate of the proportion of the defence programme spent in the inner cities, but, even if it were, this could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Tanks (Purchase)
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to announce a decision on the future purchase of tanks for the British Army; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  I have nothing to add to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Bridlington (Mr. Townend) on 12 January, at column 200.

  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department has carried out any tests upon the Challenger II tank for use by the British Army; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  No. A Mk 2 Challenger does not presently exist in fully developed form.

  Journalists (Hospitality Costs)
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Bradford, South of 22 March,Official Report, column 115, what was the estimated cost of hosting Ian Bevitt and Ron Sibbald to the unit at Belize; and what method of travel, from and to which points, was used.

  Mr. Ian Stewart
  The cost of hosting the journalists was about £35, which was met from unit funds. They travelled by Land Rover and helicopter between military bases in Belize, accompanying service men on routine duties.

  Exercise Arrowhead Express
  Sir Dudley Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what part British forces played in the recent NATO Exercise Arrowhead Express in northern Norway; and if he will make a statement on the result of that exercise.

  Mr. Ian Stewart
  The United Kingdom element of the Allied Command Europe Mobile Force (AMF), including an infantry battalion, a logistic support battalion, a force artillery HQ, force reconnaissance unit, helicopter support and RAF Jaguars, played a full role in deployment, deterrent and combat operations conducted in Exercise Arrowhead Express. The exercise tested the AMF in its role as an immediate reaction force deployed to a threatened flank area of ACE to deter aggression, to demonstrate NATO solidarity and resolve and to operate alongside host nation forces.

  Detailed assessment and evaluation of the exercise is currently being undertaken by participating nations and the appropriate NATO authorities.

  From a United Kingdom viewpoint early indications are that the exercise was very successful.

  North Sea (Air Combat Platforms)
  Mr. MacDonald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what consultations his Department has held with British Aerospace in respect of the construction of six air combat manoeuvring system platforms in the North sea; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) whether his Department has held any discussions with or issued any guidelines to British Aerospace as regards the nationality of the tenderers for the contract to build air combat manoeuvring subsystem platforms in the North sea;

  (3) what information he has as to the locations of the air combat manoeuvring instrumentation system platforms in the North sea to be built by British Aerospace;

  (4) whether his Department intends to make use of the air combat manoeuvring instrumentation systems to be constructed by British Aerospace; and whether there will be any restrictions placed on use of this system by the defence forces of other nations;

  (5) what provision he has made for the cost of contracts which his Department may enter into in respect of the air combat manoeuvring instrumentation system;

  (6) whether the defence forces of any other country will be allowed to contract directly with British Aerospace in order to make use of the air combat manoeuvring system to be constructed in the North sea;

  (7) what information he has on the principal use of the air combat manoeuvring instrumentation system to be constructed by British Aerospace;

  (8) whether British Aerospace is working to any Government guidelines or function specifications as regards the air combat manoeuvring instrumentation project.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Further to my answer at column 365 on 28 March, I can confirm that British Aerospace has presented to my Department its unsolicited proposals to build, on a private venture basis, an air combat manoeuvring installation in the North sea. If constructed, use of this training facility by prospective customers would be a matter for the company within the terms of any applicable legal or other regulations. The details of British Aerospace's proposal are under study in this Department. No commitment of any kind has been made to the company and no funds have been provisioned against future use of such a facility by this Department. No guidelines have been given to the company about any technical specifications nor about any commercial aspect of the venture.

  Scientists (Deaths)
  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will institute an inquiry into the security implications of the deaths of Mr. Victor Moore, Mr. Ashad Sharif, Mr. Vimal Dajibhai, Mr. David Sands, Mr. Peter Peapell and Dr. John Brittan;

  (2) whether Dr. John Brittan or Mr. Peter Peapell were involved in any subcontracting work for Marconi while in the employment of his Department;

  (3) whether the current investigation by Ministry of Defence police into contracts placed with Marconi has at any stage in the past involved questioning or examining Mr. Victor Moore, Mr. Ashad Sharif, Mr. Vimal Dajibhai, Mr. David Sands, Mr. Peter Peapell or Dr. John Knight.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  The answer to all three questions is no.

  Low-flying Aircraft
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the locations and dates of periods of covert monitoring of low-flying operations conducted by Royal Air Force police since 1974.

  Mr. Freeman
  [pursuant to his reply, 4 December 1987, c. 736–37]: Records of locations where covert surveys of low-flying activity have been carried out only exist for July 1979 onwards. Thereafter, the available information is as follows:

  Dates and locations of RAF Police covert observations 1979–87

  Date and Location

  1979

  Peterborough area

  Gaydon area

  Newent

  Isle of Wight

  Liverpool/Manchester area

  Pembray Range

  Twycross Zoo

  1980

  Hartley

  Isle of Skye

  Unknown

  Marchington

  Glen-Pean

  Cowden Range

  Colbeck Transmitter Masts

  Colchester

  Sheffield area

  Area between Bolton and Southport

  Area between Nottingham and Birmingham

  Area between Birmingham and London

  North London

  Brough area

  Bewdley

  Banbury

  1981

  Ashpark

  Cranfield airfield

  Lichfield

  Plaish

  3–7 August

  Desborough

  Cranfield airfield

  Street

  1982

  Pontesbury

  Shrewsbury

  Otterburn Range

  Spadeadam Range

  East Riding General Hospital

  Witnash

  1983

  Windermere

  Ullswater

  Burton-Constable

  Hall

  Yaxley

  Stone, Staffordshire

  25–29 July

  Northants

  Corby

  1984

  30 May-11 June

  Harrogate

  22–24 May

  Watton

  Oundle

  626
  9–10 May

  Aberystwyth

  5–7 June

  Area between Birmingham and Thames Valley

  6–7 September

  Pickering

  12–14 September

  Newark on Trent

  17–20 September

  Stone

  18–20 September

  Saltford

  25–27 September

  Deans Hangar

  1985

  30–31 January

  Rugby

  19–21 February

  Market Harborough

  26–27 February

  Newport, Gwent

  5–6 March

  St. Crispin Hospital, Northants

  12–13 March

  Rugby

  26–27 March

  Gorseinon

  17 April

  Brynamman, Wales

  30 April-2 May

  Sibson Airfield

  Area between Cambridge and Newmarket

  Area between RAF Leeming and Teesside

  Holbeach

  14–16 May

  Kelso

  Jedburgh

  Duns

  30 May

  Lutterworth

  14 June

  Filey, Yorkshire

  Area between Felixstowe and Ipswich

  Area between Coningsby and Boston

  Area between Cambridge and Newmarket

  21–23 October

  Teesside

  Holbeach

  Newmarket

  5–6 December

  Alnwick

  1986

  14–16 January

  Broughton

  Burton upon Stather

  Burringham

  21–22 January

  Newport, Humberside

  27–31 January

  Carlisle

  Bowness on Windermere

  Hexham

  Catterick

  7–10 April

  Windermere

  Carlisle

  Penrith

  Morpeth

  Hexham

  Alnwick

  22–24 April

  Area between Leeming and Teesside

  Area between Diss and Ipswich

  6 June

  Pocklington glider site

  24–26 June

  Weethley Hamlet

  21–22 July

  Leeds

  627

  Garforth

  21–24 July

  Builth Wells

  21–24 July

  Exmoor

  30–31 July

  Chirnside

  4–8 August

  Keswick

  Barnard Castle

  5–8 August

  Carlisle

  Lowther Castle

  Catterick

  Richmond

  Withernsea

  26–28 August

  Redditch

  23–25 September

  West Ayton

  24–26 September

  Whitnash

  8–9 October

  Grimsby

  Cleethorpes

  8 October

  East Riding Hospital

  9 October

  Area between Leeming and Teesside

  29 October

  Carperby

  19–20 November

  Rothwell

  Late 1986/early 1987

  Ashbourne

  1987

  16–18 March

  Banham Zoo

  7–9 April

  Penrith

  Morpeth

  Amble

  9 April

  Alnwick

  14–15 April

  Pickering

  Jed burgh

  1 June

  Peterborough

  7–8 July

  Redmile

  21–24 July

  Dumfries and Galloway

  21–24 July

  Builth Wells

  4–6 August

  Grindleford Bridge

  4–6 August

  Alnwick

  5 August

  Haltwhistle

  19–20 August

  Haxby

  11–12 August

  Leighton Hall, Carnforth

  13–14 August

  Castle Farm, Devon

  15–17 September

  Scarborough

  21–25 September

  Ettrick

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions since 1974 disciplinary proceedings have been instituted against pilots found to have been infringing low-flying regulations by Royal Air 628
  Force police involved in covert monitoring in low-flying areas, but where no complaints were received from the public.

  Mr. Freeman
  [pursuant to his reply, 4 December 1987, c. 736–37]: Responsibility for disciplinary action against pilots found to have been infringing low-flying regulations by Royal Air Force police lies with the commanding officer at the appropriate RAF" station. Central records of the action taken by commanding officers in such cases are not kept.

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Royal Air Force police, expressed as full-time equivalent staff, are currently assigned to covert field monitoring of low-flying aircraft; and what changes have taken place in these staffing levels since 1977.

  Mr. Freeman
  [pursuant to his reply, 4 December 1987, c. 736–37]: Total hours of all RAF police personnel devoted to covert field monitoring of low-flying aircraft currently amounts to the equivalent of approximately one third to one half of a single full-time RAF policemen's job. Figures for 1977 are not available, but there has been a general increase in the number of covert observations carried out since 1979. We are currently reviewing the numbers of personnel devoted to covert and non-covert monitoring.

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the practice of covert monitoring of low-flying by Royal Air Force police was introduced.

  Mr. Freeman
  [pursuant to his reply, 4 December 1987, c. 736–37]: Covert monitoring of low-flying aircraft has been carried out by the RAF police at least since 1977.

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the methods used by Royal Air Force police involved in covert monitoring of low-flying activity to assess height and speed of low-flying aircraft.

  Mr. Freeman
  [pursuant to his reply, 4 December 1987, c. 736–37]: Covert monitoring of low-flying aircraft is carried out visually following the survey of a suitable site noting relative heights and distances of local landmarks. Teams of two RAF police are normally made up one experienced observer and one in training.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Third World Debt
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he next plans to meet representatives of the British banks to discuss Third world debt, and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Chalker
  My right hon. and learned Friend regularly meets representatives of major British banks; Third world debt is often discussed. We remain very concerned about the debt problem, but debt owed to commercial banks is a matter for negotiation between the banks and debtor Governments.

  Conventions and Protocols
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many conventions and
  629
  protocols of the Council of Europe have been signed on behalf of the United Kingdom; how many have been ratified; and if he will list in the Official Report those conventions and protocols which have been signed but not ratified.

  Mrs. Chalker
  We have signed and ratified 73 conventions and protocols of the Council of Europe. Nine conventions and protocols have been signed but not yet ratified. These are:

  1. Protocol 4 to the Convention of Human Rights securing certain other Rights and Freedoms.

  2. European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

  3. European Convention on the Recognition of the Legal Personality of Non-Governmental Organisations.

  4. European Convention on the Control of the Acquisition and Possession of Firearms by Individuals.

  5. European Convention on the Compensation of Victims of Violent Crimes.

  6. Convention Relating to Stops on Bearer Securities in International Circulation.

  7. Convention on the Establishment of a Scheme of Registration of Wills.

  8. European Convention for the Protection of Animals for Slaughter.

  9. European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals used for Experimental Purposes.

  Bananas
  Mr. Wells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make it his policy to continue to protect the access to the British market of those countries which are traditional suppliers of bananas; if he will support the continuation of the banana protocol to the Lomé III convention in the negotiations with the EEC for Lomé IV; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  We remain committed to provide preferential access for bananas from the United Kingdom's traditional suppliers. Following a recent review of banana policy, we have also decided that the United Kingdom market should be enabled to expand gradually, with a guaranteed minimum of licences to import dollar area bananas allocated to small independent importers. This is consistent with our general objectives of promoting competition and consumer choice. The United Kingdom will fight hard in the negotiations for Lomé IV to ensure that preferential access for these traditional supplies from Jamaica and the Windward Islands is maintained.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proportion of his Department's programme is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Eggar
  The information requested is not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  South Africa (EC Companies)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information he has about cases of companies in the European Community seeking to sell to the Republic of South Africa submarine 630
  propulsion technology; and if he will make a statement on what steps Her Majesty's Government are taking to prevent this.

  Mrs. Chalker
  It is not our practice to take up with other Governments allegations of breaches of the United Nations arms embargo on South Africa. This is properly a matter for the Security Council committee established under Security Council resolution 421 of 1977.

  Israel (Non-proliferation Treaty)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his reply to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy,Official Report, 25 March, columns 241–42, when he last made a specific representation to the Israeli Government to sign the non-proliferation treaty.

  Mr. Mellor
  My right hon. and learned Friend had a recent opportunity to raise the non-proliferation treaty with the Israeli Government. But, at his request the Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office did so on 22 October 1987 with the political director of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

  Israel (Mordecai Vanunu)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his reply to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy,Official Report, 25 March, column 242, if he will now make it his policy, in the light of the 18-year prison sentence passed on Mordecai Vanunu on 27 March, to make representations to the Israeli Government for a reduction in sentence on human rights grounds.

  Mr. Mellor
  No.

  South Africa (Rugby Tour)
  Mr. Pendry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the implications for relations with the Commonwealth of the planned World XV rugby tour to South Africa; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made clear, we stand by the statement made by Commonwealth Heads of Government in June 1977 — the so-called Gleneagles Agreement—which discourages sporting contacts with South Africa.

  Central American Parliament
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assistance will be provided by Her Majesty's Government in the setting up of the Central American Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  At the San Jose IV meeting in Hamburg we and our European partners agreed to provide assistance in the holding of elections to the Central American Parliament. The form of the assistance is to be defined in discussion between the European Community and the Central American Governments.

  Guatemala Agreement
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the measures being taken by Her Majesty's Government to support the Guatemala agreement.

  Mr. Eggar
  We and our European partners have on a number of occasions expressed our support for the agreement and urged the Central American Governments to fulfil their commitments under the agreement. We have also appealed to countries with links and interests in the region to lend constructive support for the peace efforts of the Central American countries. We have also condemned all acts of violence which might jeopardise the peace process.

  Hong Kong (Vietnamese Refugees)
  Mr. Churchill
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many families among Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong have requested to be repatriated to Vietnam, in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Eggar
  The numbers of Vietnamese who have asked to be repatriated to Vietnam in each of the last 10

  The table below gives details of departures from Hong Kong since 1979 for the United Kingdom and all other countries.

  1975–79

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988 up to 15 March

  Argentina

  29

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Australia

  1,052

  90

  500

  414

  915

  736

  557

  459

  501

  92

  Austria

  86

  318

  14

  —

  —

  —

  6

  —

  3

  —

  Belgium

  125

  29

  6

  2

  2

  11

  1

  —

  42

  —

  Bermuda

  —

  7

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Canada

  5,187

  6,548

  2,070

  1,088

  536

  1,008

  1,302

  975

  766

  255

  China

  1

  33

  1

  2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Denmark

  264

  321

  220

  180

  47

  49

  18

  45

  5

  1

  Finland

  —

  —

  —

  —

  57

  54

  —

  69

  30

  —

  France

  526

  188

  362

  218

  181

  65

  90

  47

  61

  —

  Greece

  —

  42

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3

  —

  Hong Kong

  180

  109

  93

  52

  12

  18

  41

  70

  45

  4

  Ireland

  109

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Israel

  38

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Italy

  113

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Ivory Coast

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Japan

  16

  36

  68

  11

  1

  34

  52

  5

  23

  —

  Luxembourg

  —

  5

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  26

  —

  Netherlands

  261

  96

  102

  110

  26

  18

  13

  82

  71

  —

  New Caledonia

  32

  4

  12

  21

  8

  3

  —

  —

  —

  —

  New Zealand

  84

  217

  2

  99

  16

  20

  23

  26

  51

  5

  Norway

  57

  180

  187

  78

  6

  27

  39

  114

  33

  —

  Spain

  1

  250

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Sweden

  8

  95

  2

  13

  207

  11

  —

  101

  44

  —

  Switzerland

  91

  414

  97

  14

  3

  9

  —

  22

  8

  2

  Taiwan

  1

  4

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  United Kingdom

  3,988

  6,076

  1,775

  241

  101

  88

  44

  474

  156

  55

  USA

  16,583

  21,053

  12,222

  1,657

  2,065

  1,541

  1,721

  1,323

  333

  122

  Vanuatu

  8

  2

  —

  —

  2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Vietnam

  8

  —

  2

  2

  2

  —

  —

  —

  1

  —

  West Germany

  1,678

  537

  81

  45

  13

  —

  45

  44

  5

  2

  Panama
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what advice is currently being given to British citizens resident in, and travelling to, Panama.
  632
  years are as follows: six in 1978; two in 1979; two in 1980; two in 1981; four in 1982; three in 1984; one in 1985; one in 1987 and 21 in 1988. Fifteen have been successfully repatriated, 10 withdrew their applications and 17 applications are still being processed by UNHCR. According to Hong Kong Government records there has been only one family application, consisting of a husband and wife and their two children.

  Mr. Churchill
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many Vietnamese refugees have(a) sought sanctuary in Hong Kong and (b) subsequently been accepted for settlement (i) in the United Kingdom and (ii) in any other non-Communist country in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Eggar
  (a) The Hong Kong Government have accepted all Vietnamese arriving in Hong Kong in boats and has turned none away. The figures for those accepted since 1979 are: 1979 — 68,748; 1980 — 6,788; 1981—8,470; 1982—7,836; 1983—3,651; 1984—2,230; 1985—1,112; 1986—2,055; 1987—3,395; 1988 up to 15 March—716.

  (b) The table gives details of departures from Hong Kong since 1979 for the United Kingdom and all other countries:

  Mr. Eggar
  Our current advice is that there is no danger to British citizens resident in Panama. Visitors are advised not to travel to Panama until further notice unless on urgent business. Those who must travel should bring
  633
  sufficient cash in US dollars in small denominations to cover all expenses incurred during their stay. They should contact the embassy on arrival.

  Council of Ministers (Forthcoming Business)
  Sir Peter Blaker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will publish in the Official Report a statement of forthcoming business in the European Community Council of Ministers.

  Mrs. Chalker
  The usual forecast was deposited in the House earlier today. At present five meetings of the Council of Ministers are planned for April.

  The Research Council will meet on 11 April. The provisional agenda anticipates the formal adoption of the Esprit II programme (1988–1991) and the adoption of the drive, biotechnology, science, bureau of Community reference (BCR) and Delta programmes as 'A' points. Common positions on the fusion programme and the 1988–91 programme of the joint research centre (JRC) will also be discussed. The German presidency will be presenting, for first discussion, papers on the relation between EC and Eureka programmes and the contribution of research programmes to Community norms/standards.

  The Economic and Finance Council meets on 18 April to consider the Commission's proposals on the liberalisation of capital movements, indirect tax approximation and the discussions on budgetary discipline with the European Parliament.

  The Agriculture Council will meet on 18–19 April to discuss the 1988 price-fixing measures, and proposals on quick frozen foods, additives, materials and articles in contact with food, harmonisation of meat charges and trade in meat with third countries.

  The Foreign Affairs Council meets on 25–26 April. Discussions are expected to include follow-up action to the European Council conclusions on financing the Community; EC relations with Japan; a review of progress in the GATT Uruguay round negotiations; preparations for the EC/Turkey Association Council; the 1988 guidelines for the Community's programme of aid to developing countries in Asia and Latin America; and progress made in negotiations with Hungary on a trade and co-operation agreement.

  The Budget Council will meet on 28–29 April to discuss the European Parliament's amendments and modifications to the 1988 draft budget.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Food Labelling
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has any further proposals for the declaration of nutritional information on food products.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  We are pressing manufacturers and retailers to adopt the standard approach to voluntary nutrition declarations set out in the guidelines we issued on 21 January. Proposals for legislation to set out the form in which voluntary declarations must be given, will be considered once we have experience of the operation of the system and European Community intentions on nutrition labelling are clearer.

  Less-favoured Areas
  Mr. Speller
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when the tribunals deciding upon the final less-favoured area lines will complete their deliberations; and how long after this date he expects to make the decisions public.

  Mr. Gummer
  I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to the appeal panels which were set up to hear appeals from farmers whose land is currently excluded from the less-favoured areas. The panels do not themselves fix the LFA line, but advise Ministers on whether the land concerned seems likely to meet EC physical criteria for LFA designation. They have now completed their work in England and all the farmers concerned have been notified of the outcome.

  Country Landowners Association
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met the president of the Country Landowners Association; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. Gummer
  I meet Mr. Gordon Lee-Steere frequently to discuss agricultural matters.

  Forestry Commission
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met the chairman of the Forestry Commission; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I meet the chairman of the Forestry Commission from time to time to discuss a wide range of forestry matters.

  Torry Research Station, Aberdeen
  Mr. Wray
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what research is being undertaken by staff at the Torry research station, Aberdeen, into the processing of fish.

  Mr. Gummer
  The main areas of research concern the preservation of fish, the safety of fish products for the consumer and the utilisation of fish and fish products.

  Mr. Buchan
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the number of people employed in the Torry research station, Aberdeen; and if he will break that number down by occupational category.

  Mr. Gummer
  The number of staff currently employed at Torry research station is 115, of which 64 are scientific, professional and technical staff, 27 are in industrial worker grades and 24 are administration group staff.

  Mr. Graham
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has any plans to visit the Torry research station in Aberdeen within the near future.

  Mr. Gummer
  My right hon. Friend has at present no plans to do so; I visited Torry research station in 1986 and hope to do so again this year.

  EC Agricultural Budget
  Mr. Dykes
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is now satisfied with the recently agreed control mechanism for European Economic Community agricultural budget expenditure.
  635
  Mr. MacGregor
  I am satisfied that it is as good as we could possibly have got it in the recent negotiations.

  Sheepmeat
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received in the current year on the future of the European sheepmeat regime.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  We have received a number of representations on many aspects of the Commission's proposals for reform of the sheepmeat regime.

  Poultry and Eggs
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to assist the United Kingdom poultry and egg industry; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  We shall continue to assist the eggs and poultry industry by promoting efficiency and ensuring that it trades under conditions of fair competition.

  Rivers (Pollution)
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to reduce pollution in rivers arising from agricultural activities.

  Mr. Gummer
  My Department warns farmers of the dangers of polluting rivers and the severe fines which successful prosecution brings with it. I myself reinforced these views at a recent conference on silage effluent and my Department continues to support water authority action to encourage farmers to avoid pollution. Grants for tanks to handle silage and slurry effluent are available at the rate of 60 per cent. in the less-favoured areas and 30 per cent. elsewhere.

  Milk Quotas
  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the latest position on the operation of milk quotas.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Minister to my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton (Mr. Nicholson).

  Pigs
  Mr. Geraint Howells
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied with the present state of the pig industry; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Cran
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he next intends to meet the National Farmers Union and other representatives from the pig industry to discuss EEC import subsidies.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  I refer the hon. Member and my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West (Sir A. Grant) today.

  Agricultural Policy
  Mr. Goodlad
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he next expects to meet his opposite number in the EEC to discuss agricultural policy.

  Mr. MacGregor
  The next meeting of Agricultural Ministers is scheduled for 18–19 April.

  Mr. Jim Marshall
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had with the National Farmers Union about reforming the common agricultural policy.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough and Horncastle (Mr. Leigh).

  Food Aid
  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had with organisations eligible to operate the EC free food scheme.

  Mr. Gummer
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark) on 30 March.

  Ms. Harman
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about progress in implementing the EC free food scheme.

  Sir John Biggs-Davison
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the arrangements for the distribution of surplus EC food in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Gummer
  I refer the hon. Member and my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark) on 30 March and to the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, Central (Mr. Cousins) today.

  Monetary Compensatory Allowances
  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will increase beef cow hill land compensatory allowances; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The rates of hill livestock compensatory allowances to apply this year were announced in the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Torridge and Devon, West (Miss Nicholson) on 9 December 1987 at column 157. The allowances for 1989 will be considered later this year following the autumn review or the economic conditions in the hill and upland areas.

  Tenant Farmers Association
  Mr. Patnick
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met the chairman of the Tenant Farmers Association; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. Gummer
  I saw him on 4 March when were both at a conference discussing diversification and the tenant farmer. We are also in regular contact with tenant farmers and their representatives to discuss matters of mutual interest.

  Wool Board
  Mr. Knapman
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met the chairman of the Wool Board; and what matters were discussed.
  637
  Mr. Donald Thompson
  My right hon. Friend, the Minister, last met the chairman of the Wool Board on 1 February 1988 to discuss the prospects for the 1988 clip year.

  Green Pound
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received on the green pound from the National Farmers Union and Farmers Union of Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I have received representations from both these organisations.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many representations he has received in the current year on the value of the green pound.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Rochford (Dr. Clark).

  Milk Marketing Board
  Mr. John Carlisle
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met the chairman of the Milk Marketing Board; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  My right hon. Friend last met the chairman of the Milk Marketing Board on 1 March when a number of issues of current concern to the dairy industry were discussed.

  Freezer Trawlers
  Mr. Dunnachie
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the current number of United Kingdom registered freezer trawlers; what are the fishing grounds within which they operate; and which species they are allowed to catch.

  Mr. Gummer
  Fishing vessels are not required to state their method of operation when registering. However, there are currently five vessels which are licensed by United Kingdom fisheries departments as freezer trawlers; of these, three are licensed for the full range of stocks in Community waters for which the United Kingdom has quotas. The two remaining vessels are licensed for demersal species only. Three of the five vessels also have access to licences which enable them to fish in external waters for species for which the Community has quotas.

  Farm Woodland Scheme
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has for reducing the minimum acreage to qualify for the farm woodland scheme.

  Mr. Gummer
  None.

  Pollution
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he intends to introduce special help for farmers or take any other measures to combat the pollution caused by modern farming methods.
  638
  Mr. Gummer
  My Department continues to encourage farmers, through the provision of assistance and advice, to adopt practices which minimise the risk of pollution. These measures are kept under continuous review to ensure they remain effective in combating pollution.

  Set-aside Scheme
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the total estimated expenditure on set-aside payments for(a) 1988, (b) 1989 and (c) 1990; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. MacGregor
  Public expenditure planning totals were increased in the last survey by £16 million for 1989–90 and £22 million for 1990–91 to cover set-aside and extensification in the United Kingdom.

  Bass
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why the net sizes for the bass regulations are posed so as to exclude the standard channel mesh size.

  Mr. Gummer
  The measures recently proposed for the management of the bass fishery are intended to protect juvenile bass and safeguard recruitment to spawning stocks. They include mesh size restrictions for gill and other specified nets, but for this purpose we do not consider it necessary to apply these restrictions to trawls, Danish seines or similar towed nets used in the English Channel for which Council regulation (EEC) No. 2968/87 prescribes a minimum mesh size of 75mm, increasing to 80mm from 1 January 1989.

  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how he intends to ensure that the proposed bass regulations prevent the French from fishing spawning stock in mid-Channel; and what information he has on the amount taken from the spawning stock by French fishermen.

  Mr. Gummer
  As I explained on 21 March in reply to an earlier question from my hon. Friend at column 14, I have no plans to prevent fishing for adult bass. I have no recent figures of French bass catches in the Channel, but I am advised that statistics published in France show landings of bass from the Channel area up to 1983 as between 600 and 800 tonnes a year. This includes bass from French stock caught both in French inshore waters and in mid-Channel.

  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many French fishing boats were engaged in bass fishing in the English Channel last season.

  Mr. Gummer
  This information is not held by my Department.

  Agriculture Council
  Ms. Mowlam
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the outcome of the Agriculture Council meeting held at the end of March.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 30 March to my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, North-East (Mr. Moss).

  Forestry
  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations were held between his Ministry and timber and land-owning interests concerning the proposed new grant arrangements for forestry; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies).

  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he proposes to revise his estimate of annual new planting of trees in England and Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  I intend that the combination of the new woodland grant scheme and the proposed farm woodland scheme will result in a significant increase in new planting in England and Wales.

  Farming Unions
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met representatives of the farming unions; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave earlier today to my hon. Friends the Members for Fylde (Mr. Jack) and for Gainsborough and Horncastle (Mr. Leigh).

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proportion of the agriculture, fisheries and food programme is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  Expenditure in the inner cities under this programme is not separately recorded.

  Salmon Farming
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the representations he has received from Mr. Chris Tyderman of the World Wildlife Fund on the dangers of salmon farming to wild salmon returning to rivers for spawning.

  Mr. Gummer
  I have received no such representations from the World Wildlife Fund (UK).

  Arctic Foxes
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his Department's policy towards the farming of arctic foxes within Great Britain; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 8 March at column 130–31 to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) on the subject of arctic foxes.

  Food Irradiation
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent representations he has received about the irradiation of foodstuffs; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  I am still receiving some representations about the safety of food irradiation and 640
  the need for controls over the use of the technique. The Government have, of course, already made it clear that we need to be satisfied as to effective controls before there could be any question of lifting the present general prohibition — over which there would in addition be further consultation.

  Common Agricultural Policy
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his latest estimate of the amount per week which the common agricultural policy adds to the average family food bill in the United Kingdom; and if the sums spent on exporting food are additional to this amount.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  The magnitude of the costs of the CAP to consumers and taxpayers depends on the nature of the alternative policy envisaged. The Government's aim is to achieve lower levels of support worldwide thereby reducing the costs borne by consumers and taxpayers.

  Free Food
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent discussions he has had within the European Community about operating the free food scheme.

  Mr. Gummer
  The Government have requested the Commission to allocate to us a sum equivalent to £10£4 million in 1988 which the Commission has indicated is the maximum available for the United Kingdom. I await the response of the Commission.

  Pig Producers
  Sir Anthony Grant
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further steps he proposes to take to help British pig producers; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  We continue to be in close touch with the representatives of the pig producers. The market appears to have stabilised following the support measures which were taken earlier. Cereal prices continue to show a downward trend. We accept the objective of removing the MCAs from the pigmeat sector and will be actively pursuing this.

  Farm Woodlands
  Mr. Maxton
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what effects the new grant arrangements for forestry will have on his proposals for farm woodlands; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The farm woodland scheme will be linked to the Forestry Commission's new woodland grant scheme. However, we have decided that farm woodland scheme planting will only attract increased planting grants for broadleaves. These will apply to both pure broadleaf planting and the broadleaf component of other woodlands and will increase the incentive to mixed and broadleaved planting under the scheme. The planting grants for conifers will remain unchanged.

  Sheep (Radioactivity)
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many sheep have been monitored for radioactivity in each month since October 1987 in(a) each county of England and (b) the areas of the former

  Sheep monitored in England 1 November 1987 to 18 March 1988

  County1

  November 1987

  December 1987

  January 1988

  February 1988

  March 1988

  Total

  Cheshire

  25

  —

  —

  —

  —

  25

  Cumbria

  16,759

  3,974

  3,508

  3,177

  1,620

  29,038

  Devon

  77

  —

  —

  —

  —

  77

  Durham

  180

  —

  —

  —

  —

  180

  Lancashire

  101

  —

  40

  —

  —

  141

  Northumberland

  438

  —

  —

  229

  —

  667

  Shropshire

  50

  —

  —

  —

  —

  50

  Somerset

  79

  —

  —

  —

  —

  79

  Yorkshire (North)

  5,112

  —

  —

  —

  —

  5,112

  Yorkshire (West)

  200

  —

  —

  —

  —

  200

  Total

  23,021

  3,974

  3,548

  3,406

  1,620

  35,569

  1 No sheep have been monitored in counties not included in this list.

SCOTLAND

  Rating Reform
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if the police, immigration officials or staff working in Department of Health and Social Security fraud units will be able to inspect names and addresses found in the community charge register.

  Mr. Lang
  Under section 20(2)(a) of the Abolition of Domestic Rates Etc. (Scotland) Act 1987 certain parts of the community charges register, including addresses and names, will be made available for public inspection.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) if he will make it his policy to include in the next edition of his recent publication "You and the Community Charge" information to the effect that the name and address of individuals who appear on the community charge register may be sold without their knowledge or consent;

  (2) if he will make it his policy to include in the next edition of his recent publication "You and the Community Charge" information to the effect that the name and address of individuals who appear on the community charge register may be used by the police, Inland Revenue or Department of Health and Social Security specialist squads.

  Mr. Lang
  My right hon. and learned Friend has at present no plans to issue a further edition of the booklet "You and the Community Charge". As to his policies in respect of the matters referred to, I refer the hon. Member to my replies of 9 February at column 63 and of 21 March at columns 14–15.

  AIDS
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) if he will make a statement on current and future plans to prevent the spread of HIV in Scottish prisons;

  (2) what is the latest number of HIV-positive prisoners in Scottish prisons.
  642
  metropolitian counties of west midlands, Greater Manchester, Greater London, Tyne and Wear, West Yorkshire and South Yorkshire.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]: The information requested is set out in the table:

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  As my right hon. and learned Friend made clear in his statement on 29 March 1988, the Government take the problems of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) and transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection very seriously. Guidance has been issued to the Scottish prison service informing staff of the nature, the effects and the modes of transmission of HIV infection and the hygiene and other precautions necessary to prevent transmission in prison.

  The guidance makes it clear that there are no medical reasons for segregating inmates who are known to have HIV infection or for limiting the normal range of work or recreational activities in which they may engage. This guidance has been supplemented by local training using audio-visual material.

  Medical staff have been issued with specialist guidance on testing and counselling. Testing is available on request to any inmate who may be risk. In the absence of compelling medical indications, testing would not be undertaken without prior explanation and consent or in the absence of suitable arrangements for counselling and support when the result is known. Selected nurse officers are being given training to improve their counselling techniques.

  The public education campaign to draw the dangers to the attention of those at risk has been extended into prisons and will be continued as further suitable material becomes available. It will continue to be Government policy to seek to restrict situations likely to high risk of transmission of HIV infection in prison. The management of symptomless carriers and the treatment of inmates who are ill as a result of HIV infection will share the aims and principles which are applied to care in the community. Specialist advice or support is sought as required from the National Health Service through the normal system for referral.

  Full annual returns for 1987 are not yet available, but the number of inmates so far confirmed as HIV positive by medical officers for penal establishments, or who have indicated that they have been positively tested prior to coming into custody, is 73.
  643
  It is impossible to estimate numbers who may have been infected prior to reception into custody but have not yet been tested either in the community or in custody.

  Forestry Commission
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will place in the Library a copy of the Forestry Commission's mapped assessment of the suitability of land in the flow country of Caithness and Sutherland for afforestation.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I assume that the hon. Member is referring to one of a set of indicative overlays prepared by the Forestry Commission for use by a working group of officials. It related to technical plantability only and did not show the major constraints on planting, such as the need to protect areas of high conservation value.

  I will arrange for a map, prepared from that overlay, to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Paper Board and Timber Mills
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list in the Official Report information available to him on the paper board and timber mills reliant on home-produced timber since 1980, the amount of public subsidy, assistance, grant or other inducement given to encourage the establishment of those plants and the estimated cost to public funds of each job created.

  Mr. Lang
  Information in the form requested is not available. However, in 1985 plants classified to the pulp, paper and timber industries* employed some 10,600 people in Scotland with sales of around £533 million. Since 1980, offers of regional selective assistance (RSA) made to firms classified to these industries have amounted to £17·5 million, associated with the creation of 1,420 jobs and the safeguarding of a further 3,140 jobs. Since the inception of the revised regional development grant scheme (RDG2), approvals to companies in the paper board and timber industries have totalled £6–4 million, and been associated with the creation of 840 jobs. It should be noted that some firms may receive both RSA and RDG2 and that where this occurs associated jobs may appear twice in the above figures.

  * Pulp, paper and timber industries are defined as plants classified to the following Activity Headings on the 1980 Standard Industrial Classification.
  4610 Sawmilling, planing, etc. of wood.
  4620 Manufacture of semi-finished wood products and further processing and treatment of wood.
  4710 Pulp, paper and board.

  Strip Searches
  Mrs. Fyfe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many body searches and strip searches were carried out in Cornton vale prison in 1986 and 1987; and what are the comparable figures for such searches in other prisons in Scotland.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The number of body and strip searches carried out at Cornton vale institution in 1986 was 3,270 and in 1987 it was 2,651 (the statistics kept do not differentiate between body and strip searches). Statistics are not kept on the number of strip or body searches carried out at other prisons.

  Forestry
  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has any plans to give new grants to assist forestry.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  As announced by my right hon. and learned Friend on 23 March, at columns 138–9 a new woodland grant scheme is to be introduced on 5 April 1988.

  North Sea Oil
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if it is his intention to place in the Library copies of the cards which give the latest readings of suspended wellhead positions on the United Kingdom continental shelf; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Cards providing the location of' suspended wellheads on the United Kingdom shelf are published on a half yearly basis by the fisheries Departments from data supplied by the Department of Energy and the Sea Fish Industry Authority. The cards are readily available and are distributed free of charge to fisheries organisations, local fishery offices and other interested parties at home and abroad, and I am arranging for copies to be placed in the Library.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what proportion of his Department's budget is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Lang
  I refer the hon. Member to my right hon. and learned Friend's statement in the House on 29 March about urban renewal measures in Scotland.

  Department of Agriculture and Fisheries
  Mr. Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will detail the current annual expenditure involved in the provision of(a) the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Scotland, area office in Inverness and (b) the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Scotland, area sub-office in Dingwall; if he will give his estimate of the anticipated annual savings which will accrue from the closure of the latter; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The current annual expenditure, including the cost of administration support staff, involved in the provision of:(a) the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland Area office in Inverness is £205,247 and (b) the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland Area sub-office in Dingwall is £35,710. The anticipated annual savings resulting from the closure of the latter is estimated to be £22,000.

  Mr. Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will provide a breakdown of the number of farmers and crofters within the district covered by the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Scotland, area sub-office in Dingwall; how many obtain their information and services from the area office in Inverness; what information and services are sought from Inverness rather than Dingwall; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  A total of 1,174 farmers and crofters are located within the district presently covered by
  645
  the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland area sub-office in Dingwall. All of those farmers and crofters within that district requiring information and services in relation to certain schemes obtain these from the area office in Inverness. Information and services sought from Inverness include advice and guidance from surveying staff in relation to capital grant schemes, crofting counties agricultural grant schemes, crofters building grants and loans schemes, procurement of labels under the seed potato labelling scheme, and veterinary services in relation to animal heath schemes.

  Mr. Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received concerning the proposed closure of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Scotland, area sub-office in Dingwall; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Representations concerning the closure of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland area sub-office in Dingwall have been received from the Dingwall community council and also from the Dingwall and district chamber of commerce.

  Mr. Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his policy towards the retention of Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Scotland, area sub-offices; if he will list all such offices in the Official Report; whether he is considering any Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Scotland, territorial areas for further rationalisation; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Retention of Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland area sub-offices depends on the location of the individual area sub-offices in relation to the area offices themselves and on the extent to which these offices can be justified for the maintenance of an economical and efficient service. Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland area sub-offices are presently located at:

  Dingwall

  Lerwick

  Lairg

  Stornoway

  Benbecula

  Elgin

  Cupar

  Stirling

  The operational need for the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland area offices and sub-offices is kept under review on a continuing basis.

  Mr. Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the nature and extent of public consultation which took place prior to his decision to close the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Scotland, area sub-office in Dingwall; which representative public bodies were involved and what was the nature of any submissions made by them; what was the time between the commencement of such consultations and the announcement of his decision; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The decision to close the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland area sub-office in Dingwall was made in the light of the need to make the most economical use of resources without impairing the efficiency of the service provided to the agricultural community. My noble Friend, the Minister of State, had regard to the good communications between Dingwall and Inverness and to the fact that, as well as certain services provided direct from the area office of the 646
  Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, the animal health divisional office and the college advisory services for the Dingwall area are already provided from Inverness. No public consultations were carried out at this time.

  Mink Farms
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what is the size and location of each mink farm currently operating in Scotland;

  (2) how many licences are current for the operation of mink farms in Scotland; what the figure was 12 months ago; and if he will give similar information for the number of mink farms actually in operation.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  As at 31 March 1988 there were six licences for the farming of mink covering eight farms in force in Scotland. All of these farms are currently operational. As at 31 March 1987 seven licences were in force covering eight farms.

  Farms currently in operation are located in the undernoted regions of Scotland:

  Region

  Number

  Central

  1

  Grampian

  2

  Lothian

  1

  Strathclyde

  12

  Tayside

  2

  1 The renewal of a licence for one of these farms is currently under consideration following a change of ownership.

  Two of these farms carry stocks of over 5,000 mink; the remainder carry stocks of less than 5,000.

  Police Inquiries (Guidelines)
  Mr. Bill Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give details of the guidelines which are issued to members of local police committees on the action to be taken by individual members when they or their spouses are the subject of police inquiries into matters which may lead to criminal charges being made.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  No such guidelines addressed specifically to members of police authorities have been issued by the Scottish Office. I shall send my hon. Friend a copy of the national code of local government conduct.

  NHS (Seminar)
  Mr. Harry Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total cost to public funds of the seminar arranged by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Scottish Office, the hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth) and held on 2 October 1987, dealing with privatisation in the National Health Service in Scotland.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The cost of the seminar —which discussed competitive tendering not privatisation —was £263·93.

  Michael Forsyth Ltd.
  Mr. Harry Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make it his policy to refrain from
  647
  dealings with the company Michael Forsyth Limited so long as it continues to trade under the name of a Minister in his Department; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Malcolm Rifkind
  No. Government dealings with private companies are carried out in accordance with rules that are generally well understood; I do not propose to add to these rules any proposition about the name under which a company chooses to trade. The Minister for education and health no longer has an interest in Michael Forsyth Limited.

  Patient Administration (Computerisation)
  Mr. Allan Stewart
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what progress has been made regarding the computerisation of hospital patient administration systems and their introduction by health boards.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Contracts were signed today by the Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service with Honywell Bull Ltd. and McDonnell Douglas Information Systems Ltd. for the provision of systems and hardware for the following hospitals.

  Company and hospital

  Health board

  McDonnell Douglas

  Huntlyburn

  Borders

  Dunfermline and West Fife

  Fife

  Raigmore

  Highland

  Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh

  Lothian

  Western General, Edinburgh

  Lothian

  Bangour General

  Lothian

  Honeywell Bull Ltd

  Royal Alexandra, Paisley

  Argyll and Clyde

  Vale of Leven

  Argyll and Clyde

  Ayrshire Central

  Ayrshire and Arran

  Crosshouse

  Ayrshire and Arran

  Dumfries Royal Infirmary

  Dumfries and Galloway

  Falkirk and Stirling Royal Infirmaries

  Forth Valley

  Aberdeen Royal Infirmary

  Grampian

  Law

  Lanarkshire

  Ninewells

  Tayside

  Lewis

  Western Isles

  The total value of the equipment, software and services provided under these contracts is £8 million.

  Prisons (Alcoholism)
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland to what factors he attributes the fall in the number of male inmates in Scottish prisons treated for alcoholism between 1985 and 1986.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 8 February 1988]: There has been a continuous fall since 1982 in the number of male inmates in Scottish prisons treated for alcoholism. Inmates who are diagnosed by prison medical officers as suffering from alcoholism fall into two groups: those convicted of crimes related to drunkenness and those convicted of other crimes who may, coincidentally, have drink problems. This continuous fall in numbers treated for alcoholism is attributable in some degree to changes in police practice and court sentencing patterns over recent years and in the Aberdeen area, particularly to the establishment, with substantial Government financial support, of Albyn house as a designated place. This has been a major factor in the
  648
  reduction of prosecutions for drunkenness in the Aberdeen area. Thus, in the five-year period between 1981 and 1986, there was a 67 per cent reduction in the number of persons in Scotland proceeded against for drunkenness and a 54 per cent. reduction in the number of persons received into prison either directly or by default following convictions for drunkenness. Between 1985 and 1986 in Scotland there was a particularly marked fall of 57 per cent. in the number of fine defaulters convicted arid fined for drunkenness.

  Consultancy Contracts
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list each management or computer consultancy contract awarded by the Scottish Development Agency in 1987, giving in each case the name of the consultancy firm and the subject of the assignment.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 28 March 1988]: In 1987–88 (to 31 March 1988) the Scottish Development Agency commissioned 113 management or computer consultancies of a value of £5,000 or more. Several hundred consultancies to a lesser value were also commissioned: these were not exclusively management or computer consultancies. A detailed breakdown comprising the names of companies which have successfully tendered for contracts and the subject of these contracts cannot be provided without incurring disproportionate expense.

  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total amount spent by the Scottish Development Agency in 1987 on management and computer consultancy contracts, excluding hardware and software purchases.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The amount spent by the Scottish Development Agency on consultants' fees in 1987–88 (to 31 March 1988) was £6,851,863.

  This includes fees for research and development, advisory services, appraisal arid administration, such as tax and accountancy advice, pension and legal consultancies, as well as management and computer consultancy.

  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list each management or computer consultancy contract awarded by his Department in 1987, giving in each case the name of the consultancy firm and the subject of the assignment.

  Mr. Rifkind
  The information requested is as follows:

  Firm and Subject of Assignment
  J. B. Schofield & Partners—To develop a fully integrated database system for monitoring the design, construction, inspection, and maintenance of highway structures.
  Babtie Shaw & Morton — To develop a computer programme for estimating the cost of alternative designs for new bridges.
  J. M. P. Consultants Ltd. — To develop a system for recording and storing results of materials testing carried out during the construction of new bridges.
  BP International—Development of a Procurement Manual.
  A. Macdonald Associates — Review of Building Regulations: Intelligent Information Systems
  Frank Griffiths Associates Ltd. — Overview of Roads Procurement Procedures.
  IBM—Systems Engineering Services.
  Ashford Associates—Investigation into document storage and retrieval for the Scottish Office ELGIN project.
  Ashford Associates — Evaluation of text processing packages.
  Ashford Associates — Construction of a text storage data base for the Scottish Police College library.

  649
  IBM—Systems Engineering Services.
  MSA — Installation of the MSA Accounts Payable and Receivable packages.
  CIPFA Services — To develop a specification of user requirements to assist local authorities in Scotland with the preparation for the community charge.

SOCIAL SERVICES

  Housing Benefit
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many people of pensionable age in England and Wales were in receipt of housing benefit during 1987;

  (2) how many people of pensionable age in England and Wales were in receipt of housing benefit during 1975, 1979, 1983 and 1986.

  Mr. Portillo
  Table A shows the number of pensioners in receipt of housing benefit in 1979, 1983, 1986 and 1987. Information for 1975 is not available, and from 1983 onwards information can be provided only for Great Britain. These figures refer to rate rebate only to avoid the risk of double-counting.

  Table B indicates the more detailed position of pensioners gaining or losing entitlement as a result of the April 1988 changes. These modelled figures encompass gains and losses in rate rebates, and in rate rebates or allowances.

  Table A

  Numbers of pensioners receiving rate rebates1

  000s

  1975

  n/a

  1979

  22,000

  1983

  34,100

  1986

  33,990

  1987

  44,040

  1988

  53,390

  1 The figures relate to rate rebates only to avoid the risk of double counting. They understate the numbers of recipients by the very small numbers getting rent allowance or rent rebate only.

  2 Figure derived from the Department of the Environment, which had policy responsibility for housing benefit until 1982, and based on a small sample for England and Wales only. This figure excludes those who then received help with rates via supplementary benefit.

  3 Source: DHSS statistical enquiries, Great Britain.

  4 Source: Table 15.14 to the 1988 Public Expenditure White Paper, Great Britain.

  5Estimate derived from DHSS model, based on the Family Expenditure Survey, related to expected caseload in the 1988–89 fiscal year and refers to tax units in which the head or spouse is aged 60 or above.

  The estimated figures for pensioners gaining or losing housing benefit (rate rebate, rent rebate and rent allowance) as a result of the social security reforms are illustrated in the following table:

  Table B

  Thousands

  a.

  (i)Gain from existing entitlement

  970

  (ii)Gain from new entitlement

  20

  b.

  (i)Lose some housing benefit, retain entitlement

  2,570

  (ii)Lose all housing benefit entitlement

  750

  c.

  Total on housing benefit after April 1988

  3,560

  Notes:

  1. Figures relate to expected claimant caseload from April 1988,
  650
  taking the effect of the Budget into account.

  2. Figures denote tax-units, rather than households, in which the claimant or spouse is aged 60 or above.

  3. These tables include in the gains and losses those losing, or gaining less than 50p per week.

  General Practitioners (Charges)
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what is his estimate of the annual yield, excluding administration cost, from requiring all patients to pay £5 for each consultation with a general practitioner;

  (2) what is his estimate of the annual yield, excluding administration costs, from requiring all patients, except the chronically sick, to pay £5 for each consultation with a general practitioner;

  (3) what is his estimate of the annual yield, excluding administration costs, from requiring all patients, except those in receipt of retirement pension, to pay £5 for each consultation with a general practitioner;

  (4) what is his estimate of the annual yield, excluding administration costs, from requiring all patients, except those in receipt of supplementary benefit, to pay £5 for each consultation with a general practitioner;

  (5) what is his estimate of the annual yield, excluding administration costs, from requiring all patients, except the chronically sick and those in receipt of retirement pensions or supplementary benefit, to pay £5 for each consultation with a general practitioner.

  Mr. Newton
  The figures requested are as follows. Broad estimates only are possible, as the Department does not collect any data on a routine basis on consultations with general medical practitioners. The only information which is available is derived from the general household survey which is an annual inquiry based on some 12,000 households. It gives consultation rates by age and sex, but does not identify separately the consultation rates applying to specific groups such as the chronically sick or those in receipt of retirement pension or supplementary benefits; and an assumption has therefore been made that the consultation rates for these groups are the same as for the population as a whole in the relevant age group for each sex. The figures give the estimated annual gross yield on this basis before deduction of administration costs, and assume no change in present consultation patterns.

  Estimated annual yield in England assuming a payment of £5 for each consultation with a general medical practitioner applying to:

  £ million

  All patients

  980

  All patients except the chronically sick1

  670

  All patients except those in receipt of retirement pensions2

  760

  All patients except those in receipt of supplementary benefit3

  840

  All patients except the chronically sick and those in receipt of retirement pensions and supplementary benefit1 2 3 4

  470

  Notes:

  1 The chronically sick are defined as those reporting a long-standing illness in the General Household Survey.

  2 Those receiving retirement pensions are assumed to be all men aged 65 and over, and all women aged 60 and over.

  3 It is assumed that partners and dependents of people in receipt of supplementary benefits would also be excepted.

  4 It is assumed that the same proportion of chronically sick people are in receipt of supplementary benefit as the population as a whole in each age group for each sex.

  651
  No estimate has been made of the administration costs involved in collecting such charges but these costs would not be insignificant.

  Cleveland Child Abuse Inquiry
  Mr. Devlin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make it his policy to reimburse North Tees health authority for the costs of representation at the Cleveland child abuse inquiry.

  Mr. Newton
  I refer my hon. Friend to my reply to him on 25 March 1988 at column 248.

  Spending Power
  Sir Brandon Rhys Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish tables similar to those published in reply to the hon. Member for Kensington,Official Report, 4 February, columns 737–42, but taking account of changes proposed in the Budget.

  Mr. Scott
  I refer my hon. Friend to my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Bennett) on 30 March 1988.

  Mentally-ill People
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services how many mentally-ill people received treatment(a) as in-patients and (b) as out-patients in the Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale health authority in (i) Calderstones, (ii) Brockhall and (iii) other hospital sites in the last 12 months.

  Mrs. Currie
  In 1986, the latest year for which information is available, the table shows the number of inpatient admissions and out-patient attendances at NHS mental illness hospitals/units in Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale health authority.

  Hospital

  In-patient admissions

  out-patient attendances

  Burnley General

  847

  9,447

  Rossendale General

  345

  2,189

  These figures include patients who have been admitted or attended hospital on more than one occasion during the year.

  Brockhall and Calderstones hospitals are mental handicap hospitals. Central information shows very few admissions to these hospitals of mentally handicapped residents with an associated mental illness diagnosis.

  Community Health Councils
  Mr. Butler
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will give a list of the community health councils in England together with their expenditure of public funds in the latest available year.

  Mr. Newton
  Following is the information requested derived from the 1986–87 annual accounts of the relevant health authorities.

  Community health councils Total expenditure 1986–87

  £

  Northern region

  Hartlepool

  27,139

  North Tees

  33,682

  652

  £

  South Tees

  34,299

  East Cumbria

  38,068

  South Cumbria

  59,044

  West Cumbria

  36,831

  Darlington

  32,488

  Durham

  31,981

  North West Durham

  34,921

  South West Durham

  30,417

  Northumberland

  40,008

  Gateshead

  24,399

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  33,438

  North Tyneside

  30,974

  South Tyneside

  32,409

  Sunderland

  31,844

  Districts total

  551,942

  Trent region

  North Derbyshire

  37,280

  Southern Derbyshire

  61,320

  Leicestershire

  47,589

  North Lincolnshire

  35,304

  South Lincolnshire

  44,866

  Bassetlaw

  30,109

  Central Nottinghamshire

  34,268

  Nottingham

  46,320

  Barnsley

  32,947

  Doncaster

  34,596

  Rotherham

  29,717

  Sheffield

  53,522

  Districts total

  487,838

  Yorkshire region

  Hull

  38,184

  East Yorkshire

  41,402

  Grimsby

  28,499

  Scunthorpe

  31,906

  Northallerton

  31,827

  York

  29,852

  Scarborough

  32,963

  Harrogate

  36,248

  Bradford

  31,633

  Airedale

  31,141

  Calderdale

  31,569

  Huddersfield

  29,971

  Dewsbury

  31,901

  Leeds Western

  38,325

  Leeds Eastern

  35,005

  Wakefield

  27,603

  Pontefract

  30,649

  Districts total

  558,678

  East Anglian region

  Cambridge

  34,446

  Peterborough

  43,568

  West Suffolk

  29,705

  East Suffolk

  31,872

  Norwich

  41,481

  Great Yarmouth and Waveney

  35,451

  West Norfolk and Wisbech

  43,055

  Huntingdon

  37,424

  Districts total

  297,002

  North-West Thames region

  North Bedfordshire

  37,924

  South Bedfordshire

  47,919

  North Hertfordshire

  33,311

  East Hertfordshire

  55,551

  North-West Hertfordshire

  42,937

  South-West Hertfordshire

  48,711

  Barnet

  43,959

  Harrow

  38,901

  Hillingdon

  57,656

  Hounslow and Spelthorne

  49,568

  653

  £

  Ealing

  55,821

  Brent

  42,130

  Paddington and North Kensington

  47,522

  Riverside

  47,663

  Districts total

  649,573

  South-East Thames Region

  Brighton

  30,973

  Eastbourne

  35,906

  Hastings

  29,077

  South-East Kent

  30,061

  Canterbury and Thanet

  32,706

  Dartford and Gravesham

  33,095

  Maidstone

  27,773

  Medway

  30,825

  Tunbridge Wells

  23,110

  Bexley

  32,651

  Greenwich

  30,480

  Bromley

  30,145

  West Lambeth

  47,033

  Camberwell

  33,160

  Lewisham and North Southwark

  52,925

  Districts total

  499,920

  South-West Thames region

  North-West Surrey

  28,103

  West Surrey and North East Hampshire

  36,919

  South-West Surrey

  29,188

  Mid Surrey

  34,018

  East Surrey

  33,533

  Chichester

  30,088

  Mid Downs

  35,749

  Worthing

  31,365

  Croydon

  56,434

  Kingston and Esher

  39,666

  Richmond, Twickenham & Roehampton

  53,741

  Wandsworth

  63,655

  Merton and Sutton

  38,496

  Districts total

  510,955

  North-Easl Thames region

  Basildon and Thurrock

  37,504

  Mid Essex

  36,153

  North-East Essex

  32,899

  West Essex

  33,762

  Southend

  45,433

  Barking/Havering/Brentwood

  45,658

  Hampstead

  38,715

  Bloomsbury

  46,082

  Islington

  40,441

  City and Hackney

  42,075

  Newham

  31,984

  Tower Hamlets

  33,372

  Enfield

  34,098

  Haringey

  43,313

  Redbridge

  35,367

  Waltham Forest

  39,379

  Districts total

  616,235

  Wessex region

  East Dorset

  35,334

  West Dorset

  28,090

  Portsmouth & S E Hants

  34,993

  Southampton & S W Hants

  32,906

  Winchester

  27,798

  Basingstoke & N Hants

  27,524

  Salisbury

  28,693

  Swindon

  31,498

  Bath

  30,689

  Isle of Wight

  31,013

  Districts total

  308,538

  654

  £

  Oxford region

  East Berkshire

  40,505

  West Berkshire

  42,252

  Aylesbury Vale

  29,235

  Wycombe

  39,600

  Milton Keynes

  34,893

  Kettering

  37,311

  Northampton

  34,461

  Oxfordshire

  56,138

  Districts total

  314,395

  South Western region

  Bristol & Weston

  61,351

  Frenchay

  40,723

  Southmead

  38,243

  Cornwall/Isles of Scilly

  57,514

  Exeter

  37,901

  North Devon

  32,359

  Plymouth

  39,301

  Torbay

  43,074

  Cheltenham

  37,132

  Gloucester

  50,617

  Somerset

  44,541

  Districts total

  482,756

  West Midlands region

  Bromsgrove and Redditch

  30,056

  Herefordshire

  39,971

  Kidderminster

  32,368

  Worcester

  31,208

  Shropshire

  54,823

  Mid Staffordshire

  32,832

  North Staffordshire

  34,934

  South-East Staffordshire

  32,877

  Rugby

  31,108

  North Warwickshire

  32,557

  South Warwickshire

  33,726

  Central Birmingham

  39,452

  East Birmingham

  33,820

  North Birmingham

  27,943

  South Birmingham

  36,694

  West Birmingham

  36,464

  Coventry

  37,808

  Dudley

  33,675

  Sandwell

  34,905

  Solihull

  36,724

  Walsall

  33,309

  Wolverhampton

  35,546

  Districts total

  772,800

  Mersey region

  Chester

  35,536

  Crewe

  34,871

  Halton

  41,715

  Macclesfield

  36,413

  Warrington

  35,096

  Liverpool

  80,248

  St. Helens and Knowsley

  34,589

  Southport and Formby

  35,828

  South Sefton

  29,657

  Wirral

  36,399

  Districts total

  400,352

  North Western region

  Lancaster

  39,275

  Blackpool, Wyre and Fylde

  35,037

  Preston

  43,613

  Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley

  38,559

  Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale

  38,446

  West Lancashire

  28,476

  Chorley and South Ribble

  42,127

  Bolton

  52,086

  655

  £

  Bury

  29,192

  North Manchester

  43,242

  Central Manchester

  42,297

  South Manchester

  43,194

  Oldham

  32,419

  Rochdale

  30,802

  Salford

  33,137

  Stockport

  42,080

  Tameside and Glossop

  30,406

  Trafford

  26,472

  Wigan

  32,000

  Districts total

  702,860

  Note:

  In addition to the figures for district health authorities the 1986–87 annual accounts of the Northern Regional Health Authority show similar expenditure totalling £10,710.

  Prostaglandin Abortion (Poison)
  Mr. Hargreaves
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will introduce legislation to prohibit the use of poison in the case of prostaglandin abortion; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Newton
  Successive Governments have accepted since the passing of the 1967 Abortion Act that legislation in this field is initiated by private Members. The Government's position is that the method by which a legal abortion is performed is a matter for the clinical judgment of the doctor concerned, having regard to all the circumstances of the particular case.

  District Health Authorities (Land)
  Mr. Heddle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on the ability of a district health authority to cede land to a voluntary housing society.

  Mrs. Currie
  Health authorities are required to dispose of surplus land in a publicly acceptable manner and, in general, to obtain the full market price. There are provisions under which with Ministers' agreement, surplus land can be leased to voluntary bodies on concessionary terms, provided the use to be made of the land complements a NHS service. Land cannot be gifted without the approval of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what proportion of the health budget is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Newton
  Total expenditure for 1986–87 (the latest year for which figures are available) in health districts and family practitioner committee areas, which cover inner city areas, was as follows:

  £ million

  Hospital and Community Health Services1(Revenue and Capital)

  4,449

  Family Practitioner Services2

  1,222

  1 Includes an element of £158 million (estimated on a pro-rata to total population basis) for revenue and capital expenditure incurred by regional health authorities for their regions as a whole.

  2 Expenditure on family practitioner services cannot strictly be

  656

  attributed to particular regions or districts. Total expenditure has been estimated pro-rata to the total population of each region with expenditure assigned to each region geographically (ie from the annual accounts of the family practitioner committees which account for it).

  This was a total of £5,671 million within a total expenditure of £14,745 million. However, it should be noted that many of these districts and FPCs serve a geographical area considerably wider than the inner city and, in particular, that a number of the inner city districts contain teaching hospitals and provide regional specialty services, in addition to their local services. It is not possible to disaggregate those elements of expenditure which relate directly to the inner city areas.

  Social Fund
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he and his Department have received from Councillor Sam Darby and the town clerk of Manchester in regard to social fund allocations for 1988–89; what reply he is making; if there is any action he will be taking; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Portillo
  The Permanent Secretary of the Department and I have received letters dated 21 March from the town clerk, and Councillor Darby of Manchester city council, respectively. Replies will be sent shortly.

  Project 2000
  Mr. Milian
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what discussions he has had on the proposals in Project 2000 relating to nurse training and education; and what conclusions he has reached.

  Mr. Newton
  All four health Departments have undertaken widespread consultation on the "Project 2000" proposals put forward by the United Kingdom Central Council for the reform of nurse education and training. We hope to be in a position to make a response to the proposals in the near future.

  Hepatitis B
  Sir Dudley Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what progress is being made against the spread or hepatitis B infection; what groups of people are being inoculated against it; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Currie
  The number of cases of acute hepatitis B reported to the public health laboratory service has declined from approximately 2,200 in 1985 to approximately 800 in 1987. During this period there has been not only an increase in vaccination against the disease but the issue of detailed advice to health authorities on preventing the spread of both hepatitis B and HIV infection in specific high risk situations, as well as widespread publicity on the risks of AIDS and HIV infection.

  The current memorandum from the joint committee on vaccination and immunisation (JCVI), which advises the health Departments on all aspects of immunisation, recommends that specific groups of health care personnel, patients, and family contacts should be considered for vaccination against hepatitis B. We hope shortly to make an announcement about a review of this guidance which has been undertaken by the JCVI.

  Chlamydia
  Sir Dudley Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what progress is being made to diagnose, treat and counter the spread of the chlamydia infection within the community.

  Mrs. Currie
  Facilities exist in every district to diagnose chlamydia, and the disease responds readily to the appropriate antibiotics.

  The public information campaigns about AIDS by the Department and the Health Education Authority should not only help to reduce the risks of HIV infection but should assist, with other work on public education, in preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, including chlamydia.

  Nurses (Professional Conduct)
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services (I) what complaints have been received by the professional conduct committee of the United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting on allegations of poor nursing practice and negligence in each year since 1979;

  (2) how many of the complaints of poor nursing practice and negligence brought to the attention of the professional health conduct committee of the Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting have been settled by mutual agreement without conducting a hearing in each year since 1979;

  (3) what has been the cost to his Department of the settling of cases of complaints of poor nursing practice and negligence brought to the attention of the professional conduct committee of the Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting but which were settled by mutual agreement without conducting a hearing in each year since 1979;

  (4) what assessment has been made by his Department of the proportions of cases of allegations of poor nursing practice and negligence brought to the attention of the professional conduct committee of the United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting which arise from instances of low staffing levels and low morale.

  Mr. Newton
  The work of the professional conduct committee is the responsibility of the United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting (UKCC) which was formally established in 1983. I understand from the council that most of the information sought is not available in the form requested.

  It is the committee's function to determine the outcome of the cases brought before it. None are settled by mutual agreement and there is no cost to the Department. Information on the work of the professional conduct committee may be found in the annual report of the UKCC which is in the Library.

  Community Care
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services how many placements of people who have been transferred from long-stay mental handicap hospitals into community-based settings have proved unsuccessful due to(a) lack of funding, (b) poor service design and (c) neighbourhood hostility.
  658
  Mrs. Currie
  This information is not available centrally. However, the Department is not aware of any significant number of unsuccessful transfers of residents from mental handicap hospitals to community-based settings, although there may be initial difficulties for a number of reasons in such placements.

  South Manchester Health Authority
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Stretford of 28 March, he will give precise details of the date on which the Minister for Health the right hon. Member for Braintree (Mr. Newton) decided to refuse to meet a delegation of hon. Members about South Manchester health authority, having been asked to reconsider his decision to refer the matter to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary;

  (2) if, pursuant to his answer of 28 March, he will give details of the circumstances, including the means of communication by which he learned of the refusal of the hon. Member for Stretford to meet the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State about South Manchester health authority.

  Mr. Newton
  My decision not to see a delegation of hon. Members about South Manchester health authority after they had refused to meet my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary was made on 14 March 1988. It was conveyed over the telephone by my private office the same day to the hon. Member for Manchester, Withington (Mr. Bradley), who had requested the meeting on behalf of hon. Members and from whom my office learnt of the delegation's refusal to meet the Parliamentary Under-Secretary.

  Strontium 90
  Mr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what are the average levels of strontium 90 present in the bone marrow of children of the same age, born and raised in the United Kingdom, at intervals of five years from 1975 to the present; and whether the figures are based on actual measurements or from estimates from air and food levels.

  Mrs. Currie
  I am not aware of measurements or estimates which provide the information requested. Strontium 90 if found principally in bone rather than the bone marrow. The National Radiological Protection Board has made estimates for adults of radiation dose from strontium 90; these estimates are of notional lifetime dose from a particular year's intake. They are derived, using mathematical models, from measurements of levels of Strontium 90 in the diet.

  Sheltered Housing (Rents)
  Mr. Cartwright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what response he has made on the representations from the hon. Member for Woolwich dated 19 February about the decision of Greenwich council to raise rents for its frail elderly tenants in sheltered housing schemes.

  Mr. Portillo
  My office wrote to the hon. Member on 7 March explaining that the correspondence was forwarded to the Department of the Environment as the matters raised are the responsibility of that Department.

  Tranquillisers
  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what discussions he has had with other European countries about problems associated with benzodiazepines; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Newton
  We have had no such discussions.

  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services how many representations he has received since 1 January 1987 about suspected adverse drug reactions involving benzodiazepines; and how many of these have been from(a) members of the public, (b) voluntary organisations counselling patients who claim to have suffered adverse effects and (c) general practitioners.

  Benzodiazepines

  Number of Prescriptions 1978–1986

  Great Britain (Thousands)

  Drug Group

  1978

  1979

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Net Ingredient Cost £000 1986

  Temazepam

  314

  736

  1,329

  2,151

  3,088

  3,628

  4,222

  6,279

  7,160

  13,756

  Nitrazepam

  10,174

  10,148

  9,014

  8,371

  7,861

  7,048

  6,403

  5,974

  5,541

  1,147

  Diazepam

  11,096

  10,488

  8,819

  8,023

  7,077

  6,222

  5,407

  5,402

  5,235

  754

  Lorazepam

  1,826

  2,094

  2,390

  2,921

  3,466

  3,528

  3,240

  3,117

  3,149

  3,251

  Triazolam

  —

  175

  544

  1,043

  1,147

  1,093

  1,274

  1,646

  1,994

  5,833

  Chlordiazepoxide

  2,942

  2,638

  2,156

  1,996

  1,806

  1,550

  1,347

  1,165

  1,081

  1,321

  Oxazepam

  724

  736

  688

  785

  759

  712

  64.5

  721

  766

  808

  Lormetazepam

  —

  —

  —

  38

  202

  406

  521

  146

  191

  472

  Clonazepam

  37

  48

  47

  54

  65

  80

  90

  107

  113

  461

  Loprazolam

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  2

  66

  24

  80

  185

  Clobazam

  —

  132

  326

  404

  457

  466

  487

  130

  45

  222

  Alprazolam

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  171

  339

  83

  1

  6

  Flurazepam

  2,100

  2,295

  2,300

  2,233

  2,241

  2,045

  1,970

  459

  —

  —

  Clorazepate Dipotassium

  1,042

  1,045

  1,181

  1,139

  1,186

  1,189

  1,255

  267

  —

  —

  Flunitrazepam

  —

  —

  —

  —

  8

  112

  241

  69

  —

  —

  Bromazepam

  —

  —

  —

  —

  10

  95

  188

  43

  —

  —

  Ketazolam

  —

  —

  49

  127

  168

  174

  153

  36

  —

  —

  Medazepam

  331

  336

  230

  210

  183

  161

  125

  29

  —

  —

  Prazepam

  —

  —

  —

  —

  14

  66

  65

  14

  —

  —

  Total

  30,586

  30,871

  29,073

  29,495

  29,738

  28,748

  28,044

  25,711

  25,356

  28,216

  Note:

  These estimates are based on a sample of prescriptions of approximately 1 in 200 in England and Wales and 1 in 100 in Scotland which were dispensed by community pharmacists.

  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received from the Council on Involuntary Tranquilliser Addiction on Merseyside about problems associated with benzodiazepines; and what his response has been.

  Mrs. Currie
  I have received an invitation to visit the Council for Involuntary Tranquilliser Addiction which I have regretfully had to decline. I have also received representations on the council's behalf from the hon. Member, to which I responded today.

  Northern RHA (Performance Indicators)
  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what criteria will be used in the proposed use of performance indicators to assess the Northern regional health authority.
  660
  Mr. Newton
  Since 1 January 1987, we have received 22 letters from hon. Members or members of the public on this matter. None has been from a voluntary organisation or a general practitioner.

  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what was the number of prescriptions for each type of benzodiazepines dispensed by community pharmacists in Great Britain in each of the years 1978 to 1986 inclusive, giving the cost to the National Health Service in each case.

  Mr. Newton
  Information on the number of prescriptions for benzodiazepines in each of the years 1978 to 1986 and on the net ingredient cost in 1986 is set out in the table. Information on the costs for earlier years is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Newton
  Health Service indicators show each regional and district health authority's position in relation to other health authorities on a whole range of issues. 'The purpose of the indicators is, using local knowledge, to stimulate questions and enquiry about the reasons behind the variations across the country and between districts within regions. Northern region and its districts are being asked, like all other authorities, to analyse their indicators for the past four years and present the results to their authorities. Regions are specifically asked to look at variations across the region and at progress over time in addressing performance issues raised by the analysis. The results of these regional analyses will be discussed during this year's accountability reviews between the Department and regions.

  Social Security Advisory Committee
  Mr. Carttiss
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services when the Social Security Advisory Committee will be publishing its next annual report.

  Mr. Scott
  I understand that the SSAC's sixth report will be published on Wednesday 6 April 1988. Copies will be available in the Vote Office on that day.

  Independent Living Fund
  Mr. Alexander
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish the eligibility criteria for applications to the Independent Living Fund.

  Mr. Scott
  Broadly, the fund will be open to severely disabled people on low incomes who receive attendance allowance and who have to pay for domestic care.

  The detailed criteria are as follows:

  THE INDEPENDENT LIVING FUND

  Target Group
  People who are severely disabled, whether physically, mentally or sensorially, to the extent that they need help with their domestic duties and/or personal care to enable them to live independently in their own homes.

  Eligibility Criteria
  1. The applicant is living in the UK either:

  a. alone; or

  b. with a partner, or parent or parents, or other person or persons who are unable because of old age, ill-health, disability, other responsibilities, or the extent of the care need, to provide the total amount of personal care and domestic assistance required.

  For this purpose paid or voluntary support on a live-in basis does not disqualify an applicant from receiving help.

  2. The applicant is:

  a. receiving attendance allowance or constant attendance allowance; or

  b. has claimed and been found to satisfy the attendance allowance eligibility criteria, but the six months qualifying period has not yet been completed.

  If the applicant has submitted a claim to attendance allowance which has still to be decided but which the Trustees consider is likely to succeed, they may make an interim payment until decision of the claim if that would prevent the applicant's admission to institutional care.
  3. The applicant is severely restricted in his ability to perform normal personal care and/or domestic tasks because of his disablement without extensive help.
  4. The applicant or partner, or parent in the case of a dependent child, is:

  a. in receipt of income support; or

  b. not in receipt of income support but has net income in excess of income support level of less than the amount needed to pay for his essential personal care or domestic assistance and has capital of less than £6,000 (the Trustees may disregard capital earmarked for specific uses such as for adaptations or a car as they see fit.)

  5. That part of personal care and domestic assistance provided by a close relative who incurs only minimal expenses, or provided by a local authority, is not normally eligible for help from the fund.
  6. Personal care and domestic assistance has to be paid for.
  7. The above criteria having been satisfied the Trustees may give such assistance with the cost of provision of personal care and domestic assistance, having regard to receipt of attendance allowance, invalid care allowance, the income support severe disablement premium, excess income under 4(b), net housing costs, to other care needs and to such other factors as they think fit.
  8. Notwithstanding that the above criteria may not all be met, the Trustees may exceptionally make payments as they think fit if such payments would prevent a severely disabled person's admission to institutional care.
  9. In the case of payments from the fund being taken into account for the assessment of housing benefit, payment may
  662
  be made from the Fund to make good the housing benefit reduction, retrospectively, once legislation has been made to disregard payments from the Fund for the purposes of assessing housing benefit.

  Notes
  1. Domestic duties are taken to be normal household duties such as cleaning and tidying; cooking and preparing meals and washing up; essential laundering and ironing, and essential shopping.
  2. Personal care duties are taken to be those personal duties that a fit person would normally do for himself such as dressing, eating, washing and bathing, helping in and out of bed and with general mobility around the home.

  NHS (Compensation Payments)
  Miss Widdecombe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will now publish the outturn figures for 1986–87 for compensation payments to National Health Service staff in respect of redundancies and early retirements in the manner described in the Government's reply to the first report from the Social Services Committee of Session 1984–85, breaking down the figures to distinguish between competitive tendering and other cases.

  Mrs. Currie
  The outturn figures for 1986–87 are as follows:

  Number of cases £

  Compensation cost £

  Total cost including super-annuation £

  Competitive tendering

  New cases

  1,935

  3,999,000

  8,808,000

  Continuing cases

  1,479

  1,487,000

  2,099,000

  Other cases

  New cases

  1,767

  6,100,000

  16,401,000

  Continuing cases

  7,790

  12,098,000

  24,185,000

  Social Security Reform
  Mr. Ken Hargreaves
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what progress has been made in each of the social security regions on converting existing supplementary benefit claims to income support; and when he expects the conversion to be completed.

  Mr. Portillo
  We plan to complete the conversion of current supplementary benefit claims to income support by 11 April in all offices although a small number of offices still have some way to go. The table shows the position in each of the seven regions on 11 March 1988.

  Region

  Percentage load converted1

  Scotland

  89

  orth East

  83

  North West

  84

  Midlands

  82

  Wales and South Western

  85

  London North

  74

  London South

  70

  1 Staff are using the conversion to update claims records. The exercise has shown that some claims are still recorded as live even though the person is no longer receiving supplementary benefit. This means that some recent counts of the number of current

  663

  supplementary benefit claims on which these percentages are based have not reflected the fall in the number of people receiving supplementary benefit.

  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will provide for employee families with children, figures similar to those in table 9B of "Impact of the Reformed Structure of Income Related Benefits" showing average changes in disposable income after housing costs(a) below gross earnings levels ranging from £75 to £200 and (b) below present disposable income levels after housing costs ranging from £75 to £200, the figures all to be displayed in £25 steps.

  Mr. Portillo
  The figures are in the table:

  All income related benefits: Average change in disposable income after meeting housing costs: Employee families with children in real terms

  Gross weekly original income, less than (£)

  Average change

  Present disposable income after housing costs, less than (£)

  Average change

  £ per week

  £ per week

  75

  +4·10

  75

  +12·60

  100

  +3·10

  100

  +3·70

  125

  +3·60

  125

  +3·40

  150

  +340

  150

  +3·50

  175

  +3·40

  175

  +3·50

  200

  +3·40

  200

  +3·40

  The estimates are consistent with assumptions in "Impact of The Reformed Structure of Income Related Benefits," October 1987, cover survey families of all sizes, ages and tenure types and include both couples and lone parents who are employees in employment working 24 or more remunerative hours. No adjustments have been made for the 1988 Budget changes.

  Adjudication Officers' Guide
  Mr. Amos
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services when the adjudication officers' guide will he published; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Portillo
  The adjudication officers' guide will be published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office today. Its 10 volumes contain detailed guidance on the full range of adjudicable social security benefits including the new benefits of family credit and income support. Previous guidance on other benefits, most of which was not published, has been completely rewritten. The guide will be invaluable both to adjudication officers in determining social security claims and questions and to outside agencies in providing help and advice to claimants. Copies have been placed in the Library.

  NHS Finance
  Mr. Robin Cook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will give for each district health authority, regional health authority and special health authority and for England as a total the amount of income to the National Health Service from(a) charitable appeals, (b) subscriptions, (c) donations and grants, (d) legacies, (e) dividends and interests and (f) the total trust fund income for the latest available year.

  Mr. Newton
  [holding answer 1 March 1988]: Tables showing information for National Health Service trust funds and derived from the 1986–87 accounts of health authorities in England have been placed in the Libarary.

  Children in Care
  Mr. Rowe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what are the annual figures for the number of children received into care by reason of homelessness: if he will give this information for England as a whole and for each local authority area; what are the latest figures for the number of children in local authority care where the reason for their admission into care was homelessness; if he will give this information for England as a whole for each local authority area for the years ended 31 March 1985, 1986 and 1987 or the three most recent years; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Currie
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]: A child may be taken into care for a number of reasons of which homelessness may be a contributory factor, although not identified as a specific cause in the statistics.

  Information on children in care where the specific cause was that their family was homeless is given in the tables for 1984, 1985 and 1986 for each local authority in England.

  Table 1 Children received into care of local authorities because family homeless (eviction or other cause) during the year ending 31 March, 1984, 1985 and 19862

  Numbers

  1984

  1985

  21985

  England

  244

  212

  204

  Cleveland

  0

  6

  0

  Cumbria

  0

  3

  5

  Durham

  4

  3

  3

  Northumberland

  6

  0

  0

  Gateshead

  0

  0

  0

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  8

  6

  10

  North Tyneside

  0

  6

  1

  South Tyneside

  3

  0

  1

  Sunderland

  0

  0

  1

  Humberside

  10

  8

  2

  North Yorkshire

  11

  2

  0

  Barnsley

  3

  0

  3

  Doncaster

  3

  3

  9

  Rotherham

  1

  1

  0

  Sheffield

  1

  11

  11

  Bradford

  18

  11

  4

  Calderdale

  1

  0

  2

  Kirklees

  8

  2

  5

  Leeds

  3

  14

  6

  Wakefield

  1

  0

  0

  Cheshire

  5

  0

  2

  Lancashire

  10

  11

  14

  Bolton

  2

  1

  0

  Bury

  0

  3

  0

  Manchester

  3

  11

  9

  Oldham

  0

  0

  0

  Rochdale

  1

  1

  2

  Salford

  4

  0

  8

  Stockport

  6

  0

  2

  Tameside

  10

  1

  1

  Trafford

  0

  0

  0

  Wigan

  0

  0

  0

  Knowsley

  4

  0

  0

  Liverpool

  2

  0

  2

  Sefton

  2

  11

  2

  St. Helens

  4

  0

  0

  Wirral

  2

  4

  4

  Hereford and Worcester

  0

  2

  0

  Shropshire

  2

  0

  0

  Staffordshire

  4

  2

  2

  Warwickshire

  0

  0

  1

  Birmingham

  9

  3

  4

  Coventry

  5

  2

  1

  Dudley

  0

  1

  0

  Sandwell

  1

  0

  1

  665

  1984

  1985

  21986

  Solihull

  1

  0

  2

  Walsall

  3

  3

  7

  Wolverhampton

  2

  0

  0

  Derbyshire

  0

  0

  3

  Leicestershire

  0

  4

  1

  Lincolnshire

  3

  10

  2

  Northamptonshire

  1

  0

  3

  Nottinghamshire

  7

  5

  2

  Bedfordshire

  6

  2

  1

  Berkshire

  1

  3

  5

  Buckinghamshire

  0

  0

  2

  Cambridgeshire

  4

  0

  0

  Essex

  4

  7

  3

  Hertfordshire

  2

  0

  1

  Norfolk

  0

  2

  2

  Oxfordshire

  6

  0

  4

  Suffolk

  0

  1

  1

  Camden

  0

  0

  3

  Greenwich

  0

  3

  1

  Hackney

  0

  0

  0

  Hammersmith

  2

  0

  1

  Islington

  12

  12

  12

  Kensington

  1

  0

  0

  Lambeth

  0

  0

  0

  Lewisham

  0

  0

  0

  South wark

  1

  1

  2

  Tower Hamlets

  11

  11

  11

  Wandsworth

  4

  5

  4

  Westminster

  0

  0

  0

  City of London

  0

  0

  0

  Barking

  2

  0

  1

  Barnet

  0

  0

  0

  Bexley

  2

  2

  0

  Brent

  0

  2

  2

  Bromley

  0

  1

  1

  Croydon

  7

  1

  2

  Ealing

  0

  2

  0

  Enfield

  0

  2

  0

  Haringey

  2

  0

  0

  Harrow

  0

  0

  0

  Havering

  0

  0

  0

  Hillingdon

  1

  3

  1

  Hounslow

  1

  0

  0

  Kingston upon Thames

  1

  0

  0

  Merton

  0

  1

  0

  Newham

  0

  8

  13

  Redbridge

  0

  0

  0

  Richmond upon Thames

  0

  0

  0

  Sutton

  3

  0

  3

  Waltham Forest

  1

  0

  0

  Dorset

  2

  0

  2

  Hampshire

  2

  11

  0

  Isle of Wight

  1

  0

  0

  Kent

  4

  14

  14

  Surrey

  3

  2

  3

  East Sussex

  1

  3

  1

  West Sussex

  0

  0

  0

  Wiltshire

  0

  2

  0

  Avon

  8

  0

  4

  Cornwall

  0

  0

  4

  Devon

  3

  0

  10

  Gloucestershire

  2

  0

  1

  Somerset

  0

  0

  1

  1 Estimated from information for previous years.

  2 1986 figures are provisional.

  Table 2

  Children received into care of local authorities because family homeless (eviction or other cause) as at 31 March 1984, 1985 and 19862

  Numbers

  1984

  1985

  19862

  England

  713

  598

  513

  Cleveland

  4

  3

  3

  666

  1984

  1985

  19862

  Cumbria

  6

  8

  7

  Durham

  12

  11

  10

  Northumberland

  4

  3

  1

  Gateshead

  3

  3

  2

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  11

  10

  9

  North Tyneside

  7

  10

  9

  South Tyneside

  8

  5

  5

  Sunderland

  3

  2

  3

  Humberside

  9

  10

  9

  North Yorkshire

  10

  5

  3

  Barnsley

  12

  12

  12

  Doncaster

  3

  8

  9

  Rotherham

  2

  2

  2

  Sheffield

  16

  16

  116

  Bradford

  23

  19

  4

  Calderdale

  2

  2

  1

  Kirklees

  9

  8

  7

  Leeds

  3

  7

  8

  Wakefield

  12

  9

  8

  Cheshire

  16

  14

  9

  Lancashire

  21

  19

  18

  Bolton

  2

  1

  0

  Bury

  2

  4

  0

  Manchester

  13

  15

  12

  Oldham

  0

  0

  0

  Rochdale

  5

  3

  3

  Salford

  8

  6

  10

  Stockport

  7

  3

  3

  Tameside

  10

  0

  0

  Trafford

  3

  1

  0

  Wigan

  6

  5

  5

  Knowsley

  4

  4

  4

  Liverpool

  25

  0

  0

  Sefton

  7

  6

  4

  St. Helens

  5

  5

  3

  Wirral

  5

  6

  4

  Hereford and Worcester

  7

  8

  6

  Shropshire

  15

  9

  6

  Staffordshire

  21

  13

  12

  Warwickshire

  8

  8

  8

  Birmingham

  7

  4

  4

  Coventry

  11

  7

  5

  Dudley

  6

  6

  5

  Sandwell

  3

  7

  4

  Solihull

  1

  0

  0

  Walsall

  6

  6

  7

  Wolverhampton

  4

  2

  2

  Derbyshire

  2

  3

  2

  Leicestershire

  4

  3

  2

  Lincolnshire

  5

  1

  3

  Northamptonshire

  9

  6

  6

  Nottinghamshire

  12

  9

  10

  Bedfordshire

  15

  12

  8

  Berkshire

  14

  15

  9

  Buckinghamshire

  2

  2

  2

  Cambridgeshire

  6

  4

  4

  Essex

  15

  12

  9

  Hertfordshire

  12

  12

  10

  Norfolk

  2

  2

  1

  Oxfordshire

  4

  3

  1

  Suffolk

  8

  6

  6

  Camden

  0

  0

  0

  Greenwich

  0

  2

  1

  Hackney

  5

  5

  3

  Hammersmith

  7

  5

  3

  Islington

  10

  10

  10

  Kensington

  8

  7

  5

  Lambeth

  2

  0

  0

  Lewisham

  1

  1

  11

  Southwark

  2

  1

  3

  Tower Hamlets

  124

  124

  124

  Wandsworth

  5

  4

  4

  Westminster

  4

  4

  2

  City of London

  0

  0

  0

  Barking

  0

  0

  0

  Barnet

  0

  0

  0

  Bexley

  0

  0

  0

  667

  1984

  1985

  19862

  Brent

  3

  5

  4

  Bromley

  4

  4

  2

  Croydon

  5

  4

  1

  Ealing

  5

  5

  4

  Enfield

  0

  2

  0

  Haringey

  5

  4

  3

  Harrow

  1

  0

  0

  Havering

  0

  0

  0

  Hillingdon

  0

  1

  1

  Hounslow

  2

  1

  1

  Kingston upon Thames

  0

  0

  0

  Merton

  0

  0

  0

  Newham

  0

  1

  11

  Redbridge

  0

  0

  0

  Richmond upon Thames

  0

  0

  1

  Sutton

  2

  1

  3

  Waltham Forest

  0

  0

  0

  Dorset

  13

  10

  9

  Hampshire

  40

  32

  26

  Isle of Wight

  1

  0

  0

  Kent

  13

  113

  113

  Surrey

  3

  4

  5

  East Sussex

  9

  4

  6

  West Sussex

  8

  7

  6

  Wiltshire

  13

  12

  5

  Avon

  12

  11

  10

  Cornwall

  0

  0

  2

  Devon

  20

  14

  114

  Gloucestershire

  5

  3

  3

  Somerset

  4

  2

  2

  1 Estimated from information for earlier years.

  2 The 1986 figures are provisional.

  Motor Cyclists
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the annual cost to the National Health Service of the treatment of leg injuries sustained by motor cyclists in road traffic accidents.

  Mrs. Currie
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The annual cost to the National Health Service of treating injuries to motor cyclists and their passengers is estimated to be £22 million (England 1986). Information is not available on the cost of particular types of injury.

  District Health Authority Staffing
  Mr. Favell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list in respect of each district health authority(a) the total number of full-time equivalent employees and (b) the total number of full-time equivalent management employees above the level of department head or ward sister.

  Mr. Newton
  [holding answer 4 February 1988]: Such information as is available centrally is shown in the tables. Information on management employees in the form requested is not held centrally.

  NHS directly employed staff1 2 in post 30 September 1986

  Region

  Whole-time equivalent31986

  Northern

  53,510

  Yorkshire

  59,570

  Trent

  74,310

  East Anglia

  30.490

  North West Thames

  54,810

  North East Thames

  69,060

  South East Thames

  61,860

  668

  Region

  Whole-time equivalent3 1986

  South West Thames

  45,660

  Wessex

  43,520

  Oxford

  33,210

  South Western

  52,370

  West Midlands

  84,230

  Mersey

  42,870

  North Western

  74,080

  England4

  801,590

  Source:

  DHSS(SR7) Annual censuses of NHS medical and non-medical manpower.

  1 Includes permanent paid, ho norary and locum medical and dental staff.

  2 Includes agency nursing and midwifery staff.

  3 Figures are independently rounded to the nearest ten(10) whole-time equivalents.

  4 Includes staff in London Post Graduate Special Health Authorities, Dental Estimates Board, Prescription Pricing Authority, London Ambulance Services Staff, and Family Practitioner Committees' directly employed staff.

  NHS directly employed staff 1 2 3 in post 30 September 1986

  4Whole-time equivalents

  Northern RHA

  Total

  53,510

  Hartlepool

  1,570

  North Tees

  2,490

  South Tees

  5,020

  East Cumbria

  2,980

  South Cumbria

  2,060

  West Cumbria

  2,050

  Darlington

  2,270

  Durham

  2,440

  North West Durham

  1,370

  South West Durham

  2,690

  Northumberland

  5,190

  Gateshead

  2,680

  Newcastle (T)

  9,600

  North Tyneside

  1,840

  South Tyneside

  1,770

  Sunderland

  5,000

  Yorkshire RHA

  Total

  59,570

  Hull

  5,180

  East Yorkshire

  2,960

  Grimsby

  2,460

  Scunthorpe

  2,040

  Northallerton

  970

  York

  4,370

  Scarborough

  1,660

  Harrogate

  2,190

  Bradford

  5,090

  Airedale

  2,500

  Calderdale

  2,600

  Huddersfield

  3,650

  Dewsbury

  1,910

  Leeds Western (T)

  6,940

  Leeds Eastern (T)

  6,430

  Wakefield

  3,770

  Pontefract

  1,940

  Trent RHA

  Total

  74,310

  North Derbyshire

  3,750

  Southern Derbyshire

  7,510

  Leicestershire (T)

  12,460

  North Lincolnshire

  4,620

  South Lincolnshire

  3,600

  Bassetlaw

  1,210

  Central Nottinghamshire

  4,200

  669

  4Whole-time equivalents

  Nottingham (T)

  11,200

  Barnsley

  2,900

  Doncaster

  4,060

  Rotherham

  3,200

  Sheffield (T)

  12,740

  East Anglia RHA

  Total

  30,490

  Cambridge (T)

  5,140

  Peterborough

  3,050

  West Suffolk

  2,860

  East Suffolk

  5,050

  Norwich

  7,140

  Great Yarmouth and Waveney

  2,580

  West Norfolk and Wisbech

  2,160

  Huntingdon

  1,370

  North West Thames RHA

  Total

  54,810

  North Bedfordshire

  2,780

  South Bedfordshire

  3,360

  North Hertfordshire

  1,950

  East Hertfordshire

  1,840

  North West Hertfordshire

  5,440

  South West Hertfordshire

  2,200

  Barnet

  5,250

  Harrow

  2,660

  Hillingdon

  3,900

  Hounslow and Spelthorne

  3,550

  Ealing

  2,930

  Brent

  4,020

  Paddington and North Kensington (T)

  4,040

  Riverside (T)

  8,760

  North East Thames RHA

  Total

  69,060

  Basildon and Thurrock

  4,110

  Mid Essex

  3,920

  North East Essex

  5,130

  West Essex

  2,910

  Southend

  3,760

  Barking Havering and Brentwood

  5,820

  Hampstead (T)

  4,640

  Bloomsbury (T)

  7,850

  Islington

  3,200

  City and Hackney (T)

  5,760

  Newhara

  2,260

  Tower Hamlets (T)

  5,050

  Enfield

  2,730

  Haringey

  2,790

  Redbridge

  2,710

  Waltham Forest

  4,560

  South East Thames RHA

  Total

  61,860

  Brighton

  4,680

  Eastbourne

  3,330

  Hastings

  2,400

  South East Kent

  2,970

  Canterbury and Thanet

  4,570

  Dartford and Gravesham

  3,780

  Maidstone

  2,690

  Medway

  3,650

  Tunbridge Wells

  3,640

  Bexley

  2,800

  Greenwich

  4,070

  Bromley

  3,820

  West Lambeth (T)

  5,440

  Camberwell (T)

  4,530

  Lewisham and North Southwark (T)

  7,730

  South West Thames RHA

  Total

  45,660

  North West Surrey

  2,960

  West Surrey and North East Hampshire

  3,020

  South West Surrey

  2,450

  670

  4Whole-time equivalents

  Mid Surrey

  3,100

  East Surrey

  3,540

  Chichester

  2,420

  Mid Downs

  3,140

  Worthing

  2,830

  Croydon

  4,390

  Kingston and Esher

  2,920

  Richmond Twickenham and Roehampton

  2,440

  Wandsworth (T)

  5,740

  Merton and Sutton

  4,940

  Wessex RHA

  Total

  43,520

  East Dorset

  5,570

  West Dorset

  3,190

  Portsmouth and SE Hampshire

  6,520

  Southampton and SW Hampshire (T)

  7,970

  Winchester

  2,820

  Basingstoke and N Hampshire

  3,080

  Salisbury

  2,490

  Swindon

  3,300

  Bath

  5,430

  Isle of Wight

  1,900

  Oxford RHA

  Total

  33,210

  East Berkshire

  4,040

  West Berkshire

  5,650

  Aylesbury Vale

  3,080

  Wycombe

  2,310

  Milton Keynes

  1,360

  Kettering

  2,650

  Northampton

  4,400

  Oxfordshire (T)

  8,180

  South Western RHA

  Total

  52,370

  Bristol and Weston (T)

  7,170

  Frenchay

  4,680

  Southmead

  3,870

  Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

  5,380

  Exeter

  6,370

  North Devon

  1,820

  Plymouth

  5,480

  Torbay

  3,130

  Cheltenham and District

  2,380

  Gloucester

  4,640

  Somerset

  5,790

  West Midlands RHA

  Total

  84,230

  Bromsgrove and Redditch

  2,150

  Herefordshire

  2,100

  Kidderminster and District

  2,200

  Worcester and District

  3,590

  Shropshire

  5,310

  Mid Staffordshire

  3,530

  North Staffordshire

  7,430

  South East Staffordshire

  3,330

  Rugby

  840

  North Warwickshire

  2,400

  South Warwickshire

  3,540

  Central Birmingham (T)

  6,100

  East Birmingham

  2,700

  North Birmingham

  2,630

  South Birmingham

  4,980

  West Birmingham

  4,950

  Coventry

  5,000

  Dudley

  4,120

  Sandwell

  2,960

  Solihull

  2,140

  Walsall

  3,450

  Wolverhampton

  4,320

  671

  4Whole-time equivalents

  Mersey RHA

  Total

  42,870

  Chester

  3,570

  Crewe

  3,070

  Halton

  1,100

  Macclesfield

  2,700

  Warrington

  3,920

  Liverpool (T)

  10,430

  St. Helens and Knowsley

  4,690

  Southport and Formby

  2,080

  South Sefton

  4,130

  Wirral

  5,030

  North Western RHA

  Total

  74,080

  Lancaster

  3,800

  Blackpool, Wyre and Fylde

  4,290

  Preston

  5,390

  Blackburn. Hyndburn and Ribble Valley

  4,900

  Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale

  4,420

  West Lancashire

  1,780

  Chorley and South Ribble

  1,060

  Bolton

  3,410

  Bury

  1,830

  North Manchester

  4,680

  Central Manchester (T)

  4,610

  South Manchester (T)

  6,540

  Oldham

  2,790

  Rochdale

  2,190

  Salford (T)

  6,340

  Stockport

  3,750

  Tameside and Glossop

  2,500

  Trafford

  2,350

  Wigan

  3,810

  Source: DHSS annual census of National Health Service medical and non-medical manpower.

  Notes to all regional tables:

  1. Includes permanent paid, honorary and locum medical and dental staff. Excludes consultants in non-teaching district health authorities and senior registrars in all district health authorities — these staff have their contracts with regional health authorities.

  2. Includes agency nursing and midwifery staff.

  3. Regional totals including regional headquarters and headquarters units staff, and staff whose contracts are held by regional health authorities.

  4. Figures are independently rounded to nearest ten (10) whole-time equivalents.

  (T)—Denotes teaching authority.

EMPLOYMENT

  Consultative Documents
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make it his policy that responses received to consultative documents issued by his Department be made publicly available in his Department's library, except where the respondent has specifically asked that this be not done; and if he will arrange for this procedure to be made clear when future consultative documents are issued.

  Mr. Lee
  The Department of Employment operates a system whereby responses to consultative documents issued by my Department are made available in the Library for public inspection, on request. Responses are not made available when the respondents have stated that they do not wish their comments to be made public.

  Deaf People (Training Schemes)
  Mr. Sims
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what plans he has to increase the supply of properly qualified communicators with deaf people on training schemes;

  (2) whether he intends to establish further courses along the lines of that run at Bournville further education college, Birmingham, to train communicators with deaf people.

  Mr. Cope
  The Manpower Services Commission is committed to assist in increasing the supply of trained communicators for deaf people in order to support deaf trainees in the commission's youth and adult training programme. Plans include the setting up and running of a number of courses over the next year to 18 months based on the experiences of the Bournville course, which was itself funded by the commission.

  Telephone Communications
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment why telephone callers to his Department's advertised number of 213 3000 are being asked successively to redial two further numbers, the last of which is mainly engaged; what action he proposes to take to improve telephone communications with his Department; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lee
  The 213 3000 number for this Department was changed to a new number on 18 January 1988 as part of the modernisation programme of the Whitehall telephone exchange system which is run by the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency (CCTA), as part of the common service to Government Departments.

  After the changeover, a recorded message was placed on the 213 number and callers were asked to phone a central switchboard where they are told the new number of the person or section they want to contact. Provided the extension is not busy the call is then transferred, avoiding the need to dial an additional number.

  However, the passport office was also on the old 213 exchange and because of the large number of people who ring there the number has sometimes become overloaded. At such times operators have asked callers to dial the new number directly in order to deal more quickly with new inquiries.

  The CCTA has recently installed a new intercept recorded announcement message, which gives more prominence to the new number of the passport office. This should reduce the number of callers erroneously ringing the number used by this Department. The volume of callers on the 213 number is also decreasing as people are becoming aware of the new numbers. The CCTA is also ensuring that all callers who ring the 273 number are transferred to the new extension number and are not being asked to make a further call.

  Adult Training Scheme
  Mr. Dunnachie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what representations he has received asking him to reconsider his decision to require those participating in the adult training scheme to pay the first £5 of their travel expenses.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what representations he has received asking
  673
  him to reconsider his decision to require those participating in the adult training scheme to pay the first £5 of their travel expenses.

  Mr. Nicholls
  None. It was the unanimous recommendation of the Manpower Services Commission that only participants' travel expenses in excess of £5 should be met, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has accepted this.

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Permanent workers dismissed for offence justifying summary dismissal

  —

  —

  —

  2

  —

  —

  —

  Reinstated by order of East Anglia Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Dismissal upheld by East Anglia Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals

  —

  —

  —

  2

  —

  —

  —

  Training Schemes
  Mr. Janner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many school leavers were on YTS/ YOPs schemes during 1987; and hos many and what percentage of these school leavers obtained work on completing their time on the scheme.

  Mr. Cope
  There were on average about 400,000 young people training on YTS at any one time in 1987. The youth opportunities programme ended in 1983. The latest Manpower Services Commission follow-up surveys of YTS leavers show that of those who completed their training programme between April 1986 and September 1987, 73 per cent. were in work at the time of the surveys.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what proportion of the employment programme is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Cope
  In 1987–88 it is estimated that approximately one third of the expenditure by this Department and the Manpower Services Commission on employment, training and enterprise programmes in England is in the inner cities.

  Health and Safety Executive
  Mr. Randall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what consideration he has given to privatising the Health and Safety Executive; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The Government have no plans to privatise the Health and Safety Executive.

  Wages
  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will delineate the average, in percentage and real terms, increase in wage levels in all regions of the United Kingdom from 1979 to the latest available date.

  Dock Workers
  Mr. Summerson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many permanent registered dock workers in the East Anglia labour board area in each year from 1980 to 1986 have been dismissed by their employer for an offence justifying summary dismissal under the disciplinary provisions of the dock labour scheme; how many of these men have been reinstated by order of the local dock labour board and appeal tribunals; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The figures requested are as follows:

  Mr. Lee
  I am sending the hon. Member the information requested, which is also available in the Library.

  Industrial Tribunals
  Mr. Batiste
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what proportion of applications to industrial tribunals in each of the last three years for which figures are available have been subject to a pre-hearing assessment; in how many cases a warning as to costs was issued; and following such warning how many applications were withdrawn.

  Mr. Nicholls
  [pursuant to his reply, 7 March 1988, c. 37]: I regret that there were some errors in my original reply. The correct information should read as follows:

  12 months ending

  31 December 1984

  31 March 1986

  31 March 1987

  Proportion of applications subject to pre-hearing assessment (per cent.)

  9·4

  3·7

  2·5

  Number of costs warnings issued

  1,266

  672

  517

  Number of applications withdrawn or settled after costs warning

  1,004

  510

  403

  National Dock Labour Scheme
  Mr. Jacques Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many permanent registered dock workers in the London labour board area in each year from 1980 to 1986 have been dismissed by their employer for an offence justifying summary dismissal under the disciplinary provisions of the dock labour scheme; and how many of these men have been reinstated by order of the local dock labour board and appeal tribunals.
  675
  Mr. Nicholls
  [pursuant to his reply, 14 March 1988, c. 448–49]: The figures requested are as follows:

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Permanent Workers dismissed for an offence justifying summary dismissal

  9

  7

  10

  2

  —

  1

  —

  Reinstated by order of London Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals

  9

  5

  8

  2

  —

  1

  —

  Dismissal upheld by London Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals

  —

  2

  2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Mr. John Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many permanent registered dock workers in the Hull and Goole dock labour board area in each year from 1980 to 1986 have been dismissed by their employer for an offence justifying summary dismissal under the disciplinary provisions of the dock labour

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Permanent workers dismissed for an offence justifying summary dismissal

  7

  —

  1

  2

  1

  1

  —

  Reinstated by order of Hull and Goole Dock Labour Board Appeal Tribunals

  7

  —

  1

  1

  1

  1

  —

  Dismissal upheld by Hull and Goole Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals

  —

  —

  —

  1—

  —

  —

  —

  1 The second man in this year left the industry without his case being resolved by the Local Board.

  Mr. Roger King
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many permanent registered dock workers in the Tyne and Wear local dock labour board area in each year from 1980 to 1986 have been dismissed by their employer for an offence justifying summary dismissal under the disciplinary provisions of the dock

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Permanent workers dismissed for an offence justifying summary dismissal

  2

  1

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Reinstated by order of Tyne and Wear Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals

  1

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Dismissal upheld by Tync and Wear Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals

  1

  —

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Mr. Wood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many permanent registered dock workers in the Grimsby and Immingham local dock labour board area in each year from 1980 to 1986 have been dismissed by their employer for an offence justifying summary dismissal under the disciplinary provisions on

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Permanent workers dismissed for an offence justifying summary dismissal

  5

  1

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Reinstated by order of Grimsby and Immingham Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals.

  5

  —

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Dismissal upheld by Grimsby and Immingham Dock Labour Board and Appeals Tribunals

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Mr. Wilshire
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many permanent registered dock workers in the West Scotland local dock labour board area in each year from 1980 to 1986 have been dismissed by their employer for an offence justifying summary dismissal under the disciplinary provisions of the dock labour
  676
  scheme; and how many of these men have been reinstated by order of the local dock labour board and appeal tribunals.

  Mr. Nicholls
  [pursuant to his reply, 14 March 1988, c. 448–49]: The figures requested are as follows:

  the dock labour scheme; and how many of these men have been reinstated by order of the local dock labour board and appeal tribunals.

  Mr. Nicholls
  [pursuant to his reply, 14 March 1988, c. 448–9]: The figures requested are as follows:

  labour scheme; and how many of these men have been reinstated by order of the local dock labour board and appeal tribunals.

  Mr. Nicholls
  [pursuant to his reply, 14 March 1988, c. 448–9]: The figures requested are as follows:
  677

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  Permanent workers dismissed for an offence justifying summary dismissal

  8

  9

  3

  1

  2

  2

  1

  Reinstated by order of West Scotland Dock Labour Board and Appeal Tribunals.

  7

  9

  3

  1

  2

  1

  1

  Dismissal upheld by West Scotland Dock Labour Board and Appeals Tribunals

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  1

  —

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Community Programme
  Mr. Lawrence
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many places have been allocated under the community programme for crime prevention.

  Mr. Hurd
  On 29 February 1988, the latest available date for which information is available, 8,637 community programme places had been approved on 323 crime prevention schemes.

  Charities
  Mr. Lawrence
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to amend the law governing charities so as to give the Charity Commission power to take action against a charity operating contrary to the law.

  Mr. Hurd
  Charities are subject to the criminal law in the normal way. In addition, the Charity Commission has powers under sections 6 and 20 of the Charities Act 1960 to investigate any charity and where necessary take action to protect its property. The Government have accepted that the commission's powers for dealing with abuse should be strengthened in line with the recommendations of the Woodfield report, and will introduce legislation accordingly.

  Mr. Lawrence
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to amend the law governing charities to ensure that greater importance is attached to the methods by which the charity fulfils its objects.

  Number of classes

  Average number of inmates in each class

  Total number of class hours

  Day

  Evening

  Birmingham

  33

  0

  8·3

  66

  Leeds

  75

  36

  7·2

  222

  Pentonville

  64

  33

  6·5

  193

  Manchester

  44

  15

  7·6

  109

  Wandsworth

  47

  49

  7·8

  209·5

  Wormwood Scrubs

  21

  39

  8·3

  120

  Holloway

  1102

  20

  8·6

  244

  1 Figure includes vocational training.

  As the Government's recent reply to the second report from the Select Committee on Education, Science and Arts on prison education makes clear, very positive efforts are being made to improve both the quantity and the quality of education in Prison Department establishments. The figures for a small selection of prisons, including some of our most overcrowded local establishments, should not be regarded as representative. At Birmingham, for instance,
  678
  Mr. Hurd
  Trustees are under a clear obligation to ensure that the method by which a charity fulfils its objects are within the law. Action can be taken against a charity wherever there is evidence that its activities are not in the public interest.

  Mr. Lawrence
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to ensure persons with convictions for dishonesty are not permitted to become charitable trustees.

  Mr. Hurd
  One of the recommendations of the Woodfield report is that provision should be made that no person should, without the permission in writing of the commissioners, act as the trustee of a charity if they have been convicted of any offence involving fraud or dishonesty. The Government intend to introduce legislation to implement the Woodfield report's recommendations before the end of the life of this Parliament.

  Prisoners (Education)
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prison daytime and evening education classes were held; what was the average number of prisoners in each class, and what was the total number of hours of education in the most recent convenient week, at each of the following prisons: Birmingham, Leeds, Pentonville, Manchester, Wandsworth, Wormwood Scrubs and Holloway; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The information for the week commencing 14 March 1988 is as follows:

  where the level of overcrowding makes movement to classes very difficult, considerable work has been done on the development of learning packs for use in cell.

  Data Protection
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many subject access requests under the terms of the Data Protection Act the Metropolitan police and police national computer unit have received; what
  679
  were the anticipated number of requests; and whether he is reconsidering the subject access fee charged by the police as a result; and whether he will make a statement.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I understand from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis that from 11 November 1987 to 24 March 1988, the Metropolitan police have received subject access requests under the Data Protection Act 1984, as follows:

  Number

  i. for disclosure from the police national computer

  34

  ii. for disclosure from data registered in common on the police national computer and on force systems

  45

  iii. for disclosure from Metropolitan police systems only

  10

  The Metropolitan police had anticipated some 4,000 applications per annum.

  Over the same period, the subject access office of the National Identification Bureau, which deals with requests for access to data on the police national computer, has received 404.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will provide information to the Data Protection Registrar in a way that does not compromise national security, on the number, scope and extent of the certificates that he has signed under section 27 of the Data Protection Act.

  Mr. Hurd
  Such arrangements are not required by the Data Protection Act and would not be in the interest of national security.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the benefits for the public of the code of practice covering personal data used for police purposes.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The public benefit from the procedures set out in the code of practice since they seek to ensure that personal data held on police computer systems are properly obtained, maintained and secured in all forces, and comply with the data protection principles laid down in the Data Protection Act 1984.

  Prison Workshops
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many workshops there are; and for how many hours they were open in the most recent convenient week at each of the following prisons: Birmingham, Leeds, Pentonville, Manchester, Wandsworth, Wormwood Scrubs and Holloway.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  In the week ending 28 February 1988 the following numbers of industrial workshops were in operation in each of the listed prisons:

  No. of Employment Places

  Average number Employed in w/e 28 February 1988

  Industrial Workshops and Farms and Gardens

  Domestic Catering and Maintenance Duties

  Industrial Workshops and Farms and Gardens

  Domestic Catering and Maintenance Duties

  Birmingham

  160

  158

  126

  154

  Leeds

  280

  170

  149

  147

  Pentonville

  124

  135

  45

  119

  Manchester

  195

  227

  102

  227

  680

  Number of Workshops

  Opening Hours

  Birmingham

  Laundry

  23·50

  Heavy Textiles I

  13·75

  Heavy Textiles II

  9·75

  Leeds

  Heavy Textiles I

  21·75

  Heavy Textiles II

  21·00

  Heavy Textiles III

  21·00

  Light Textiles

  21·00

  Engineering

  8·00

  Assembly

  Nil

  Pentonville

  Tailoring

  13·50

  Assembly

  7·15

  Manchester

  Tailoring

  30·00

  Laundry

  29·00

  Textiles

  27·50

  Assembly I

  20·50

  Assembly II

  20·35

  Wandsworth

  Laundry

  19·50

  Heavy Textiles

  17·50

  Dry Cleaning

  16·00

  Leather

  15·75

  Brushmaking

  15·00

  Tailoring

  14·75

  Carpenters

  8·50

  Wormwood Scrubs

  Engineering

  12·85

  Tailoring

  12·10

  Cutting

  11·25

  Binding

  9·25

  Sewing Machine Repairs

  9·25

  Assembly

  7·50

  Light Textiles

  2·50

  Holloway

  Light Textiles

  18·00

  Prisoners (Employment)
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the maximum number of prisoners who can be employed; and how many prisoners were actually employed(a) in workshops and (b) on other tasks in the most recent convenient week, at each of the following prisons: Birmingham, Leeds, Pentonvilile, Manchester, Wandsworth, Wormwood Scrubs and Holloway.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The information is as follows:
  681

  No. of Employment Places

  Average number Employed in w/e 28 February 1988

  Industrial Workshops and Farms and Gardens

  Domestic Catering and Maintenance Duties

  Industrial Workshops and Farms and Gardens

  Domestic Catering and Maintenance Duties

  Wandsworth

  451

  288

  202

  288

  Wormwood Scrubs

  228

  204

  137

  173

  Holloway

  52

  97

  14

  90

  In addition to those employed in work as defined above, significant numbers of prisoners were also engaged in other out of cell activities including full or part-time education, vocational training and construction industry training courses.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of his Department's expenditure is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Hurd
  Much Home Office expenditure goes to inner city areas without being specifically targeted to them. It would involve disproportionate cost to calculate the sums involved.

  Police Officers (Firearms)
  Mr. Greg Knight
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what guidance he has issued to chief constables about the use by police officers of firearms to shoot animals;

  (2) what was the number of operations in which firearms were issued to police officers in England and Wales in 1987 where the firearms were used to shoot animals; how many animals were so killed; and if he will list the species involved.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The guidance issued to chief constables about the use of firearms to destroy dangerous animals is contained in a comprehensive booklet prepared by the West Yorkshire police force in conjunction with the Association of Chief Police Officers. I am arranging for a copy of that guidance to be placed in the Library.

  Firearms were issued to police officers on 41 operations in England and Wales in 1987 for the destruction of animals; 44 beasts were destroyed. The species included bullocks, bulls, cows, deer, dogs, horses and pigs.

  Passports
  Sir Dudley Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how long it is now taking his Department's office at Peterborough to process legitimate passport applications.

  Mr. Renton
  Correctly completed non-urgent applications are now being dealt with within 26 working days. Urgent applications are given priority.

  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many requests for the urgent return of passports were received by his Department during February from people whose passports had been sent to the Home Office before 31 December 1987 in connection with applications for British citizenship.
  682
  Mr. Renton
  No comprehensive statistics are available concerning the number of such requests. The practice is to undertake searches when urgency is established.

  Mr. Curry
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there has been an increase in demand for passports; what action is being taken to avoid delays in the handling of passport applications in advance of computerisation of the passport offices; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Renton
  So far this year overall demand for new passports and for amendments to existing passports has been over 25 per cent, up on the corresponding period of 1987. In anticipation that this heavy demand will continue throughout the summer months a number of special measures are being taken to help reduce delays at the passport offices. These include:

  (1) the recruitment of additional staff at all offices;

  (2) overtime working at weekends;

  (3) the immediate grant of free short-term extensions to expired passports for personal callers;

  (4) issuing emergency travel documents to personal callers whose postal applications cannot readily be traced.

  In addition, Governments of countries to which British citizens travel most frequently have been approached and invited exceptionally to accept travellers using uncancelled United Kingdom passports which have expired within the last five years, or British visitor's passports, where these are not already accepted. British visitor's passports, which are already accepted by all countries in Western Europe, are currently available from the 1,500 main post offices in Britain from Monday to Friday only. It is hoped to extend this service shortly to Saturday mornings.

  To date, the following countries have either agreed, or have indicated their willingness in principle, to accept expired passports and British visitor's passports under these arrangements:

  USA

  Israel

  Netherlands

  Hong Kong

  Antigua and Barbuda.

  Information about these arrangements, including the operative dates of agreements with other countries, will be made available through the travel trade, on Prestel, and through the media.

  The phased programme of computerisation of the United Kingdom passport offices is due to begins in July this year. Glasgow will be the first, and arrangements are in hand to disperse work on postal applications now done in London to that office as soon as practicable following computerisation, to relieve the pressures on the London office. Computerisation of the remaining five passport offices should be completed by the end of 1989.

  Computerisation is designed to enable the passport offices to cope with the anticipated rises in future demand

  683
  for passport services without the excessive and unacceptable delays that have arisen in recent years with the present outdated manual system of passport production.

  Prisoners (Drug Addicts)
  Sir Dudley Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has of the percentage of prisoners in Her Majesty's prisons who have a drug addiction and who have their habit sustained while they are in prison custody.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The number of inmates reported by medical officers as having some degree of dependence on drugs at the same time of their reception into custody is included in the medical statistics on page 70 of the "Report On The Work of the Prison Service 1986–87" (Cm. 246), a copy of which is in the Library. It shows that 3,051 were so reported during that year. Information is not available on which to estimate how many sustain their addiction while in custody. The House was informed in answer to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Bennett) on 14 December 1987, at column 342, of measures taken in Her Majesty's prisons to prevent and detect illicit drugs.

  Sir Dudley Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what treatments and counselling services are provided for those receiving prison sentences who are found to be hard drug addicts;

  (2) what survey is made of those prisoners serving sentences who have a hard drug addiction; and what clinical and psychological efforts are made to get them off the habit and to attempt to dissuade them from returning to drug taking, either in prison or after their release.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  As the House was informed in answer to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Bennett) on 14 December, at columns 342–43, the possibility of a history of drugs misuse is one of the factors medical officers inquire into during the course of their examination of inmates being received into prison custody. Where indicated, medical help in withdrawing is offered, its nature and extent determined by the medical officer's clinical assessment of the individual case. Additionally, at a number of establishments personal support continuing after withdrawal is provided by members of staff or drug counselling agencies from the community.

  Guidelines prepared in discussion between the Prison Department and probation service for the introduction at all establishments of a more co-ordinated response to drug misusers were issued on 25 September 1987. These describe the responsibility of the Government to ensure the development of a coherent system and the complementary roles of medical and probation officers in the provision of care and support. The use of suitable drug counselling agencies from the community is encouraged. The particular advice offered an inmate prior to discharge will depend upon individual circumstances but progressively as the system is introduced will include the issue of a brief advisory card with which all establishments have been supplied. A copy of the guidelines and card are in the Library.

  Traffic Wardens (London)
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many traffic wardens were deployed in each London borough during the last three completed years.

  Mr Douglas Hogg
  I understand from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis that the information in the form requested could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The traffic warden service was restructured under the reorganisation of the force and responsibility for operational matters devolved to areas. The number of traffic wardens in each of the areas at the end of the last two years was as follows:

  31 December 1986

  31 December 1987

  No. 1 Area (North)

  185

  154

  No. 2 Area (East)

  89

  100

  No. 3 Area (South East)

  169

  156

  No. 4 Area (South)

  189

  153

  No. 5 Area (South West)

  75

  77

  No. 6 Area (West)

  176

  156

  No. 7 Area (North West)

  196

  187

  No. 8 Area (Central)

  429

  413

  1,508

  1,396

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has, pursuant to his reply of 11 March,Official Report, column 357, on the reasons for the reduction of traffic wardens in London between 31 December 1984 and 31 December 1987.

  Mr Douglas Hogg
  I understand from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis that the fall in the number of traffic wardens is due to a high level of resignations and a shortfall in recruitment. Dissatisfaction with pay and conditions are given as the main reasons for resignation. A scrutiny of the traffic warden service has made recommendations for improvements which are being considered.

  London Fire and Civil Defence Authority
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department why he refused to allow the London Fire and Civil Defence Authority to maintain the Greater London co-ordinating centre; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. John Patten
  The Greater London co-ordination centre (GLECC) has been maintained by the London Fire and Civil Defence Authority by virtue of temporary sanctions under section 19 of the Local Government Finance Act 1982. The authority sought primary legislation which would enable it to maintain GLECC on a permanent basis. We concluded, in the light of expert advice, that there was no role for GLECC that could not otherwise be met and that primary legislation would not be justified. The London boroughs have the necessary powers to fund the authority to maintain GLECC if they consider there is a need.

  Police Act 1964
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many cases in 1987 damages
  685
  have been paid after judgment under section 48(2)(a) of the Police Act 1964; what was the average settlement figure; and what was the average level of damages awarded.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  This information is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Metropolitan Police (Wrongful Acts)
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what were the amounts paid in out-of-court settlements of claims arising from the wrongful acts of Metropolitan police officers in 1987; and what were the amounts paid under awards made by courts in 1987 and the number of cases concluded in 1987.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I understand from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis that in 1987 the total amount paid by the Metropolitan police in settlements out of court arising from allegations of wrongful acts by Metropolitan police officers (whether or not formal proceedings were instituted) was £173,714. A total of £11,233 was paid under awards made by the courts. In all, 133 cases were concluded.

  BBC Hulton Picture Library
  Mr. Adley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement about the future of the BBC Hulton picture library.

  Mr. Renton
  I understand that it is the BBC's intention to sell the Hulton picture library. There are likely to be certain conditions attached to its sale, however, which might include a requirement for it to remain in the United Kingdom and for it to retain its title.

  Immigration Officers (Birmingham)
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many immigration officers were based at the Birmingham immigration office at 31 December 1987.

  Mr. Renton
  Twenty-four.

  Entry Clearance Applications
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many entry clearance applications had been referred to his Department by entry clearance officers but had not yet been allocated to an immigration office at 31 December 1987.

  Mr. Renton
  I regret that the information requested is not available.

  Summer Time
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps the Government have in mind for the future of summer time.

  Mr. Hurd
  An order has been laid before Parliament to continue the present arrangements for 1989. Departments are being asked to consult interested groups on the merits of three options which emerged with the most support from a preliminary survey towards the end of last year. These are the continuation of the present position; the 686
  harmonisation of the date for ending summer time to bring it into line with the rest of the Community; or the introduction of Greenwich mean time plus one hour in the winter, with Greenwich mean time plus two hours from the end of March to the end of September. The last option would mean that the United Kingdom would be in the same time zone as most other EC countries throughout the whole year. Copies of the consultation document have today been placed in the Library of the House. After this consultation process has been completed the Government will canvas public and parliamentary opinion more generally with a view to testing the degree of support for change.

  Lunar House, Croydon
  Mr. Speed
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the average and maximum recorded delay before members of the public are able to get through by telephone to the passport and immigration departments, respectively, at Lunar house, Croydon.

  Mr. Renton
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]: Information is not available on the number of calls to Lunar house which receive an engaged tone. Information is available on the average and maximum recorded delays for calls from members of the public who have been connected to the nationality telephone inquiry bureau at Lunar house but whose calls have not yet been answered. This does not, however, distinguish between calls that are answered and those that are terminated by the exchange equipment or the callers.

  Over the three months from December 1987 to February 1988 the average and maximum recorded delays described above were three minutes and 14 minutes respectively.

  Similar information about calls answered by the immigration telephone inquiry bureau is not available. However, on the afternoon of 22 March, the average waiting time was six minutes. The longest delay was nine minutes.

  Mr. Speed
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many staff are currently employed answering telephone calls from the public in the passport and immigration departments at Lunar house, Croydon; and what was the comparable figure 12 months ago.

  Mr. Renton
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]: The nationality telephone inquiry bureau has nine staff answering telephone calls from the public compared to six, 12 months ago.

  The immigration telephone inquiry bureau has an average of 10 staff carrying out this duty compared to 17 a year ago. The reduction reflects the priority given to providing staff for the public inquiry office which deals with those who call in person.

  Mr. Speed
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to improve telephone access to the public of the facilities at Lunar house, Croydon.

  Mr. Renton
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]: The matter is being given urgent consideration.

  Mr. Speed
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many outside telephone lines are
  687
  currently available to receive calls from the public at the passport and immigration departments at Lunar house, Croydon.

  Mr. Renton
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]: The nationality telephone inquiry bureau has 14 telephone lines available to receive calls from the public. There are 30 lines in the immigration telephone inquiry bureau.

  Michael Ryan
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to what procedure was used by the late Michael Ryan to deliver his original firearms form 1 application to Thames Valley police;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and procedure used by the late Michael Ryan to deliver firearms form 1 applications for variation to Thames Valley police.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that this information is not available.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to the date and procedure used to deliver the original firearms certificate to the late Michael Ryan and the registration identification number;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to the date and procedure used to deliver the varied firearms certificates to the late Michael Ryan, and the registration identification number.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that records relating to the delivery of firearm certificates are destroyed after six months. The information requested is therefore not available. However, the normal practice is to send firearm certificates by recorded delivery through the post.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to which of the chief constable, deputy chief constable or assistant chief constable personally authorised the original grant of the firearms certificate to the late Michael Ryan, or the rank to which they delegated that responsibility;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which either the chief constable, deputy chief constable or assistant chief constable personally authorised the variations to the firearms certificate of the late Michael Ryan or the rank to which that responsibility was delegated.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan's application for a firearm certificate was authorised at assistant chief constable level and that his variation applications were also authorised at that level on 30 April 1987 and 30 July 1987.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the 688
  chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to the ranks of police officers or civilians receiving the late Michael Ryan's application for the original grant of a firearms certificate at police headquarters;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to the date on which the original firearms form 1 application was received and recorded at local station level and by what rank of police officer or civilian acting for the police in the case of the application of the late Michael Ryan;

  (3) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and the rank of police officers or civilians recording receipt of the grant fee of £25, the receipt number and date in respect of firearms certificates issued to the late Michael Ryan by Thames Valley police.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan's application for the grant of firearms certificate was received at Hungerford police station on 26 November 1986 by a police constable who issued a receipt (number 472484) for the fee paid. The application was received at police headquarters by the assistant chief constable on 10 December 1986.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will place in the Library the contents of the statement made by the ex-manager of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, to the police, into the status of the late Michael Ryan's membership on 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 December 1986; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: No. It is not the practice to disclose the contents of statements obtained during police inquiries into criminal offences.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the police have located or seized a 7·65mm/0·32 Scorpion machine pistol alleged to have been held at any time by the late Michael Ryan on a firearms certificate.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that they have no knowledge of the weapon in question.

  Firearms
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many firearms certificates had been granted on, or prior to, 11 December 1986 by the Thames Valley police to applicants giving their good reasons as(a) probationary or (b) full membership of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that no firearm certificates were issued on or before the date in question to applicants giving probationary membership of the Dunmore shooting centre as their good reason for possessing a firearm. Information in respect of applicants having full membership at that time is not known.
  689
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will place a copy of the original home approval certificate for the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, and any subsequent amendments or additions to, and renewals of it in the Library;

  (2) if he will (a) list and (b) place in the Library copies of all relevant documents relating to inquiries made and completed by his Department and Thames Valley or other police forces into the applications by the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, for consideration for the issue, amendment, additions to, or renewals of, his Department's approval certificates;

  (3) if he will (a) list and (b) place in the Library a copy of all documents submitted in the course of the applications by the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon to the police or his Department for the issue, amendment, addition to, or renewal of, his Department's approval certificates;

  (4) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to on which date the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, was first granted his Department's approval and on which subsequent dates this approval was reviewed and certificates reissued or renewed.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: The club in question was approved for the use of small and full-bore pistols on 16 September 1986 and approval was extended to small and full-bore rifles on 15 February 1988.

  It is not the practice to place documents of this kind in the House Library.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will place in the Library a copy of Home Office form coded PSL 4381 Firearms 20. (Rev. 5/69) and all such amended variations since 1968 to include draft and any final copies of those forms recommended by his recent working parties.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: We have been unable to identify the form requested with either the Home Office stationery branch or Her Majesty's Stationery Office. If the hon. Member would care to send further details of the form requested we will look into the matter further.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will place in the Library(a) a copy of Thames Valley police form FIR 25(9/74), (b) all such previous variations of copy since 1968, (c) all amended variations of copy form since 19 August 1987 and (d) a copy of the questionnaire completed by police officers or civilians after interview of the late Michael Ryan upon receipt by Thames Valley police of his original firearms form 1 application for a firearms certificate;

  (2) if he will place in the Library (a) a copy of Thames Valley police form FIR 25(9/74) and (b) a copy of the questionnaire completed by police officers or police civilian employees after interviewing the late Michael Ryan upon receipt by Thames Valley police of his firearms form 1 variations applications to his firearms certificate;

  (3) if he will place a copy of the Thames Valley force's standing orders concerning the administration of the Firearms Act 1968 with dates of issue and all amendments to it, with dates, in the Library.
  690
  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable that the documents requested are essentially for operational use and I do not think it right to place a copy of them in the Library.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) who holds(a) the provisional and (b) full membership cards for the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, issued to the late Michael Ryan; and if he will place copies in the Library;

  (2) who holds the firearms certificate issued to the late Michael Ryan; and if he will place a copy in the Library;

  (3) who holds the provisional membership card for the Wiltshire shooting centre issued to the late Michaal Ryan; and if he will place a copy in the Library.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan's firearm certificate has never been found. It is believed that it was destroyed in the fire at his home together with his club membership card.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many entries were made by the late Michael Ryan in the register of users of the range facilities of the Wiltshire shooting centre;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many visits were made by the late Michael Ryan, and on what dates, to the Wiltshire shooting centre.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan attended the Wiltshire shooting club on at least 10 occasions between 13 July and 19 August 1987. Further details of the visits made are not known.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the firearms form 1 variations applications were received from the late Michael Ryan and recorded at(a) local station and (b) division; and by what rank of police officer or civilian police employee;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and the ranks of police officers or civilian police employees receiving the late Michael Ryan's applications for variations of his firearms certificate at police headquarters.

  (3) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the rank of police officer or civilian recording receipt of the variation fee of £20, the receipt number and date, in respect of each variation of the firearms certificate of the late Michael Ryan.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan's applications for a varitation of his firearm certificate were received on 24 March 1987 and 17 July 1987 at Hungerford police station by a police sergeant who issued receipts for the variation fee paid (numbers 503378 and 508185). The applications were received at police headquarters by the assistant chief constable on 2 April 1987 and 30 July 1987.
  691
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and rank of all police officers or civilians(a) involved in and (b) authorising by means of signature each stage of inquiries relating to the variation applications by the late Michael Ryan on his firearms certificate; and which stages did not contain a request for a signature, rank, or date by inquiring police officers and-or civilians;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and the rank of police officers and/or civilian police employees completing the processing at (a) local station and (b) divisional level and passing the applications to vary his firearms certificate by the late Michael Ryan to force headquarters.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan's first application to vary his firearm certificate was submitted by a police constable on or about 28 March 1987 to a superintendent who forwarded it on 1 April 1987. It was received by the assistant chief constable the following day for approval. His second application was submitted by a police constable to an acting inspector on or about 25 July 1987 who forwarded it on the same day to a chief inspector. The application was received on 30 July 1987 by the assistant chief constable for approval.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and ranks of police officers or civilian police employees completing the checks with special branch for the variations to the firearms certificate of the late Michael Ryan;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and the ranks of police officers or civilians completing the checks with special branch for the original grant of a firearms certificate for the late Michael Ryan.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that no checks other than those made with the criminal records office were made.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to on which dates and by what rank of police officer or civilian police employee the late Michael Ryan was advised concerning storage security arrangements upon applications for variations to his firearms certificate;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to on which dates and which rank of police officers or civilian police employees inspected the storage and security arrangements at the house of the late Michael Ryan upon applications for variations to his firearms certificate;

  (3) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the dates and ranks of police officers or civilians first recording the information regarding the possession by the late Michael Ryan of a firearms security cabinet;

  (4) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to what ranks of
  692
  police officers or civilians inspected the storage and security arrangements at the house of the late Michael Ryan; and on which date each visit took place;

  (5) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to on what date arid by what rank of police officer or civilian acting for the police the late Michael Ryan was advised concerning storage security arrangements and obtaining a security cabinet.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that a police constable visited Michael Ryan's house on 30 November 1986 to inspect his storage and security arrangements in respect of his application for a firearm certificate. Further inspections were carried out on 28 March 1987 and 25 July 1987 by a police officer of the same rank in respect of applications made to vary the original certificate. A survey was also carried out by a police constable from the community liaison department as a crime prevention officer.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to date on which the late Michael Ryan signed and dated his original firearms form 1 application for a firearms certificate; and if he will place a copy of it in the Library;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan signed and dated his firearms form 1 application for variations of his firearms certificate; and if he will place copies of it in the Library.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that the dates on which Michael Ryan signed his original application form and applications for a variation of a firearm certificate were 23 November 1986, 23 March 1987 and 14 July 1987 respectively.

  The requested documents are essentially for police operational use, and I do not think it right to place them in the Library.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date and the ranks of police officers or civilian police employees completing the checks with the criminal records office for the variations to the firearms certificate of the late Michael Ryan;

  (2) If he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date completed and ranks of police officers or civilians completing the checks with the criminal records office for the original grant of a firearms certificate for the late Michael Ryan.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police detailed records of checks made with the Criminal Record Office are not kept.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan was granted provisional membership of the Wiltshire shooting centre; by whom; after what assessment; and by what procedure:
  693
  (2) If he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan made written application for membership of the Wiltshire shooting centre;

  (3) If he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan's application was received by the Wiltshire shooting centre; and by whom.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan joined the club in question on 13 July 1987 but that further details of his application for membership are not known.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date procedure used and ranks of police officers or civilians involved in the checks to verify the late Michael Ryan's(a) provisional and (b) full membership of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon; and with whom they have been verified by the police at the club and on behalf of that club;

  (2) If he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the dates, procedures used and ranks of police officers or civilian police employees involved in the checks to verify the late Michael Ryan's (a) provisional and (b) full membership of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon; and with whom they had been varified at the clubs, upon his application for variation to his firearms certificate;

  (3) If he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the dates and ranks of police officers and-or civilians involved in the checks to verify the late Michael Ryan's provisional membership of the Wiltshire shooting centre; and with whom they had been verified at the club, upon his application for variations to his firearms cerficate.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988] : I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that it is common practice for reporting officers to telephone club secretaries to confirm membership of a club and to discuss an application with the secretary. Available police records indicate that the secretaries of both clubs in question were contacted but not the dates on which inquiries were made.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to on what dates police officers or civilians acting for the police discussed the application for the original grant of a firearms certificate with the late Michael Ryan;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to on which dates police officers or civilian police employees discussed the applications for variations of his firearms certificate with the late Michael Ryan.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 19881: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that interviews with Michael Ryan about his applications for the grant and variation of a firearm certificate took place on 30 November 1986, 28 March 1987 and on or about 25 July 1987.
  694
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the good reasons written by the late Michael Ryan on his firearms form 1 variations applications for each firearm, requested in his applications for variations of his firearms certificate;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the good reason written by the late Michael Ryan on his original firearms form I for each firearm, requested in his application for a firearms certificate.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that the good reason given by Michael Ryan on his firearm application and renewal forms was target shooting on approved ranges.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many Thames Valley police officers were involved in giving any form of instruction or guidance in(a) the use of firearms or (b) related matters, to the late Michael Ryan, giving ranks and dates.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that this information is not available.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to what procedures or requirements have been amended by the Wiltshire shooting centre in respect of applications for membership since 19 August 1987.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that inquiries made of the Wiltshire police indicate that no changes in the rules regarding membership of the Wiltshire shooting centre have been made since the date in question.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan was granted provisional membership of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon; by whom; what assessment was made; and by what procedure;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan was granted full membership of Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon; by whom; what assessment was made; and by what procedure;

  (3) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan made written application for membership of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon;

  (4) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date on which the late Michael Ryan's application for membership of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon was received; and by whom.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan's applications for

  695
  provisional arid full membership of the club in question were granted by its manager on August bank holiday 1986 and 8 December 1986 respectively. Details relating to the consideration given to these applications is not known. Nor is it known whether the applications were made in writing.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the date

  Date of purchase or date of notification where date of sale not known

  Make or model of firearm

  Date of sale or transfer

  Firearm dealer

  23 December 1986

  Beretta 9 mm pistol

  —

  Dunmore shooting centre

  8 January 1987

  Smith and Wesson ·38 pistol

  2 May 1987

  Dunmore shooting centre

  6 May 1987

  Bernadelli ·22 pistol

  —

  Dunmore shooting centre

  3 May 1987

  CZ 32 pistol

  —

  Sportique

  6 August 1987

  7·762 Kalashnikov rifle

  —

  Westbury Guns

  8 August 1987

  ·30 Underwood rifle

  —

  Wiltshire shooting centre

  I further understand that Michael Ryan was authorised to possess, at any one time, 500 rounds of each calibre, but restricted to acquiring only 200 rounds at any one time of each calibre. Information relating to the amount of ammunition he purchased is not known as this is recorded on the firearm certificate presumed destroyed at the fire at his home.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many entries were made by the late Michael Ryan in the register of users of the range facilities of the Dunmore shooting centre;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many visits were made, and on what dates, by the late Michael Ryan to the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that range records for the club in question show Michael Ryan attended the range facilities on the following dates:

  29 September 1986

  6 October 1986

  8 October 1986

  17 October 1986

  20 October 1986

  21 October 1986

  11 November 1986

  18 November 1986

  20 November 1986

  25 November 1986

  28 November 1986

  1 December 1986

  10 December 1986

  6 January 1987

  21 January 1987

  7 February 1987

  16 February 1987

  23 February 1987

  24 February 1987

  5 March 1987

  9 April 1987

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to what
  696
  of purchase, sale or transfer by the late Michael Ryan of all firearms, giving the make and model and quantity of each calibre of ammunition in each case and the names of all firearms dealers involved.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that details of Michael Ryan's firearm transactions are as follows:

  procedures or requirements have been amended by the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, in respect of applications for membership since 19 August 1987.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that since September 1987 the club in question requires a minimum period of six months probation before full membership may be conferred.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to the dates and ranks of all police officers or civilians(a) involved in and (b) authorising by means of signature each stage of inquiries relating to the original grant of the application by the late Michael Ryan of a firearms certificate; and which stages did not contain a request for a signature, rank, or date by inquiring police officers;

  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to the ranks of police officers or civilians completing inquiries at (a) local station and (b) divisional level into the application by the late Michael Ryan for the original grant of a firearms certificate;

  (3) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police as to the date on which completed, and rank of police officers or civilians completing the processing at (a) local station and (b) divisional level and passing the original application for a firearms certificate by the late Michael Ryan to force headquarters.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that Michael Ryan's application for a firearms certificate was submitted by a police constable on or after 30 November 1986 to a chief inspector and that it was received by the assistant chief constable on 10 December 1986 for approval.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many Thames Valley police officers were members of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, on the date the late Michael Ryan applied for membership;
  697
  (2) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many Thames Valley police officers are currently members of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon;

  (3) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police force as to how many Thames Valley police officers were members of the Dunmore shooting centre, Abingdon, on 19 August 1987.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 25 February 1988]: I understand from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police that the information requested is not known.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Mentally Ill People
  Mr. Goodlad
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) how many residential places have been provided in the community for patients discharged from mental hospitals in Northern Ireland in each of the last 10 years;

  (2) how many residential places have been provided in the community for patients discharged from mental hospitals in Northern Ireland with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia psychoses in each of the last 10 years;

  (3) how many residential places in the community have been provided for patients with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia psychoses discharged from mental hospitals in Northern Ireland in each of the last 10 years.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not held centrally. Local provision of living accommodation available for those discharged from mental hospitals comprises a wide range of residential types including hostels, group homes, residential and nursing homes and private accommodation run by individual carers. This range of accommodation is operated by the statutory, private and voluntary sectors and is not necessarily solely for those discharged from mental hospitals.

  Mr. Goodlad
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many patients with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia psychoses have been discharged from mental hospitals in Northern Ireland in each of the last 10 years.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The available information is given below:

  Year

  Number of discharges

  1986

  981

  1985

  1,120

  1984

  1,096

  1983

  1,037

  1982

  985

  1981

  1,015

  1980

  1,078

  1979

  983

  1978

  1,063

  1977

  1,040

  These figures may include patients discharged more than once in the same year.

  Mr. Goodlad
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many long-stay mental patients he expects there will be in Northern Ireland in each of the next seven years.
  698
  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not available centrally.

  Mental Hospitals
  Mr. Goodlad
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) how many mental hospital beds have been opened in Northern Ireland in each of last 10 years;

  (2) how many mental hospital beds have been closed in Northern Ireland in each of the last 10 years.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not available in the form requested.

  The net figures for beds available in mental illness hospitals (that is adjusted to take account of beds opened and closed) for the period from 1977 to 1986 are :

  Year

  Beds

  1986

  4,330

  1985

  4,478

  1984

  4,599

  1983

  4,732

  1982

  1

  1981

  4,760

  1980

  4,777

  1979

  4,889

  1978

  4,903

  1977

  4,999

  1 Not available due to industrial action.

  Protestants and Roman Catholics
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what are the most recent percentages available for the Protestant and Roman Catholic sections of the community; what percentage of Protestants and Roman Catholics are known to be employed by(a) the Bank of Ireland and (b) Allied Irish Banks plc; and which departments of the Northern Ireland Office employ either the Bank of Ireland or Allied Irish Banks as their bankers.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  It is estimated that 36.8 per cent. of the population of Northern Ireland aged 16 and over in 1987 were Roman Catholic and 60.9 per cent non-Roman Catholic. In the survey from which these figures are taken 2 to 3 per cent. of those surveyed did not state a religion.

  The latest available figures published by the Fair Employment Agency in March 1986 show the percentages of Protestants and Catholics employed in the banks referred to as follows:

  align="right">Protestant per cent.

  Catholic per cent.

  Bank of Ireland

  42

  58

  Allied Irish Banks plc

  28

  72

  The Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland employs Allied Irish Banks plc as its banker. No other Northern Ireland Department employs either bank as its principal banker, although several have isolated accounts with one or the other.

  Psychiatric Nurses
  Mr. Goodlad
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many community psychiatric nurses there were in Northern Ireland in 1979; how many there are now; and how many he estimates there will be in 1991.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The information is as follows:
  699

  Community psychiatric nurses in the health and personal social services

  Year

  Number

  1979

  30

  1987

  115

  11991

  169

  1 Estimated.

  International Investments Ltd.
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will call for a report from the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary on the progress of inquiries into the losses incurred by Northern Ireland investors with International Investments Ltd. of Gibraltar.

  Mr. Stanley
  The Royal Ulster Constabulary's fraud squad has been conducting an investigation into the financial affairs of International Investments Ltd. following the collapse of the company in June 1984. I can confirm that papers on the case have been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who directed no prosecution against agents employed by the company in Northern Ireland. The police investigation is continuing into other aspects of the case and it is likely to be some time before it is concluded.

  Radioactive Fallout
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will give details of the medical consequences of the radioactive fallout in Northern Ireland(a) as anticipated following the fire in No. 1 Pile at Windscale in October 1957 and (b) by today's standards.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  No medical consequences were anticipated in 1957 nor have the Government any evidence to suggest that the health of people in Northern Ireland has been adversely affected by this incident.

  Housing
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many dwellings were constructed in each of the past live years by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive; and how many architectural staff were employed by the Executive in each of those five years.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Housing Executive but I am advised by the chief executive that the number of dwellings constructed and the number of architectural staff employed by the Housing Executive in each of the last five years is as follows:

  Year

  Number of dwellings

  Number of architectural staff1

  1983

  4,044

  174

  1984

  3,588

  173

  1985

  3,233

  169

  1986

  2,580

  161

  1987

  1,764

  160

  1 Architectural work is also undertaken by consultants.

  Environmental Health and Building Control Staff
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which district councils are within each 700
  group system for the employment of environmental health and building control staff; in each group, which council has the authority to make the individual appointments: and what roles or authority the other councils have in each group when new appointments are being made.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The district councils which are within each group system for the employment of environmental health and building control staff are prescribed in article 3 of the Local Government (Employment of Environmental Health Officers) Order (NI) 1973 (SR & O (NI) 1973 No. 168) and the Local Government (Employment of Building Control Staff) Order (NI) 1973 (SR & O (NI) 1973 No. 167) copies of which are available in the Library. Article 4(1) of those orders identifies those councils, known as employer councils, which have authority to make individual appointments.

  Other councils within each group have a representative role in relation to appointments. They are represented on a group committee which advises the employer council on staffing levels and they may also be present on shortlisting and interviewing panels for new appointments although they have no voting rights.

  Community Programme
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will publish the guidelines set out for entrance on the community programme in the Province; and whether consultations are held with relevant representatives of commerce and business prior to community programme schemes being undertaken.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Guidelines for the action For community employment scheme are contained in leaflet CP1 published by the Department of Economic Development. These guidelines place a responsibility on ACE sponsors to consult with relevant bodies, including industry and commerce, whose interest may be affected by a proposed project.

  Harland and Wolff
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what estimate he has of how many jobs outside Harland and Wolff are directly related to the activities of the company(a) in Northern Ireland and (b) in Great Britain.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Based on a number of recent studies the number of jobs in Northern Ireland directly related to the activities of Harland and Wolff is about 500. There are insufficient statistical data available to provide an accurate assessment of the numbers in Great Britain.

  Residential and Commercial Property
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will take steps to have replaced the use of site value as a basis of compensation for residential or commercial property compulsorily required for redevelopment by a more equitable arrangement for compensation through market value payments.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Legislation to abolish the site value rule for residential property in article 91(1) of the Housing (NI) Order 1981 will be brought forward as soon as practicable in line with a similar proposal for Great
  701
  Britain. The current site value rule does not apply to commercial properties for which compensation is already assessed on the basis of market value.

  Ministerial Private Office (Staff)
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether any members of the staff of the Private Office of the Minister responsible for agriculture, Lord Lyell, was absent on leave on 24 January 1987.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  No.

  Houses in Multiple Occupation
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) what percentage of tenants in houses in multiple occupation in Northern Ireland receive housing benefit;

  (2) in how many cases housing benefit is paid directly to the landlords of houses in multiple occupation in Northern Ireland.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The information is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Government Offices (Relocation)
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what are his intentions about the relocation of central Government offices into South Down in the light of the level of unemployment in that constituency.

  Mr. Stanley
  I cannot at present add to the reply that I gave to the hon. Gentleman on 10 November 1987, at column 165.

  Housing Associations
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list all the housing associations in Northern Ireland and give details of the number of habitations provided by each of them.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The attached table lists all the housing associations registered with the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland and indicates the number of dwellings managed by them at 31 December 1987.

  Information on unregistered housing associations is not held centrally.

  Registered Housing Associations—stock in management at 31 December 1987

  Association

  Stock

  Abbeyfleld NI Development Society

  8

  Ballymacarrett Housing Association

  9

  Ballynafeigh Housing Association

  161

  Baptist Union of Ireland Housing Association

  32

  Belfast Community Housing Association

  138

  Belfast Improved Houses

  1,079

  Ben Madigan Housing Association

  31

  Botanic Housing Association

  56

  Broadway Housing Association

  Nil

  Church of Ireland Housing Association (NI)

  63

  Clonard Housing Association

  37

  Connswater Housing Association

  203

  Coral Crescent Housing Association

  21

  702

  Association

  Stock

  Covenanter Residential Association

  32

  Craigavon and District Housing Association

  202

  Craigowen Housing Association

  2

  Derry Housing Association

  236

  Donacloney Housing Association

  92

  Down and Connor Housing Association

  Nil

  Dungannon and District Housing Association

  68

  Flax Housing Association

  Nil

  Fold Housing Association

  1,314

  Gosford Housing Association (Armagh)

  41

  Grove Housing Association

  373

  Habinteg Housing Association (Ulster)

  294

  Hearth

  58

  James Butcher Housing Association (NI)

  736

  Latharna Housing Association

  21

  Lisnagarvey Housing Association

  18

  Malone Housing Association

  66

  Masonic Housing Association (NI)

  93

  McGarel Housing Association

  21

  Newington Housing Association (1975)

  158

  Northern Ireland Co-ownership Housing Association

  5,999

  Nih Housing Association

  242

  North Belfast Mission Housing Society

  9

  Open Door Housing Association (NI)

  38

  Presbytarian Housing Association (NI)

  286

  Royal British Legion Housing Association (NI)

  389

  Students' Housing Association Co-op

  164

  St. Matthew's Housing Association

  136

  Tennent Street District Housing Association

  144

  Triangle Women's Housing Association

  33

  Ulidia Housing Association

  84

  Ulster Homemaker

  Nil

  Willowfield Parish Church Housing Association

  50

  Woodvale and Shankill Housing Association

  247

  Total

  13,484

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what proportion of his Department's budget is spent in the inner cities.

  Mr. Stanley
  There is no formal definition of inner city areas for Northern Ireland. However, several measures are specifically designed to promote urban regeneration and the budget for these schemes in 1988/89 is 15·4 million.

  Royal Ulster Constabulary
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will call for a report from the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary on the role of Royal Ulster Constabulary informants and paid agents, and the control over payments made to them and as to what sums were used for these purposes in the latest available year; what was the largest sum paid to one individual in the latest available year; when changes were last made in the financial controls; what were the last changes made in procedures; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Tom King
  It is not the practice to comment on such matters.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what form of declaration of secrecy officers of the Royal Ulster Constabulary are required to sign; and what guidance is given to them on the extent to which this permits or obliges them to conceal material evidence from investigating officers or the courts.
  703
  Mr. Tom King
  All RUC officers are subject to the provisions of the Official Secrets Act 1911, 1920 and 1939. No guidance of the type mentioned by the hon. Member is given.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many Royal Ulster Constabulary personnel are also members of the Orange Order, Freemasons, Royal Black Preceptory and the Apprentice Boys; if he will initiate an investigation into the effects of this membership and compatibility of such membership with service in the Royal Ulster Constabulary; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stanley
  [holding answer 28 March 1988]: The information requested is not available. There are no plans to initiate such an investigation.

  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many civilians have been killed by members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary since 1969.

  Mr. Stanley
  [holding answer 29 February 1988]: Forty, including civilians believed to have been terrorists and civilians who were not.

  Urgent Needs Payments
  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on recovery of urgent needs payments made as a result of flood damage in Strabane, indicating what consideration was given to the questions referred to in 58602 (2) of the urgent cases regulation 25 under the Supplementary Benefit Act 1976, section 4(2).

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The recovery of urgent needs payments made as a result of flood damage in Strabane is being considered in accordance with regulation 25 of the urgent cases regulations and with paragraph 8602 and other relevant paragraphs of the supplementary benefit manual.

  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the procedure instructions in code AX to adjudication officers in Northern Ireland regarding the manner and rate of recovery of an urgent needs payment and whether to abandon recovery.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: The procedures for both the recovery and abandonment of recovery of urgent needs payments in Northern Ireland follow those in operation in the rest of the United Kingdom. They provide for recovery to be abandoned where the claimant's resources are at or below supplementary benefit level and there is no, or is unlikely to be, available capital or disregarded income from which recovery may be made. In those cases where recovery action is appropriate, repayment may be made either by a lump sum payment, where the claimant has available capital, or by instalments, or deduction from supplementary benefit or other prescribed benefits. In each case the rate of recovery is determined in relation to the claimant's resources and requirements. Where supplementary benefit is in payment the weekly rate of recovery is subject to an overriding limit of £10 where there is available capital, or half the weekly amount of disregarded income.

  Where supplementary benefit is not in payment, the weekly rate of recovery is limited to the amount by which
  704
  resources exceed supplementary benefit requirements plus half of any disregarded income or £10 where there is available capital, subject to an overriding limit of one third of the claimants' personal benefit rate.

  Homes (Insulation)
  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement indicating the total financial allocation to the new homes insulation scheme.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: The allocation for this scheme for the 1988–89 financial year is £297,000.

  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what information is available to indicate the numbers of insulation grants made in each of the past three years to people who were not on housing benefit, supplementary benefit, or family income supplement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: No such information is available.

  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what information is available to indicate the numbers and total values of supplementary benefit single payments for insulation or draught-proofing in Northern Ireland in 1986 and 1987.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 30 March 1988]: Information in the precise form requested is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, the annual statistical inquiry shows that the following payments were made for draught-proofing during the preceding 12 months to people on supplementary benefit at the time of the inquiry:

  Inquiry

  Single Payments

  Numbers

  £

  February 1986

  8,307

  468,718

  May 1986

  11,776

  502,319

  Source: 5 per cent. sample.

  Chernobyl
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what investigations have taken place into the presence of radioactive materials deposited in Northern Ireland as a result of the accident at Chernobyl; what is his assessment of the period which will pass before restrictions on the affected areas will be lifted; and if he will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: Following the accident at Chernobyl the Departments of Agriculture and Environment undertook Province-wide investigations into the levels of radioactivity in milk and milk products, meat, fish, forage, fruit, cereals, migratory birds, air and water. Experimental investigations were carried out on the transfer of radio caesium from forage to milk, milk products and sheepmeat.

  It is not possible at this time to predict when the controls on the movement and slaughter of sheep from the three restricted areas could be lifted.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what sums have been paid, for how many sheep, and to how many farmers in Northern Ireland for each year or financial year as a result of the Chernobyl accident.
  705
  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: To 28 March 1987 in the current financial year, £951.85 was paid to three farmers in respect of market loss on 121 sheep and £11,688·30 was paid to 83 farmers in respect of handling costs of 8,991 sheep.

  Extraditions (Irish Republic)
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will now list the names of the persons for whom extradition warrants were sent from Northern Ireland to the Irish Rebublic in each of the last five years, indicating in each case which persons were extradited, which warrants were held to be defective, and

  Table A

  Non terrorist-type offences

  Year of request

  Number of requests

  Granted

  Held to be defective while before Irish courts

  Other outcome3

  1983

  6

  2

  11

  3

  1984

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1985

  5

  0

  21

  4

  1986

  6

  0

  0

  6

  1987

  21

  0

  0

  21

  1 B. Burns—warrants defective owing to irregularity in issue.

  2 J. G. O'Reilly—warrants defective primarily because it could not be proved that the person issuing them was a judicial authority.

  Table B

  Non terrorist-type offences

  Year of request

  Number of requests

  Granted

  Held to be defective while before Irish courts

  Other outcome3

  1983

  22

  10

  0

  12

  1984

  10

  1

  0

  9

  1985

  28

  5

  0

  23

  1986

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1987

  1

  1

  0

  0

  3 Includes cases where the warrants were subsequently withdrawn, the fugitive was arrested in the United Kingdom, cases rejected by the Irish courts for other reasons and cases as yet uncompleted.

  Consultancy Contracts
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the total amount spent by his Department in 1987 on management and computer consultancy contracts, excluding hardware and software purchases.

  Mr. Stanley
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: Total expenditure under this head in 1987–88 is estimated at £2,862,000.

  MV Saga Moon
  Mr. Prescott
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will call for a report from the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary on the incident on the vessel Saga Moon in the port of Belfast, on 14 March; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stanley
  [holding answer 28 March 1988]: No. The officers involved in the alleged incident on the Saga Moon were members of the Belfast harbour police and as such do not come under the jurisdiction of the Chief Constable of the RUC.
  706
  the manner in which they were defective in each case, and whether the persons being sought were to be charged with terrorist-type activity.

  Mr. Stanley
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: As I indicated to the hon. Gentleman on 9 February, at column 165, it would not be in the public interest to give details of individual cases prior to Irish court proceedings, Furthermore, it must be remembered that an extradition application can consist of many individual warrants and be the subject of extensive discussion with the Irish authorities.

  Against this background, the available information is as follows:

  Sinn Fein
  Rev. Martin Smyth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about his policy towards proscription of Sinn Fein and organisations which may pose a threat to the state.

  Mr. King
  [holding answer 28 March 1988]: As I made clear in the House on 17 March, at columns 1247–48, in response to questions from the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. Maginnis) and my hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Gow), we keep such matters under review.

  Homelessness
  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what figures are available to indicate the number of homeless households in a given week in Northern Ireland.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 24 March 1988]: Information on the exact number of homeless households

  707
  in Northern Ireland is not available. However, the following information gives some indication of the extent of homelessness in Northern Ireland.

  At 31 December 1987 26 homeless families and 75 homeless single people were living in temporary accommodation arranged or provided by area health and social services boards and voluntary organisations.

  At the same date the total number of applicants who had been awarded A1 status — that is, in need of accommodation because of homelessness or threatened homelessness or other emergency situations—under the Northern Ireland Housing Executive's housing selection scheme was 601. Few, if any, of these applicants were without shelter of some form.

  Civilians (Deaths)
  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many civilians have been killed by members of the British armed forces in Northern Ireland since 1969.

  Mr. Stanley
  [holding answer 29 February 1988]: Two hundred and forty, including civilians believed to have been terrorists and civilians who were not.

  Northern Ireland nursing staff by board at 31 December 1987

  Eastern board

  Northern board

  Southern board

  Western board

  All boards

  Full time

  Part time

  WTE of part time

  Full time

  Part time

  WTE of part time

  Full time

  Part time

  WTE of part time

  Full time

  Part time

  WTE of part time

  Full time

  Part time

  WTE of part time

  CANO1

  1

  —

  —

  1

  —

  —

  1

  1

  —

  1

  —

  —

  4

  —

  —

  SANO1

  2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  2

  —

  —

  ACANO1

  5

  —

  —

  3

  —

  —

  3

  —

  —

  3

  —

  —

  14

  —

  —

  Director of Nursing Services2

  14

  —

  —

  3

  —

  —

  3

  —

  —

  4

  —

  —

  24

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 1+

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 3

  —

  —

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  1

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 4

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 5

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 6

  9

  —

  —

  6

  —

  —

  1

  —

  —

  9

  —

  —

  25

  —

  —

  Senior Nursing Grade 7

  46

  —

  —

  20

  —

  —

  39

  —

  —

  32

  1

  0·64

  137

  1

  0·64

  Senior Nursing Grade 8

  62

  —

  —

  23

  1

  0·88

  9

  —

  —

  2

  —

  —

  96

  1

  0·88

  Health Visitor3

  537

  53

  28·47

  248

  58

  37·23

  218

  26

  14·2

  198

  27

  15·81

  1,201

  164

  95·71

  Staff Nurse4

  2,191

  1,655

  945·59

  561

  499

  330·85

  519

  629

  388·55

  963

  215

  134·58

  4,234

  2,998

  1,799·57

  Senior Enrolled Nurse

  51

  10

  7·37

  3

  —

  —

  10

  —

  —

  8

  —

  —

  72

  10

  7·37

  Enrolled Nurse

  785

  748

  459·52

  438

  345

  231·22

  354

  236

  152·92

  384

  50

  31·72

  1,961

  1,379

  875·38

  Nursing Auxiliary

  525

  716

  491·61

  304

  124

  88·3

  193

  158

  105·15

  203

  20

  11·42

  1,225

  1,018

  696·48

  Nursing Assistant

  248

  407

  104·37

  —

  —

  —

  222

  4

  2·8

  168

  13

  8·66

  638

  424

  115·83

  Sisters5

  811

  24

  18·27

  199

  4

  3·05

  219

  16

  8·32

  171

  4

  3·23

  1,400

  48

  32·87

  1 Chief administrative nursing officer; senior administrative nursing officer; assistant chief administrative nursing officer—There are no regional nursing officers or regional nurses employed in the health and personal social services. The grades shown equate to district nursing officer grades 1–7.

  2 Director of nursing services—Information on numbers by grades is not held centrally.

  3 Health visitor includes—Health visitor, health visitor/fieldwork teacher, District nurse, School nurse, District midwife, District nurse/midwife.

  4 Staff nurse includes—Staff nurse, State registered nurse, Staff midwife, Staff nurse/midwife, Staff nurse (RFN).

  5 Sister includes—Community sister (psych), Departmental sister, category B, Night charge nurse, Nursing sister charge nurse 2, Sister-in-charge, Nursing sister-charge nurse I, Ward sister, Departmental charge nurse category C, Departmental sister category C, Deputy charge nurse, Home sister category A, Midwifeiy night sister, Occupational health sister, Senior night sister.

  Consultancy Contracts
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list each management or computer consultancy contract awarded by his Department in 1987, giving in each case the name of the consultancy firm and the subject of the assignment.

  Mr. Stanley
  The information is as follows:

  Nurses
  Mr. Robin Cook
  To ask the Secretary of Stale for Northern Ireland if he will publish a table showing(a) the establishment figures, (b) the funded establishment figures and (c) the in post figures of each of the health and social services boards in Northern Ireland for the following nursing grades; regional nursing officer 1 and 2, regional nurse 1 and 2, district nursing officer grades 1 to 7, director of nursing services grades 1 + to 6, senior nurse grades 1 + to 8, sister I, sister II, health visitor, deputy nursing sister, staff nurse, senior enrolled nurse, enrolled nurse and nursing auxiliary/assistant; and if he will public, for each grade category, the number of employees in fulltime posts, the number of part-time employees and the whole-time equivalents of those part-time employees.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The establishment and funded establishment figures are not held centrally and cannot be obtained in the time available. My hon. Friend with responsibility for these matters will write to the hon. Members.

  The in-post figures are as follows:

  Firm and subject of assignment
  Aims Training — Structured Systems Analysis Design Methodology (SSADM) Consultancy Systems Development.
  Charles Allison—Auditing Development Systems.
  Professor J. Alty—To evaluate the potential contribution of a Northern Ireland Software Engineering Institute to the Local Software Industry.
  Arthur Andersen — Information Technology Resourcing Study.
  A. Manning & Associates—Management Training.

  709
  Beecom—Roads Service Integrated Systems, Water Service Integrated Systems, Systems Development, User Awareness.
  Belfast IT Services—User Awareness.
  Belmin Systems—Videotext software for local sourcing and performance indicators.
  BIC Systems—Microcomputing, Systems Development.
  BIS Applied Systems —Telecommunications, Management Training.
  Brennan & Simmons—New Leadership Initiative—Women and Men Together.
  British Telecom—Government Network.
  Capita Ltd. — Feasibility Study on use of software packages, Strategy Review, Superannuation.
  CCTA — Technical Data Flow System (TDFS), Strategy Study—DFP, Enabling Study, Project Support, Strategy Study—DANI, Strategy Study—DED.
  Chartered Institute of Finance and Accountancy —Financial Skills Training.
  Coopers and Lybrand Associates—The development and implementation of a departmental information technology strategy for social security benefit payments. Financial Management Surveys of 3 Education and Library Boards. IDB Review. Clerical Work. Measurement Training. To advise on the Technical and Economic aspects of Private Sector Electricity Generation
  D. E. Barnard Systems — NI0 Prison Officers Payroll —SSADM. Land Registry. Telecoms. Print Unit Review. Systems Development.
  Deloitte, Haskins and Sells — To examine the Financial Systems of the NI Training Authority Financial Management assignment (Harland and Wolff).
  Denham-Nash—User Awareness.
  Denton Hall Burgin and Warrens—To negotiate and draft Contractural Arrangements with Private Sector Electricity Generators.
  Dianne Bailey Associates—New Staff Appraisal Training.
  Digital—Office Automation.
  Elston Computer Services Ltd. — Development of Payroll System Under VME (Virtual Machine Environment).
  Ernst Whinney—Review Internal Audit.
  EOSYS—Data Communications Strategy Review.
  Frost and Sullivan—Computer Related Training.
  Gilpin Black — Strategy Setting. Objective Setting. Management Skills for Professionals.
  Health Economics Consortium of the University of York—Investment Appraisal Training.
  ICL — Mainframe Upgrade; Technical Support; Programming; Systems Development.
  Industrial Training Service Ltd.—Assistance with new YTP Workscheme; Enterprise Training in Community Workshops; Evaluation of Selected Community Workshops
  Institute of Manpower Studies — Ongoing advice on the application of Equal Opportunity across the Northern Ireland Civil Service
  International Systems Corp of Lancaster (ISCOL)—Review the role and functions of Management and Manpower Review Division (MMRD)
  IT Services Ltd. — Evaluation of Pilot Job Training Programme
  Learmouth and Burchett Management Systems —Implementation of PROMPT (Project Resources Organisation Management and Planning Techniques); DED Training Division; SSADM
  Management Development Services (NI) Ltd. — The provision of Training and Consultancy Services to Enterprise Allowance Participants
  Mary Moran—Assertiveness Skills; Management Training for Women
  K McDowall—Review GIS
  R A McLaughlin—To assist in the Management of the European Community STAR Programme
  NCC—SSADM Manuals
  Netherlands Economic Institute — Enquiry into the proposals of Economic Development in Northern Ireland
  NI Council on Alcohol—Alcohol in the Workplace
  Northern Bank Ltd.—Pre-Retirement
  710
  Otto Gold GMBH & Co. KE—Otto Gold is retained by DED to provide Technical Advice on the Assessment of work carried out under the Lignite Prospecting Licences and Related Mining Feasibility Studies
  PA Management Consultants—Review of Work Study
  Pauline Farrell—New Leadership Initiative
  Phillips Diane—Review functions of Historic Monuments and Buildings Branch
  Price Waterhouse — Assistance with statutory audits; Investment Appraisal; Financial Skills; To review the Pilot Manpower Training Scheme
  Printing and Packaging Industry Research Association —Disposal of Waste Paper
  Purchasing Index (UK) Ltd. — Purchasing studies for DANI, Northern Ireland Housing Executive and the General Supplies Index
  Queen's University of Belfast—Professional Qualifications of Internal Audit offered by Institute of Internal Auditors; Investment Appraisal; Basic Book-keeping; Judicial Review Training
  N M Rothschild & Sons Ltd.—To advise on the viability of the Financial Structure underlying Private Sector Electricity Generating Proposals
  Simdell Ltd.—Register of Student Nurses
  Software Ireland — Computerisation of Valuation and Lands Officer Microcomputing Systems Development User Awareness Development of Payroll System Under VME
  South West Regional Health Authority — Implementation of National Child Health Computer System
  The Mindweeks Partnership—Business Analysis training
  Time Manager International—Time Management
  Touche Ross—Assessment of audit needs, development of audit processes and assistance with computer audit, both for Departmental Internal Audit and the Statutory Audit function
  Touche Ross Management Consultants — Provision of Consultancy Services in the Department of Economic Development in respect of Harland and Wolff
  University of Ulster at Jordanstown—Investment Appraisal Policy Analysts
  Xentec Ltd. — Consultancy — Including Analysis of Technical Design specification for Transit Project

ENVIRONMENT

  Water Supplies
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to announce his decision on the allocation of responsibility for water pipes up to the meter.

  Mr. Moynihan
  An announcement will be made shortly on this and other aspects of the water and sewerage law review.

  Mr. Rathbone
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to report on water board monitoring of the chemical content of water supplies; and what steps he will take if the chemical content is found to be too high.

  Mr. Moynihan
  If the chemical content of a public water supply exceeds concentrations permitted under the EC drinking water directive, the water authority must take steps to reduce the concentrations to an acceptable level. If this will take time, the water undertaker must submit an action programme to the Department for approval. My right hon. Friend has no plans to report on monitoring by water undertakers.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if there has been any official communication from Her Majesty's Government to the European
  711
  Commission that the United Kingdom will comply with the European Community drinking water directive; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The information contained in my statement of 20 January 1988, at column 742, about the withdrawal of nitrate derogations, and in the statement of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment on 21 December 1987, at column 915, about the interpretation of the term "maximum admissible concentration" in the drinking water directive has been officially communicated to the European Commission by Her Majesty's Government.

  Non-governmental Organisations (Grants)
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the non-governmental organisations in receipt of grants from his Department during 1986–87 and 1987–88 together with the size of each grant.

  Mr. Ridley
  I have placed in the Library a list of some 185 bodies in receipt of grant from the Department in the

  Local authorities' housing investment programme allocations: England

  £ millions: 1988–89 prices

  1978–79

  1980–81

  1982–83

  1984–85

  1986–87

  1988–89

  London boroughs and GLC

  1,785

  1,177

  820

  648

  469

  372

  Metropolitan districts

  1,339

  909

  783

  579

  407

  300

  Non-metropolitan districts in South East

  756

  420

  389

  308

  228

  150

  Other non-metropolitan districts

  1,386

  864

  856

  610

  435

  305

  Total

  5,266

  3,370

  2,848

  2,145

  1,539

  1,127

  Notes:

  1. Figures include the basic allocations and homes insulation scheme allocations, also additional retrospective allocations for 1982–83.

  2 South-east is the standard region comprising the authorities in the Department of the Environment administrative eastern (excluding East Anglia) and south-eastern regions.

  Local Authority Housing
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list, at 1986–87 outturn prices, local authorities housing capital expenditure(a) on new building, (b) on renovation of local authority stock, (c) on renovation grants, (d) on loans to housing associations and (e) on other purposes during (i) 1976–77, (ii) 1978–79, (iii) 1980–81, (iv) 1982–83, (v) 1984–85 and (vi) 1986–87; and if he will give this information (1) for England as a whole, (2) for Greater London, (3) for metropolitan authorities outside Greater London, (4) for non metropolitan authorities in the south-east and (5) for non metropolitan authorities in England.

  Mr. Jim Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether regulation 4(1)(e) of the Local Government (Prescribed Expenditure) (Amendment) Regulations 1988 applies to capital receipts arising from the disposal of assets acquired by councils from development corporations under the new towns transfer agreements; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Chope
  I shall write to the hon. Members.

  North Sea Conference
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will outline the reasons for the United 712
  relevant years. The Department also operates schemes for providing revenue support to housing associations; assisting companies and other organisations with the cost of reclaiming derelict land; assisting with the provision of water supply and sewerage in assisted areas; and assisting statutory water companies with civil defence costs. The list excludes organisations in receipt of local authority or non departmental public body contributions supported by grant from the Department.

  Housing Investment Programme
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list at 1988–89 prices his Department's initial housing investment programme allocations(a) to English local authorities, (b) to local authorities in Greater London, (c) to metropolitan authorities outside London, (d) to non-metropolitan authorities in the south-east and (e) to English non-metropolitan authorities (i) for 1978–79, (ii) for 1980–81., (iii) for 1982–83 (iv) for 1984–85 (v) for 1986–87 and (vi) for 1988–89.

  Mrs. Roe
  The figures are in the table:

  Kingdom's rejection of the European Commission proposal of December 1987 to implement the results of the North sea conference at European Community level.

  Mr. Moynihan
  Far from rejecting any formal proposal, the United Kingdom agreed with all other member states of the Environment Council on 3 December 1987 on conclusions welcoming the significant progress made at the second international conference on the protection of the North sea. The council recalled the need to combat fresh water and marine pollution, and expected to pursue Community action in this field on the basis of appropriate proposals by the Commission.

  McDonald's Hamburgers Ltd.
  Ms. Richardson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many planning applications submitted by McDonald's Hamburgers Ltd. have been turned down by local authorities since 1979, which have been the subject of an appeal to him; how many appeals have been successful; and from which local planning authority each application has been made.

  Mrs. Roe
  The information requested is not readily available from departmental records, and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Westminster Council (Sale of Cemeteries)
  Mr. Jim Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many complaints he has received about the actions of Westminster city council in respect of the sale of cemeteries owned by the authority.

  Mr. Chope
  Since 4 January we have received 74 letters from members and 39 direct from members of the public.

  Chlorofluorocarbon Gases
  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will be meeting the management of ICI to discuss the phasing out of chlorofluorocarbon gases production.

  Mr. Moynihan
  I have no plans to do so. Officials in the Department keep in close touch with both United Kingdom producers of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) on the steps they are taking to develop suitable and safe substitutes for the CFCs controlled by the Montreal protocol. ICI has recently reaffirmed its commitment to the development of such alternatives and has scheduled a rapid increase in its investment in this field.

  Rating Reform
  Dr. Reid
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he last met representatives of English local authorities regarding the poll tax; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. Howard
  My right hon. Friend and I frequently meet representatives of English local authorities in the course of official business and discuss many aspects of the proposed community charge.

  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his estimate of the average community charge and the national non-domestic rate that would be levied in 1988–89 if the Local Government Finance Bill were in force.

  Mr. Howard
  I shall write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has received any analysis from the Association of District Councils regarding the costs of collecting and administering the poll tax in Nottingham.

  Mr. Howard
  The Association of District Councils undertook a survey last year of the preparation and collection costs of the community charge. From this survey the association extrapolated national estimates but did not supply figures for individual authorities nor offer analysis of their estimates. Nottingham is one of the sample authorities included in the study now being undertaken by Price Waterhouse for my Department.

  Mr. Gow
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what estimate he has made of the initial costs which will be incurred by Eastbourne borough council in setting up the administrative machinery for the proposed community charge in each of the two years ending 31 March 1989 and 1990 and of the annual administrative costs thereafter; and what financial assistance is proposed to be made by his Department towards those costs.

  Mr. Howard
  My right hon. Friend included estimates of these costs for all charging authorities in the financial 714
  memorandum to the Local Government Finance Bill. I have announced initial capital allocations totalling £25 million towards these costs in 1988–89, which will be distributed to authorities including Eastbourne borough council within the next few days. We shall reflect the further resources needed in 1989–90 and subsequent years in future capital allocations and grant settlements.

  Mr. Baldry
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from member of religious orders seeking exemption from the community charge; and what response he intends to make.

  Mr. Ridley
  I have received a number of representations from members of religious orders. The Government propose to table amendments to the Local Government Finance Bill which will have the effect of exempting from the community charge members of religious orders the principal occupation of which is devoted to prayer, contemplation, the relief of suffering, education or such other activities as may be prescribed. The exemption will be limited to those who are dependent on their communities for their material needs, and who have no income or capital of their own.

  Dr. Cunningham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what is the average cash figure paid by the lowest paid 5 per cent. of households under the present system towards the cost of local services; what this amount is as a percentage of their average after-tax income; and what these figures will be when the community charge is implemented;

  (2) what is the average cash figure paid by the highest paid 5 per cent. of households under the present system towards the cost of local services; what this amount is as a percentage of their average after-tax income; what these figures will be when the community charge is implemented; and what the above figures will be when the income tax changes proposed in the Budget are implemented.

  Mr. Ridley
  [holding answer 23 March]: Households contribute to the cost of local services both directly via local taxation and indirectly via national taxation. Assessments of the size of contributions rely on data from the family expenditure survey. Limitations in the sample size prevent reliable estimates of the relative contribution of the highest and lowest paid 5 per cent. of households.

  Local Authority Publicity
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he proposes to include in the forthcoming code of recommended practice on local authority publicity a provision to the effect that a local authority should not engage in publicity in order to promote the use of services offered by a particular private business, to the detriment of other businesses offering similar services to the public in the authority's area.

  Mr. Chope
  The draft code of recommended practice makes it clear that there should be no discrimination in favour of, or against, persons or groups in the compilation and distribution of local authority publicity material.

  South Africa (Rugby Tour)
  Mr. Pendry
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking to uphold the
  715
  Gleneagles agreement by seeking to ensure that the planned World XV rugby tour to South Africa does not take place.

  Mr. Moynihan
  My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister confirmed the Government's continuing commitment to the Gleneagles agreement during Prime Minister's questions on 29 March. I welcome the efforts of English Rugby Union to discourage players from taking part in the projected tour.

  Bed-and-breakfast Accommodation
  Mr. Soley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his estimate of the numbers of(a) children and (b) pensioners living in bed-and-breakfast accommodation for each local authority in England and Wales.

  Mrs. Roe
  At 31 December 1987 there were 10,370 households temporarily placed in bed-and-breakfast accommodation by English local authorities under the homelessness provisions of the Housing Act 1985. Information on the number of children and pensioners in these households is not collected by my Department. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales has responsibility for these matters as they affect the Principality.

  Mr. Soley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the latest cost of keeping a family in bed-and-breakfast accommodation for each local authority in England and Wales.

  Mrs. Roe
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. Morgan) on 16 March, at column 601.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of the expenditure of his Department is spent in inner cities.

  Mr. Ridley
  Spending from my Department's programmes specifically targeted at inner cities is expected to be about £1,070 million, 16 per cent, out of a public expenditure total of £6,833 million in 1988–89 for the housing and other environmental services. Inner city areas will also benefit from my Department's other countryside programmes which spend some of their resources in these areas; separate figures for inner cities are not available. Expenditure from these programmes which is not incorporated in the 16 per cent, includes: water authorities, heritage, recreation, local environmental services, other local authority current, most local authority spending on housing.

  British Canoe Union
  Mr. Onslow
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the total amount of Sports Council grants to the British Canoe Union in each of the last three years for which figures are available; and what information he has as to what estimate was made of the total membership of the British Canoe Union in the years in question.

  Mr. Moynihan
  Sports Council grant-in-aid to the British Canoe Union for the last three years for which figures are available was as follows:
  716

  Year

  £

  1984–85

  269,614

  1985–86

  239,410

  1986–87

  196,789

  Estimates of membership as supplied by the BCU are from November to October in each of those years:

  Year

  Numbers

  1984–85

  11,377

  1985–86

  12,733

  1986–87

  13,667

  Amateur Rowing Association
  Mr. Onslow
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the total amount of Sports Council grant to the Amateur Rowing Association in each of the last three years for which figures are available; and what information he has as to what estimate was made of the total membership of the Amateur Rowing Association in each of the years in question.

  Mr. Moynihan
  Sports Council grant-in-aid to the Amateur Rowing Association for the last three years for which figures are available was as follows:

  Year

  £

  1984–85

  288,540

  1985–86

  382,546

  1986–87

  439,850

  Estimates of membership for the calendar years 1984, 1985 and 1986 are as follows:

  Year

  Number

  1984

  24,910

  1985

  25,173

  1986

  24,842

  Water Authorities
  Mr. Onslow
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking to monitor the performance of water authorities in England and Wales in their compliance with discharge concerns.

  Mr. Moynihan
  Details of discharges from sewage treatment works are contained in the public registers which water authorities are required to maintain. In addition, since 1986 the authorities have made annual reports to the Department detailing works which have failed to comply with consent conditions. The reports for 1987, which are now being received, will be followed-up by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution to establish the reasons for non-compliance and the remedial measures which the water authorities; propose to deal with the problems. The Department; will also examine water authority plans to improve the performance of their sewage treatment works in the context of their corporate plans.

  EC Harmonisation Programme
  Mr. Latham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement on the programme of work in which his Department is involved
  717
  with the construction and allied industries relating to the European Community's harmonisation programme in 1992 under the Single European Act.

  Mr. Ridley
  The Department leads the negotiations on the draft construction products directive as part of the agreed Community programme for the completion of the single market by the end of 1992. The directive, when implemented, should benefit the United Kingdom construction products industry by requiring the removal of non-tariff barriers to trade between member states. Although negotiations on the draft directive are at an advanced stage it is not yet possible to say when it will be implemented.

  The Department is also involved in the development of European technical standards in support of the directive.

  Nuclear Waste
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will acquire for his departmental library a copy of the paper presented by M. E. Ginniff of United Kingdom Nirex Ltd. to the Waste Management '88 conference in Tucson, Arizona, on future nuclear waste management strategies for the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Moynihan
  A copy of the paper to which the hon. Member refers has been acquired for the departmental library.

  West Midlands (Nitrogen Dioxide)
  Mr. John M. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a summary of the findings of the investigation of atmospheric concentrations of nitrogen dioxide in the west midlands commissioned by the air and noise division of his Department in collaboration with west midlands local authorities and in particular regarding emission from domestic balanced flue gas appliances, which investigations were the subject of a report in 1987.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The contractors for the west midlands survey of nitrogen dioxide concentrations, Midland Environment Ltd., will be presenting a summary paper on all aspects of the study to the investigation of air pollution standing conference, in Birmingham on 7 June this year. The Department, in line with normal practice, has also encouraged Midland Environment to publish papers on the survey results in the appropriate scientific and technical journals.

  Boundary Changes
  Mr. Adley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if, pursuant to changes in county boundaries following the passage of the Local Government Act 1972, he will list those areas in England and Wales which have subsequently been transferred from one economic planning region to another, and the dates on which such changes formally occurred.

  Mr. Chope
  I shall write to my hon. Friend.

  House Prices
  Mr. Adley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list what information he has on those areas in England where major new housing development has resulted in reductions of house prices.
  718
  Mrs. Roe
  I regret that information is not available in sufficiently fine detail to identify such areas.

  Planning System
  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has any plans to propose changes in the working of the planning system.

  Mrs. Roe
  We keep the planning system under constant review to ensure that it operates efficiently to enable development which contributes to the growth of the economy while protecting and enhancing the urban and rural environment. We are at present consulting about proposals to amend and consolidate the general development order, and about proposals for incorporating EC requirements on environmental assessment into the planning system. We also intend shortly to introduce revised procedure rules for planning inquiries.

  Rented Housing
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proposals he has to increase the supply of rented housing.

  Mrs. Roe
  The main aim of the deregulation proposals in part I of the Housing Bill is to increase the supply of rented accommodation. We are confident that the relaxation of rent controls over new lettings, backed up by the generous tax relief under my right hon. Friend's proposed extension of the business corporation scheme, will provide a powerful incentive to invest in rented property.

  The Local Government Act 1988 also included an explicit new power for local authorities to assist in the provision of privately let accommodation.

  We are also helping housing associations to provide more new homes for rent and to repair some empty properties to bring them back into rented use. We have both increased the Housing Corporation's programme by some £50 million in 1988–89 rising to a total of £850 million in 1990–91 and announced major increases in the grant rates available for schemes using private finance to make public money stretch further in providing new homes.

  Basildon (Debt Burden)
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what account he took of Basildon district council's debt burden in deciding to rate-cap that authority for 1988–89.

  Mr. Howard
  As required by statute, my right hon. Friend selected Basildon district council for rate limitation for 1988–89 by reference to the best information available to him about its likely total expenditure for 1987–88, which reflected among other things the costs falling that year on Basildon's ratepayers as a result of the council's debt.

  Industrial Installations (Radiation)
  Mr. Cran
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has any plans to change the legal dose limits for acceptable levels of exposure to radiation for those working in, or living in the vicinity of, industrial installations.
  719
  Mr. Moynihan
  My right hon. Friend has no plans for changing legal dose limits for acceptable levels of exposure to radiation. Dose limits, for workers and for members of the general public, are contained in the Ionising Radiations Regulations 1985, which are enforced by the Health and Safety Executive. The Health and Safety Commission has set up a working group on ionising radiations, which is reviewing the subject and will be reporting to the commission in due course.

  Local Government Act 1988
  Mr. Patnick
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will announce his final decisions on the timing of implementation of the competition provisions of the Local Government Act 1988.

  Mr. Chope
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer that my hon. and learned Friend gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate (Mr. Banks) yesterday.

  Council Houses (Nottingham)
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment which private company is carrying out research into tenants' views on the sale of council estates on behalf of his Department in Nottingham; and what other work the company has done for his Department.

  Mrs. Roe
  I shall write to the hon. Gentleman.

  Local Authorities (Property Assets)
  Mr. Heddle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has any plans to monitor the performance of local authorities in ensuring that their real property assets are managed efficiently and cost effectively.

  Mrs. Roe
  The Audit Commission has recently published a report which recommends measures for the improvement of local authorities' management of their property. The auditors will be following up the recommendations of the report with individual local authorities during the next audit round. My Department will be discussing with the local authority associations and the commission ways in which councils can be encouraged to adopt the report's recommendations.

  Property Services Agency Board
  Mr. Heddle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish in the Offical Report the terms of reference of the Property Services Agency Board; when the scope of its functions and powers was last reviewed; and what steps the board is currently taking to encourage greater competition and private sector involvement in the management and execution of its duties so far as they relate to the real property assets of each Government Department.

  Mr. Chope
  I shall write to my hon. Friend.

  Property Services Agency
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many buildings the Property Services Agency rents for Government Departments in central London; and what is the annual cost and the rent per square metre.
  720
  Mr. Chope
  The Property Services Agency leases 159 buildings for occupation by Government Departments in the following central London postal districts: WC1 and 2, W1, SW1, SE1 and EC1 to 4. The rent bill for these properties is currently some £80 million, representing an annual rental of a little over£ 100 per sq m.

  Glanville Fritillary
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to make a decision on the Glanville fritillary; if he will list the representations he has received; and what information he has on where in the United Kingdom this butterfly is found.

  Mr. Moynihan
  I shall write to my hon. Friend.

  Greenwich (Rents)
  Mr. Cartwright
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what response he has made to the representations dated 19 February from the hon. Member for Woolwich about the decision of Greenwich council to raise rents for its frail elderly tenants in sheltered housing schemes.

  Mrs. Roe
  I shall write to the hon. Member.

  Crown Suppliers
  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) whether, after privatisation of the Crown Suppliers, any staff wishing to remain in the Civil Service will be found equivalent employment elsewhere in the Civil Service, with retraining and regrading where necessary;

  (2) whether, after privatisation of the Crown Suppliers, staff nearing retirement or with long service not wishing to transfer out of the Crown Suppliers will have the option of going to the new organisation on secondment or taking early retirement;

  (3) whether staff of the Crown Suppliers will be able to transfer out of the organisation prior to privatisation and will have equality of opportunity with other staff to apply for other jobs within the Civil Service;

  (4) what are the expected financial savings to Government of privatising the Crown Suppliers;

  (5) which parts of the Crown Suppliers organisation will be retained within the Civil Service;

  (6) whether, after privatisation of the Crown Suppliers, any changes to the terms and conditions of service of staff will be subject to the same consultation with the trade union side as at present;

  (7) whether, following privatisation of the Crown Suppliers, any staff will be made redundant compulsorily.

  Mr. Chope
  I shall write to the hon. Member.

  County Hall
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement concerning the future use of the former headquarters of the Greater London council at county hall, SE1.

  Mr. Chope
  The future use of county hall is a matter for the London residuary body and any future owner taking into account planning and listed building considerations. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will be
  721
  considering the recent High Court judgment on his planning decisions of 20 October 1987, when the transcript becomes available.

  Warrington-Runcorn New Town
  Mr. Butler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give for each year since 1981 the square footage of factory space vacated by tenants of Warrington-Runcorn new town.

  Mrs. Roe
  The information requested is as follows:

  Factory space vacated

  1 gross square footage

  1985–86

  259,000

  1986–87

  291,500

  1987–88

  296,750

  1 Estimated.

  Note: These figures do not take account of re-allocations or other re-lettings. Information for 1984–85 and previous years is not readily available.

  I should emphasise that a significant proportion, about a third, of vacations arise from expansion, and that these figures do not therefore reflect the success of the corporation's role in the industrial development of the north-west.

  Non-Metropolitan County Councils
  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (I) if he will publish for each non-metropolitan county council in England(a) the outturn expenditure for 1986–87, (b) the current expenditure for 1987–88 and (c) the percentage increase between the two;

  (2) if he will publish for each non-metropolitan county council in England (a) the current expenditure for 1987–88, (b) the budgeted expenditure for 1988–89 and (c) the percentage increase between the two.

  Mr. Chope
  I shall write to the hon. Member shortly.

  Hackney
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has come to a decision on the future of Hackney's building direct labour organisation following his request to the borough to submit a special report.

  Mr. Chope
  My right hon. Friend has considered Hackney's special report and subsequent correspondence and has today informed the borough, in accordance with his powers under S17(5) of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980, that with immediate effect its direct labour organisation shall not have power to undertake major new building work except as necessary to complete work already awarded to it, and that its power to carry out this work will cease completely a year from now.

  The borough claimed to have made a surplus on its major new works account in 1985–86 following losses of
  722
  £3·2 million in 1983–84 and £1·75 million in 1984–85. My right hon. Friend is now satisfied, however, that the claimed surplus is spurious.

  Brompton Hospital
  Mr. Faulds
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to accept the advice tendered on architectural and historical grounds by English Heritage that the Brompton hospital be added to the statutory list; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Moynihan
  I shall write to the hon. Member.

  Local Authorities (Expenditure)
  Mr. Heddle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has on English local authorities' expenditure plans for 1988–89; and what amount of block grant he estimates will be payable to them.

  Mr. Ridley
  On the basis of information received by 21 March, English local authorities are budgeting for an aggregate total expenditure in 1988–89 of about £27,610 million, compared with £26,569 million provided for in the RSG settlement. On this basis, the amount of block grant payable will be £8,955 million, £516 million less than provided in the settlement.

  Ozone Layer
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on his policy on the initiatives to reduce damage to the ozone layer.

  Mr. Moynihan
  [holding answer 29 March 1988]: In September 1987 the United Kingdom signed the Montreal protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer and we are currently working with other member states on proposals for implementing the protocol within the European Community. The Department is also discussing with representatives of producers and users of chlorofluorocarbons and halons steps to reduce consumption of these chemicals through the development of suitable and safe substitutes and measures such as recycling and recovery.

  Sites of Special Scientific Interest
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list any sites of special scientific interest that have been ploughed up for cereal growing in the last 12 months showing their habitat type; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Moynihan
  [holding answer 25 March 1988]:The NCC's 13th annual report shows that 27 SSSIs notified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 suffered damage (mainly superficial) from agricultural activities. Another 21 awaiting or proposed for notification suffered similarly. The Nature Conservancy Council is compiling the information requested in respect of cereal growing. I shall write to the hon. Member with the details shortly.

Preamble
The House met at eleven of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Newcastle.

Drugs for Children: Report on Prescribing
Lord Campbell of Croy Lord Campbell of Croy asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they intend to publish their response to the recent report of the World Health Organisation suggesting over-use in the United Kingdom of medicine and drugs as treatment for health.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Lord Skelmersdale): My Lords, it is the responsibility of the medical profession to consider the important messages in the World Health Organisation report Drugs for Children. The Government will consider to what extent the report needs to be highlighted in publications on prescribing which are sent to doctors. Beyond that, the report does not call for a response from the Government.
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for his reply. As the report states that it is children in particular who are receiving more medical drugs than are required, do the Government intend to sponsor some means of spreading information on the subject to the public, especially parents?
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, anyone who has children or who has had children can appreciate the anxiety parents feel when their children are ill. I acknowledge that it may lead some of them to expect medicines from doctors. The final decision on how to treat the patient must rest with the doctor, using his clinical judgment. However, I accept that parents and the public should be educated, and the Health Education Authority publishes a leaflet called Minor Illness—How to treat at home. I further expect doctors to discuss the best form of treatment which may or may not include the provision of drugs.
Lord Renton: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that it is not only children who may suffer from taking too many drugs? There is growing medical evidence that if adults take sleeping pills, aspirin or other drugs too often, they will suffer from dizziness in old age.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, I readily bow to my noble friend's superior wisdom in this matter. The Government continue their efforts to make doctors more aware of their prescribing habits. For example, in the autumn a new computer prescription pricing authority will start providing doctors with timely, well-presented information about their prescribing for all patients. The Government expect doctors to pay greater attention to their prescribing habits once the information is available.
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, does it follow from the Minister's reply that the department or the FPCs do not currently collect information about the quantity and range of medicines and drugs prescribed to children? On the other hand, if they do collect the information, is it being fed back to the general practitioners?
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, the net ingredient cost of prescriptions in the under-16-years-of-age exempt category totalled about £90 million in England in 1986. So yes, we do collect this information. I should add that doctors in the department's regional medical service are increasing their visits to high cost prescribers to discuss with doctors how to improve their prescribing without detriment to patient care. In addition, an experiment is under way employing two prescribing specialist medical officers whose sole task is to encourage more effective and economic prescribing.
Lord Mellish: My Lords, how does the Minister reconcile what he has just been saying with television commercials telling people night after night that if they take a certain pill or drug they are a new man the next morning?
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, it is perfectly proper for the pharmaceutical companies to advertise their wares. If the noble Lord or anyone else in the country has complaints about advertising, there is the advertising standards authority to which those complaints should be directed.
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, will my noble friend and his department take into account that it was not the prescribing of drugs for a particular illness that the report emphasised but the fact that children went on taking the drug long after the treatment had ended?
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, yes. We are aware of that. This is where the parent-doctor role applies, or should apply, most vigorously.

Easter Act 1928
11.10 a.m.
Lord Airedale Lord Airedale asked Her Majesty's Government:
What progress is being made towards implementing the Easter Act 1928 so as to ensure that Easter is always celebrated during the first half of April.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers): My Lords, I understand that the prospect of the Orthodox Churches making any progress towards a common date is not likely to be immediate.
Lord Airedale: My Lords, I am grateful for that Answer, which was rather what I expected. Is the Minister aware that people generally regard Easter as the first outdoor holiday of the year? Even allowing for the vagaries of the British climate, is there not a better chance of good weather in April than in March? However, with the fairly recent introduction

863
of the May Day holiday, Easter is not suitable for the second half of April, because we want to avoid the bunching of Bank Holidays. Therefore did not our elders and betters get it about right in 1928?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Airedale, has asked questions about the holidays and the weather. The actual Question he put down on the Order Paper was about Easter. Easter is a religious festival. We think that it would be undesirable that the changing of the festival of Easter should be undertaken without the agreement of the Churches.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that many of us find his reply to the noble Lord, Lord Airedale, most reassuring? Will the Government continue to bear in mind that as Easter is the chief festival of the Christian year its date is much more a matter for the Churches than for governments?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I am very grateful to my noble friend for that encouraging remark. Having heard noble Lords ask this same question and some poor noble Lord answer it from this Dispatch Box over the past 20 years, I never expected to find myself in this position. My noble friend is quite correct. The method of calculating when Easter should fall was established by resolution of the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. It was given statutory authority in this country by the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750.
Lord Harmar-Nicholls: My Lords, my noble friend said that it is up to the Orthodox Churches to make this decision. What, for example, has the Greek Orthodox Church to do with the date we celebrate our Easter?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, it is desirable that there should be agreement with all the Churches of which the Greek Orthodox is one. When my noble friend Lord Elton occupied this hazardous seat he wrote, after receiving such a Question from your Lordships, to the Orthodox Archbishop of Thyateira and Great Britain to see if he could ask the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople how matters stood on adopting a common date. My noble friend was told in the reply that the second Pan-Orthodox Preconciliar Conference of the Holy Orthodox Church was held in 1982 and considered the subject of the common celebration of Easter by all Christians.
The conference heard that,
"besides scientific akribeia, the whole problem is a problem of ecclesiological consciousness of one and indivisible Orthodoxy, the unity of which should in no way be undermined; it requires a proper assessment by the Church in her pastoral responsibility and in accordance with the needs of her flock; in the present state of Church affairs, the believing God's people have not been prepared, or in any case have not been sufficiently informed, for accepting changes in determining the date of Easter."
The Earl of Lauderdale: My Lords, only once in seven years does the Orthodox Easter coincide with the western Easter. In any case, the decision is not a matter of summer holidays for children. As has already been said, it concerns one of the greatest religious festivals of the year.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, my noble friend is quite right. That occurs, I believe, because the Holy Orthodox Church is still on the Julian calendar whereas we are on the Gregorian calendar. We changed in 1752 and lost 11 days in the process. I understand that the Holy Orthodox Church has been talking for some centuries about changing but has not yet decided to do so.
Lord Soper: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the evangelical fervour and scholarship that he has demonstrated in your Lordships' House today is extremely acceptable to many of us who would desire a greater attention to the inner meaning of Easter whether it falls on a particular date or not? We would desire to commend that spirit of anticipation because we believe the celebration of Easter as the culmination and fulfilment of the promise of God is of the utmost importance for our own welfare.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, if I may say so that is a most appropriate note, be it in the form of a question which the noble Lord, Lord Soper, has addressed on this particular occasion.
Lord Jenkins of Hillhead: My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that when I was first Home Secretary just over 20 years ago I rashly tried to solve this problem but with no more success than he has achieved? However, there did appear to be very considerable support for a fixed Easter among the Anglican communion and also in the Roman Catholic Church. As the noble Earl has informed us, it is the Greek Church that has raised difficulties. Are there not precedents where Christian festivals are celebrated on different days in the Greek Church to the western Church?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, that may well be; the point about changing the Easter Act is that it was suggested that this should only be done after we had had regard to the opinions officially expressed by other Churches. I am delighted, if I may so put it, that the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins of Hillhead, did not succeed in changing it. I am sure that he would agree that it is not for the Government to change the date of Easter; it is a matter for the Churches. Of course it is a complicated matter to know the date on which Easter does fall. I have done a little research. I discover that it falls on the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the 21st day of March. If the full moon occurs on a Sunday, Easter Day is the following Sunday. But the moon referred to is not the real moon of the heaven; it is a hypothetical moon whose being full determines the date of Easter.
Lord Elwyn-Jones: My Lords, is not the noble Earl to be congratulated on the profound depth of his researches and for adding to our vocabulary the word "ecclesiological"?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord. I was prompted to do my researches having seen the awful mill through which my predecessors had been put by your Lordships on this subject.

NHS: "Waiting List Fund"
11.20 a.m.
Lord Gainford Lord Gainford asked Her Majesty's Government:
How the £30 million from the "Waiting List Fund" will be allocated for 1988–89.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, the £30 million has been allocated on the basis of projects put to us by regional health authorities. The allocations will fund over 350 projects aimed at treating at least 100,000 extra cases.
Lord Gainford: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Is the waiting time not more important to patients than the waiting list? Can he comment on the situation in Scotland?
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, I agree with my noble friend that what matters to the individual patient is the time he or she has to wait for treatment rather than the size of the list. Half of all admissions to hospital are immediate. For those who wait, half are admitted within seven weeks or less. It is the small but worrying proportion who have to wait for an unacceptedly long time on which we wish to concentrate the most effort. The most recent figures, for March 1987, show that we are continuing to make progress. The number of people on the waiting list waiting over a year fell by over 2,000 to 23·6 per cent. of the total list. That is the lowest proportion in the 12 years since the figure was first collected.
So far as Scotland is concerned, my honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State with special responsibility for health matters in Scotland announced on Tuesday that as part of a major campaign to reduce waiting lists and waiting times he had set aside a waiting list fund of £3 million for 1988–89.
Lord Prys-Davies: My Lords, can the Minister confirm that the waiting list initiative is not having an adverse effect on the specialties which do not benefit from that particular initiative in that they do not have to give up beds and release theatre time in favour of the initiative? Are those waiting lists building up to an unacceptable level?
Lord Skelmersdale: No, my Lords. So far as I am aware that is not the case. The regional health authorities, which suggest projects for funding to the departments, are making sure that that does not happen.

Forestry: Planting Targets
11.25 a.m.
Lord Taylor of Gryfe Lord Taylor of Gryfe asked Her Majesty's Government:
What steps they propose to take to maintain existing targets in the event of a decline in planting following the abolition of tax incentives for private forestry.
The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Sanderson of Bowden): My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland announced on 23rd March that a new woodland grant scheme offering higher rates of grant would come into operation on 5th April. Clearly the industry will have to adjust to changes. But with the transitional arrangements announced we hope to sustain planting at a reasonable level until planting under the new grant scheme gets into its stride.
Lord Taylor of Gryfe: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Will the Minister confirm that the Government are committed to the 30,000 hectare target which has long been regarded as acceptable for forestry in the United Kingdom? Can he identify the new investors that he hopes to attract to forestry, because many of the traditional investors will find other opportunities for rewarding investment in other areas?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, I can confirm that it is the Government's intention that the new planting at the rate of 33,000 hectares per annum should remain. In addition, there are the farm woodlands scheme targets which we hope to attain. As regards new investors, I am sure that the noble Lord, with his great knowledge of investment, will understand that we shall, like Mr. Asquith, have to wait and see.
Lord Renton: My Lords, in the light of the views expressed in our recent debate on the report of the Nature Conservancy Council, can my noble friend give an assurance that future planting, particularly of conifers, will not impair the environment?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: Yes, my Lords. I have seen comments in the newspapers recently about that matter. I believe that my noble friend is referring to Scotland and Wales, where most of the conifer planting takes place. Perhaps I may assure my noble friend that the uplands of Scotland and Wales will be protected against environmentally damaging afforestation. No planting scheme will be approved for grant aid which is out of sympathy with the environment. There will be special provisions in the new plans of operation for positive environmental and conservation proposals. The existing consultation arrangements provide adequate safeguards for areas of special environmental importance.
Lady Saltoun of Abernethy: My Lords, what calculations have been made with regard to further investment in the processing sector, should there be a drop in planting levels?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, the noble Lady has made a very important point regarding downstream activities which are particularly important to the economies of Scotland and Wales. As regards the new regime—the removal of tax incentives and the move to grants—the Government will keep under review the activities that take place, particularly over the next months. As I have said to the noble Lord, Lord Taylor of Gryfe, 33.000 hectares is our target.
Lord Carter: My Lords, is the Minister aware that although there are many people, including noble Lords on these Benches, who supported the closing of the tax loophole on forestry, there are a number of owners who are considering a reduction in their forestry staff as a result of the changes, because they will not be able to charge the cost of maintaining their plantations against tax? Perhaps the Minister can tell the House the Government's views on the employment aspects of the proposed changes.
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, the noble Lord is referring to the maintenance situation. Planting grants under the woodlands scheme will be paid in three instalments; 70 per cent. at the start of planting; 20 per cent. five years after initial planting; and 10 per cent. after 10 years. Those grants are paid subject to satisfactory planting, establishment and maintenance. As regards management grants, those were paid under earlier dedication schemes and continue to be paid under closed schemes. However, they do not feature in the later schemes because of the lack of any persuasive evidence that such payments stimulated better management and were cost effective. We are not convinced that there is a case for introducing them. However, I hear what the noble Lord says and I am well aware of what is being said in the industry.
Lord Hunt: My Lords, in the light of the Minister's reply to the noble Lord, Lord Renton, does he agree that the further planting of conifers is especially undesirable on environmental grounds in national parks? Can he confirm that nonetheless grants have continued to be available for private forestry in Welsh national parks while that is quite rightly not the case in England?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, as regards the planting of conifers, I am well aware of the views strongly held on both sides of the argument. My noble friend Lord Renton may not like me to repeat it, but it is a question of balance.
Lord John-Mackie: My Lords, perhaps the Minister can tell the House the logic of withdrawing the tax relief which has created wealth and jobs in Scotland and elsewhere and giving relief in another way which means that the money will be spent elsewhere and probably abroad. What is the logic of the exercise that the Chancellor has undertaken? The Minister said that he hoped that a reasonable level of planting would be maintained. The Government must know that the target of 33,000 hectares has fallen short by an average of 10,000 acres over the past eight years. How will the Government get a reasonable level of planting when up to now they have failed?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, I believe that the noble Lord understands that the figure of 33,000 hectares is a target. I do not accept that the level has significantly fallen consistently below that. We have seen an increase in the level, although admittedly it has not reached the target level yet. The noble Lord has asked me about the logic behind the change; it is a simplification of the situation. We must look at the whole of the Budget in the context of that
868
area and realise that a drop in the top rate of tax from 60 per cent. to 40 per cent. might well have had an effect even if the change had not been made.
Lord Mackie of Benshie: My Lords, can the Minister assure us that in the farm woodland scheme and any scheme for planting—whether conifers or not—the farmer's own labour and that of his men will be taken into account as a proper expense when considering the grants?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, I think that that is a little wide of the original Question. I shall look very carefully at what the noble Lord has asked me about the farm woodland scheme. Of course the Bill has not yet gone through the House, but I should like to look at his question relating to what can be charged against the farmer's own business before giving a categorical assurance.
Lord Taylor of Gryfe: My Lords, I wish the Minister a very happy Easter. May I ask him whether when he returns to the Borders, where he will spend Easter, he will meet his neighbours who are active foresters and consult with them as to the devastating impact of these tax changes?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, I shall be delighted to meet my neighbours. I meet them on many occasions. It will not surprise the noble Lord to know that trees are fairly well up the agenda in my discussions with them. However, I am not persuaded that what he has said is true. In my discussions, many people—and indeed many Members on opposite Benches—have asked for changes to take place. That has now happened. I wish the noble Lord a very good Easter. As I have said to him, I think—like one of the Liberal Prime Ministers from the past—we shall have to wait and see.
Lord Leatherland: My Lords, is the Minister aware of the fact we have to spend our Easter and other vacations without pay, whereas the other place pays its Members for every day of the year?
Lord Sanderson of Bowden: My Lords, I am not sure that I am responsible for answering that sort of question.

House of Lords, Offices: Select Committee Report
11.32 a.m.
The Chairman of Committees (Lord Aberdare): My Lords, I beg to move that the Fourth Report from the Select Committee be agreed to.
Moved, That the Fourth Report from the Select Committee be agreed to.—(Lord Aberdare.)
The report read as follows:
1. SUB-COMMITTEES
The Committee approved the appointments of Lord Belstead as a member of the Staff of the House Sub-Committee in place of Viscount Whitelaw and Lord Dainton as Chairman of the Library Sub-Committee and as a member of the Computer, Finance and Administration Sub-Committees in place of Earl Ferrers.
2. STAFF OF THE HOUSE
The Committee agreed to the creation of two temporary posts of Committee Specialist Assistant for a period of two years and to the appointment of an additional part-time Clerical Officer in the Refreshment Department.
The Committee also agreed that the merged National Union of Civil and Public Servants should be granted representative capacity for members of the Union employed as Attendants and Housemaids.
3. PARLIAMENT OFFICE
The Committee were informed that following Mr. J. E. Grey's retirement it was proposed that Mr. M. A. J. Wheeler-Booth, his successor as Clerk Assistant, should retain the duties of Clerk of the Journals and assume a supervisory role of the Accountants and Establishment Offices; that Mr. J. M. Davies on his appointment as Reading Clerk should assume the duties of Principal Clerk, Public Bill Office; that Mr. M. G. Pownall should be appointed Principal Clerk, Private Bill and Overseas Offices; that Mr. D. R. Beamish, a Chief Clerk, should replace Mr. Pownall as Establishment Officer and that Mr. S. P. Burton had been appointed as Clerk to fill the consequential vacancy.
The Committee agreed a change in the pay assimilation terms on regarding of the Deputy Librarian and Deputy Clerk of the Records and authorised an extension of service and revised fee for the temporary part-time archivist employed in the Record Office.
4. INSURANCE FOR LORDS
The Committee approved an increase in the personal accident cover for Lords whilst on Parliamentary duty.
5. PARLIAMENTARY DELEGATIONS
The Committee approved a revised administrative guide for members of the United Kingdom delegation to European assemblies and authorised revised rates of subsistence.
6. CONFERENCES
The Committee agreed to provision being made in the House of Lords' Vote to meet a share of the cost of the third Commonwealth Delegated Legislation Conference and the annual session of the North Atlantic Assembly to be held in London in 1989 and 1990 respectively.
7. HOUSE OF LORDS' FEES
The Committee considered the fees payable on Judicial proceedings and Peerage Claims and approved a revision, with effect from 12th April 1988, as follows:—

(a) Fees on Judicial Proceedings

£

Lodgment of Petition of Appeal

24

Entering Appearance

6

Issue of Order of Service

24

Return of Recognisance

24

Lodgment of Petition not referred to Appeal Committee

24

Lodgment of Joint Petition, from each Party thereto

12

Lodgment of Petition referred to Appeal Committee (including report thereon)

30

Application to waive Security for Costs

12

Lodgment of Case, including laying Case on the Table, entering Appeal in Cause List, Bar fee and Counsel attending

120

Lodgment of Joint Case, including laying Case on the Table, entering Appeal in Cause List, Bar fee and Counsel attending

240

Application to set down for Hearing

24

Issue of Final Judgment

30

(b) Fees on Peerage Claims

Petition of Claimant

24

For each of the first 3 days on which the Committee for Privileges meets

60

For each subsequent day

85

Order for Attendance of a Witness

24

Resolution and Judgment

85

(c) Fees on Irish Peerage Claims

On presentation of Petition

24

Lord Chancellor's Report

24

Order made thereon

24

8. REVISED SCALES OF PAY AND ALLOWANCES
The Committee confirmed the application of the following Civil Service memoranda to staff of the House of Lords:—

CM/819

Discretionary increments and performance points for senior administrative staff.

CM/826

Revised scales of pay for executive grades.

IM 87/12

London Weighting for industrial staff.

9. HANSARD REPORTING STAFF
The Committee authorised the revision of late night attendance fees and allowances to permanent staff and attendance fees to temporary reporters.
10. OFFICIAL SHORTHAND WRITER
The Committee authorised a revised scale of fees for the Shorthand Writer and the introduction of a supplementary fee for the supply of evidence on disk.
11. UNIFORM ALLOWANCES
The Committee authorised an increase in the allowances paid to Clerks at the Table, the Gentleman Usher and Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod and Doorkeepers for the purchase and maintenance of dress clothes.
12. SUPERANNUATION
The Committee were notified of the following awards made under the House of Lords' Staff Pension Scheme:—

(a) Pension and lump sum to Mr. L. F. Rutterford, Senior Clerk, who retired on 9th January 1988.

(b) Pension and lump sum to Mr. P. M. Eglinton, Senior Reporter, who retired on 1st February 1988.

(c) Pension and lump sum to Mr. A. M. Daws, Senior Reporter, who retired on 1st February 1988.

(d) Pension and lump sum to Mr. J. O'Halloran, Attendant, who retired on ill-health grounds, on 1st January 1988.

(e) Pension and lump sum to Mrs. E. A. McLean, General Assistant, who retired on 1st January 1988.

(f) Pension and lump sum to Mrs. E. M. Steeves, General Assistant, who retired on 23rd January 1988.

(g) Pension and lump sum to Mrs. D. E. Weirich, Cleaner, who retired on ill-health grounds, on 10th January 1988.

(h) Revised pension and lump sum to Mr. J. Parker, Staff Inspector, who retired on 1st October 1987.

(i) Revised pension and lump sum to Mr. J. R. Mellish, Executive Officer, who retired on ill-health grounds, on 1st August 1987.

(j) Revised pension and lump sum to Mrs. M. E. Curd, Senior Clerical Officer, who retired on 20th December 1986.

(k) Revised pension and lump sum to Mr. C. W. Hunt, Senior Clerical Officer, who retired on 21st January 1987.

(l) Short service payment to Miss C. J. Williams, Personal Secretary, who resigned on 8th January 1988.

(m) Short service payment to Mrs. S. L. Peeters, Bar Assistant, who resigned on 21st January 1988.

(n) Short service payment to Miss J. A. Stewart, Assistant Manageress, who resigned on 18th February 1988.

(o) Lump sum death benefit and pension to Mr. H. E. Brind, widower of Mrs. M. A. Brind, former Cleaner, who died on 16th January 1988.

(p) Revised compensation payment, preserved pension and lump sum to Miss J. Thomas, Personal Secretary, who prematurely retired on 22nd November 1987.

The Committee agreed to an increase in the additional lump sum compensation payment made to Miss Thomas.
Lord Shackleton: My Lords, perhaps I may express my appreciation to the Offices Committee for granting both the European Communities Committee and the Science and Technology Committee an additional part-time specialist assistant for a period of two years. The amount of work that our clerks get through on our behalf is amazing. If by any chance the House thinks that we are being over-indulged let me say that I was subjected to a rigorous cross-examination by the Leader of the House on the need for those clerks. Since I see that the next item refers to the Parliament Office, I should like to put on record again how much we owe to the Clerks of the House.
Baroness Burton of Coventry: My Lords, I hope that I am in order in wishing to thank Mr. Grey, who is leaving us. In my experience he has certainly been most helpful and kind to Members who have

871
questions to table. I should like him to know how much that has been appreciated.
Noble Lords: Hear! Hear!
The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, perhaps I may first of all thank the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton. It was his persuasive speech, together with that of the noble Baroness, Lady Serota, which impressed us so much that we agreed the additional post of Committee Specialist Assistant available for both the committees.
I am sure that Mr. Grey will have heard with gratitude what the noble Baroness, Lady Burton, said and I am sure that it is felt throughout the House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Duchy of Lancaster Bill
Lord Denham: My Lords, I have it in command from Her Majesty the Queen to acquaint the House that Her Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Duchy of Lancaster Bill, has consented to place her prerogative and interests so far as they are affected by the Bill at the disposal of Parliament for the purposes of the Bill.
On Question, Bill read a third time, and passed.

Foreign Marriage (Amendment) Bill [H.L.]
The Lord Chancellor (Lord Mackay of Clashfern): My Lords, I understand that no amendments have been set down to this Bill and that no noble Lord has indicated a wish to move a manuscript amendment or to speak in Committee. Therefore, unless any noble Lord objects, I beg to move that the order of commitment be discharged.
Moved, That the order of commitment be discharged.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Legal Aid (Financial Conditions) Regulations 1988
11.37 p.m.
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor rose to move, That the regulations laid before the House on 9th March be approved [20th Report from the Joint Committee.]
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, in seeking to move this Motion, it may be for your Lordships' convenience if I speak also to the other three related matters.
The first two Motions relate to legal aid and legal advice and assistance in England and Wales. The other two relate to Scotland. The House will also be aware that there are further sets of Regulations for which an affirmative resolution is not required. Together, all these regulations form a single package aimed at adjusting the legal aid financial limits to take account of inflation, and at giving effect to the
872
necessary amendments arising from changes in social security.
The two Motions for England and Wales deal with the income and capital limits for civil legal aid and advice and assistance. The regulations raise the lower disposable income limit for civil legal aid—that is, the level below which no contribution from income is payable—from £2,325 to £2,400 a year. The proposed increases in the upper income limit—that is, the level above which legal aid is not normally available—is from £5,585 to £5,765 a year. The upper capital limit is similarly increased by the regulations from £4,850 to £5,000.
For legal advice and assistance (known in England and Wales as the Green Form scheme), the regulations raise the upper income limit from £118 to £122 a week. The capital limit—above which advice and assistance is not available—increases from £825 to £850.
The two sets of Scottish Regulations—the Civil Legal Aid (Financial Conditions) (Scotland) Regulations 1988 and the Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions) (Scotland) Regulations 1988—make the same increases for Scotland. In addition, the Legal Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions) (No. 2) Regulations 1988, which do not require affirmative resolution, increase the lower income limit for green form advice from £56 to £58 a week and revise the table of contributions. There are identical increases in the lower income limit and a similar revision in the table of contributions relating to Scotland. These are contained in the Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions) (Scotland) Regulations 1988.
I am also proposing to increase the financial limits for criminal legal aid. The Legal Aid in Criminal Proceedings (General) (Amendment) Regulations 1988 increase from £48 to £50 a week the limit of disposable income above which a person receiving aid in criminal proceedings under Part II of the Legal Aid Act 1974 is required to pay a contribution from income; the regulations also amend the scale of contributions.
All these changes represent an increase of around 3·2 per cent., which matches that underlying the level of the new income-related benefits. I am not proposing any change in the £3,000 lower capital limit for civil and criminal legal aid, or the similar limit above which assistance by way of representation (ABWOR) is not available.
Your Lordships will be aware of the reforms to income-related benefits. On 11th April income support will replace supplementary benefit and there will also be a number of other changes arising from the Social Security Act 1986. Under the new arrangements, recipients of income support and the other income-related benefits will be permitted to have £3,000 capital before an income is assumed to be generated which could affect the level of benefit paid. It seems sensible to continue to use this limit as the threshold for capital contributors for legal aid.
At present, although those on supplementary benefit in practice receive free legal aid, technically their income and capital are still assessed for legal aid purposes. The regulations seek to formalise arrangements which by means of appropriate

873
disregards should always guarantee free civil legal aid to income support claimants, subject of course to the usual test as to the merits of their case. This will not only make administrative sense but will also ensure the achievement of what I hope your Lordships agree is a desirable policy objective.
In addition to creating this "passport" for income support recipients—and that will include their immediate dependants—these regulations also give effect to a series of minor amendments for legal aid which are consequential on the social security changes. In making these amendments I have generally sought to re-create as closely as possible the existing arrangements in relation to the new benefits and their claimants.
There is one slightly different point to which I should like to draw your Lordships' attention, although strictly speaking it is not in a regulation for which I am seeking approval today. Under the scheme for duty solicitors at police stations, commonly known as the 24 hour duty solicitor scheme, there are two tiers of matters in connection with which advice and assistance can be given, each with a different cost limit. The lower tier comprises non-arrestable offences and also all those who are voluntarily assisting the police with their inquiries, however grave the offence involved.
It has been represented to me that this is unfair and that where someone has volunteered to help the police in connection with an arrestable offence they should be able to receive advice in the upper tier, to which a higher, and extendable cost limit applies. If they were subsequently charged with an arrestable offence they would in any case then be eligible for advice within the higher upper tier limit. As some of your Lordships will know, I have accepted these arguments. From 1st April volunteers in connection with arrestable offences will fall within the upper tier of the scheme. The relevant regulation is Regulation 6 of the Legal Advice and Assistance (Amendment) Regulations.
With that one exception I am proposing that all the regulations relating both to the legal aid limits and to the consequences of the social security reforms should come into force on 11th April, the same day on which the new income-related benefits will be introduced. I have also made and placed before the House, under the procedure subject to negative resolution, instruments relating to Northern Ireland which echo the increases in the limits proposed for England and Wales and make comparable consequential amendments arising from the social security changes. These too should come into effect on 11th April.
With that explanation, I beg to move the first Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That the regulations laid before the House on 9th March be approved [20th Report from the Joint Committee].—(The Lord Chancellor.)
Lord Elwyn-Jones: My Lords, the House will be grateful to the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor for taking part in the annual Lord Chancellor's quartet in regard to the provision of legal aid. It is not announced to the sound of music or even a fanfare of trumpets—and perhaps the latter
874
would not be abundantly justified in view of the modesty of the increases that are permitted. However, for what we are about to receive we are nevertheless grateful.
I note that this year the Scottish regulations come into force not, as was the case last year, on All Fools' Day but on a later day. I do not know whether that was a deliberate exercise of discretion on the part of the noble and learned Lord, but what is more important is the assurance—and I speak not with a Scottish voice since I am not entitled to claim one—that the regulations for Scotland are the same as for England and Wales.
As I think the noble and learned Lord said, the purpose of legal aid is to put the assisted litigant in the same position as the unassisted litigant as regards accessibility to the courts. I should like to ask the noble and learned Lord whether he thinks that that object is being and will be achieved following these modest improvements. One is speaking of the odd pound here and there, but perhaps that is not unimportant in this matter. Can the noble and learned Lord give an indication as to what percentage of the population is now covered by the legal aid and advice scheme so far as it is possible to make a shot at that estimate?
In this Session we have had substantial debates on the legal aid scheme generally and the restructuring of the whole of the legal aid machinery. I shall resist the temptation to resurrect some of the issues in that field, but I hope that the noble and learned Lord will not forget the expressions of concern that legal aid should not become an inadequate second-class service. This is not the occasion on which to resurrect those anxieties, but I mention them because they are still present in the minds of many who have been taking part in these matters. If it is possible for the noble and learned Lord to say how many of our fellow citizens have benefited in the past year, 1987, from the legal aid provisions, it would be of interest but it may not be easy for him to obtain that information. However, if would be good to know to what extent this notable social service, which I believe it is, is playing its part in the life of our community.
I did not recover the rules regarding criminal legal aid and I do not know whether they are available. Certainly I did not find that they were available to me. Perhaps the noble and learned Lord will say whether they are separately treated by some published regulations. Perhaps he would look into that matter.
We shall have to examine what the noble and learned Lord said about the duty solicitor scheme. So far as I could understand, it seemed to be a beneficial and helpful suggestion.
Generally speaking we welcome the changes. However, we await, I hope with patience, the publication of the various, indeed multitudinous, regulations which fall for publication in the restructing of the legal aid scheme. We hope that they will be published and available fairly soon. That point does not directly arise from today's business but it is a matter of continuing concern to us all. Subject to those observations, we welcome these improvements in the scheme so far as they go.
Lord Meston: My Lords, any adjustment in the financial eligibility for legal aid needs careful scrutiny. The upper financial limits should remind us that legal aid is a service not just for the poor but also for those of moderate means—people who pay taxes and who will expect to make an assessed contribution to the legal aid fund. We should also remember the force of the statement in the report of the Royal Commission on Legal Services under the chairmanship of the noble Lord, Lord Benson, in which it is said that an upper limit of eligibility is inevitably arbitrary and may operate unfairly on persons who fall just above the line. People in that marginal position may be forced to abandon their legal rights, and in personal injury cases in particular it can mean that instead of recovering the damages to which they would be entitled, they become a burden upon the state and upon other taxpayers.
The lesson surely must be that the limits should be regularly up-rated and up-rated properly with reliable information and consistent criteria. If that does not happen, there will be an erratic narrowing of eligibility such as has happened in past years. However, as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Elwyn-Jones, has said, we are in a transitional period. I am conscious of the fact that we may be rearranging the furniture of the legal aid system when the removal van is already taking the whole structure to new premises under new management by the Legal Aid Board. Indeed, I am also reminded by reading the Benson Report again that there was a recommendation that all eligibility limits should be abolished. I suspect that any government would find that hard to grasp, but perhaps it points the Legal Aid Board to a future consideration of how a measure of flexibility can be extended to those marginal cases in which hardship can be created.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, I am grateful to both noble Lords who have spoken in connection with this matter. On the points raised by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Elwyn-Jones, I am sure that the Scots would regard his voice as sufficiently close to their own to be highly acceptable to them. In any event, I am certain that they would be glad of his eloquent support in any matter that was of concern to them.
The noble and learned Lord mentioned the criminal regulations. These are not before us today. However, I thought it right to mention them because this change that I have agreed to make to the duty solicitor scheme—which is very important—in my view is highly advantageous and highly proper. People who are assisting the police with their inquiries in relation to arrestable offences should be treated in the same way for this purpose as people who are charged with arrestable offences. I was persuaded that it was right to make that change. I believe that it is highly beneficial. I wish to emphasise it. If I did not explain the position sufficiently clearly the first time, I am sorry, but it is an important change. I wish to make it clear now.
Various estimates have been attempted of the coverage of legal aid. The noble and learned Lord will appreciate that these estimates are at the very best highly dubious. The last estimate the Government
876
published was in the White Paper, where it was estimated that approximately 70 per cent. of households were eligible for legal aid. In the course of the proceedings on the Bill, I expressed considerable reservations about the validity of these figures. I see that others have joined me.
It is not surprising that in this area there is scope for a good deal of variety in the estimates. In order to obtain good figures a great deal more work would be required than I have seen. I should therefore not presume to give any estimate of my own. I understand that, in 1986–87, 253,328 civil legal aid certificates were granted. That gives an impression of the coverage with regard to civil legal aid. On criminal legal aid, I do not have an accurate figure available to me.
The noble Lord, Lord Meston, raised the question of the upper limit. I have always considered that to be very important. If one has a limit the people immediately above it are bound to feel it is a pity that they are just above the limit—that with a few less pounds they would have been all right. However, unless one is going to make the coverage complete, that is bound to be a feature.
As the noble Lord hinted, any government would be likely to find it rather hard to make a complete coverage of all the population by legal aid. Indeed, the purpose clause which your Lordships were kind enough to affirm in the Legal Aid Bill before it passed this House speaks of people of small and moderate means and does not aim at a complete coverage of the population.
These regulations cover the position adequately in the present situation. As the noble Lord, Lord Meston, said, the Bill which was passed here is now in the other place. I hope that a major improvement will result in the administrative efficiency of the legal aid scheme once the Legal Aid Board is in operation.
In the meantime, I am glad of the support that your Lordships have given for this up-rating.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Legal Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions) Regulations 1988
11.55 a.m.
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor rose to move, That the regulations laid before the House on 9th March be approved [20th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move.
Moved, That the regulations laid before the House on 9th March be approved. [20th Report from the Joint Committee]—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Civil Legal Aid (Financial Conditions) (Scotland) Regulations 1988
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 17th March be approved [20th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 17th March be approved. [20th Report from the Joint Committee]—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions) (Scotland) Regulations 1988
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 17th March be approved [20th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 17th March be approved. [20th Report from the Joint Committee]—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Licensing Bill
11.58 a.m.
Report received.
Clause 1 [Modification of permitted hours]:
Lord Graham of Edmonton Lord Graham of Edmonton moved Amendment No. 1:
Page 1, line 19, at end insert—
("( ) In subsection (6) of that section (premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquor for consumption off the premises), the words "half past" shall be omitted.")
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I believe that it would be for the convenience of the House if I speak also to Amendment No. 7 which is a consequential amendment.
In dealing with a comparable amendment at an earlier stage, the Minister acknowledged that there have been changes in consumer demand. The noble Earl, Lord Arran, said:
"The new clause seeks to extend those hours so that they may begin at 8 a.m., this being the time when many shops and supermarkets now open". [Official Report, 15/3/88; col. 1107.]
He went on to say that he was not persuaded that this would be right and proper. In raising the matter again I hope to persuade the Minister that this provision ought to be in a Bill. We are trying to produce regulations and rules with regard to on and off licensing which are appropriate to 1988.
There is no doubt that the hours of trade in 1988 are undergoing a great change. Many years ago shops were open at all hours, from very early until very late. Fortunately, there has been a period when the opening hours of shops were very much restricted. By and large, this has been to the benefit of workers and communities. However, the retail trade has very heavily reorganised over the past 30 or 40 years. Increasingly members of the public are obtaining their needs from what we call the large stores—if not the hypermarkets, certainly the supermarket and the self-service shop. Increasingly in 1988 shops are rationalising their hours.
I declare an interest, as I always do, with my close connection with the Co-operative movement. But it is not just the Co-ops. It concerns the larger stores such
878
as Tesco, Sainsbury, Asda, Gateway and many others, all of them members of the Retail Consortium who represent 90 per cent. of the retail trade in this country.
The vogue is very much for shops that open from "8 to 8". Some of them say "8 'till late". The point I am hoping the Minister will accept is that confusion is caused not just for customers, but for staff. Shops open at 8 a.m. but by law they cannot sell alcohol until 8.30, and some might ask why a customer could not wait. The short answer is that for the many people whom you and I would want to go out to work often find it convenient to do their shopping before they go to work. They go into the shop when it opens at 8 a.m. I am not talking about the corner shop but about the large stores patronised by many people. They will be able to get round the shelves quickly because the shop is relatively lightly occupied and they reach the check-out at 8.15 or 8.20, only to be told that the alcohol they have chosen cannot be sold because it is prohibited. Those who manage our retail businesses are responsible people. That does not mean to say that sometimes there is not either error or abuse. The retail trade desires to observe the law, but irritation and confusion is created.
I am asking the Minister to accept the logic of this. We are seeking to encourage people to go out to work and to maximise their time. From my point of view the best use of weekday hours diminishes the need for Sunday trading—a point I make very strongly. We ought to make it convenient for those who wish to purchase their alcohol at the same time as they purchase other items and to be able to do it sensibly, rationally and, much more important, legally between 8 and 8.30 a.m. This is a modest change in keeping with the times, and is one which I believe will assist businesses to use their staff and their resources more efficiently. I beg to move.
12 noon
Lord Sainsbury: My Lords, after declaring my usual interest, I strongly support this amendment from the point of view of the consumer interest and common sense. It is becoming increasingly the practice for shops to open at 8 o'clock a.m. at busy periods, for example on Saturday morning. Without the amendment customers who are in the shop to purchase groceries and perishable goods will be unable to purchase alcoholic beverages at the same time. Instead shoppers are forced to wait around the premises until the off-licence of the shop is opened or are forced to make a second visit to the store. This is an obvious inconvenience to the shopper who finds it difficult to understand.
This minor extension of licensing hours to bring them into line with what is now a growing shop practice will be welcome both by the public and the trade.
Viscount Montgomery of Alamein: My Lords, I also rise to support the amendment. It seems to me that when shops, stores or any retail outlets are open, everything that is available inside those stores should be for sale. To have certain items available only at certain times is quite illogical and makes no sense whatsoever.

879
I take issue with only one small point in the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton. He said that the amendment would diminish the need for shops or stores to open on Sunday. Quite the contrary. We shall be moving forward in due course to Sunday opening once again, but I appreciate that that is quite another issue.
Baroness Ewart-Biggs: My Lords, I see that this amendment has very strong support from the three previous speakers, but I still wonder about the logic which is that in supermarkets which open at 8 a.m. the time of the sale of alcohol should coincide. The noble Lord, Lord Montgomery, just said that it seemed quite right that all products sold in a shop should be available while it is open. How would he feel about those shops which open before 8 o'clock? Would he say that the sale of alcohol should be permissible from 7 o'clock in the morning and so on? Indeed the noble Earl, Lord Arran, at Committee stage said that perhaps shops would like to be able to sell alcohol from 7 a.m. I shall be interested to hear what the Minister says in response to that.
I feel that from two points of view this amendment would be yet another liberalisation, though I know it is a small one, and yet another outlet for the sale of alcohol. Also, there seems to be a lack of logic that it would not apply to shops that open before 8 o'clock. I believe that there is a weakness there.
Lord Leatherland: My Lords, as one who was a complete teetotaller for 40 years but who has now fallen from grace, I should like to support this amendment. I think that the whole House will support the amendment without feeling that they have done anything wrong or unsociable.
Lord Ardwick: My Lords, the whole House does not support the amendment. I do not support the amendment, as I did not in the Committee stage. The argument of the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, seemed to me to diminish the arguments of my noble friend. My noble friend had the earnest worker starting work at 8 o'clock in the morning and having to go to work without his bottle of claret. Now the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, says "Oh no, it is Saturday mornings, the busy mornings when the people who nip in to be the first in line at the check-out want to get away". It will take them a quarter of an hour to choose their other goods and then they would have to wait perhaps another quarter of an hour to buy their alcohol. That is perhaps inevitable, but I think it is a very sad indication of the way we are going in this country.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I do not think that we want to start off with difficulties. The noble Lord, Lord Leatherland, says that the whole House will support the amendment, and his noble friend Lord Ardwick says that the whole House will not support it. That makes life very complicated.
The noble Lord, Lord Graham, raised this matter at Committee stage. My noble friend Lord Arran said that he was not persuaded that the present restrictions on the opening hours of off-licenses were
880
such a serious impediment to trade as to justify altering the licensing hours so that they began at 8 a.m. Since then I have had an opportunity to study more carefully the argument of the noble Lord, Lord Graham.
The noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, said at Committee stage that her noble friend's argument was logical, that his explanation made sense, but to be fair to her she said that she did not support it. Indeed, to be equally fair to her, today she said that she did not think it was logical. The spirit behind the Bill is one of removing unnecessary and outdated restrictions, provided that in doing so we do not put into jeopardy other citizens' legitimate rights to go about their business, indeed their lives, without undue disturbance.
On reflection the proposed amendment seems to me to be in keeping with that spirit. Changing work patterns and life-styles result in people needing to do their shopping early in the morning or after work in the evening, and the supermarkets have sought to cater for those needs with the result that many of them now open at 8 o'clock in the morning until 7 or 8 at night. The vast majority of shoppers who will purchase alcohol at this early time will simply be buying what they would normally buy, but at a time which they find more convenient.
There must be a cut-off point in any licensing restriction, and to some extent that must always be arbitrary. The fact that there is a degree of arbitrariness does not mean that we should take a rigid or inflexible view in deciding where the cut-off point should be. If we accept that an 8 a.m. start to the off-licence day is acceptable then, as the noble Baroness points out, there will still be a number of premises which open even earlier and which will not be accommodated. However, I do not believe that that means that we should be detracted from the validity of an 8 a.m. start.
This is a pretty modest amendment and I have been persuaded that it strikes the right balance between catering for changing shopping needs and presenting undue early morning disturbances. I am happy to accept the amendment.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for his reflections and his acceptance of the amendment. I take the matter seriously although it is not a matter of life and death. It would not be of great importance if the amendment was moved and not carried. If the amendment is put to the House and the vote is lost there would be no great outcry. The amendment is moved in the sense that the Bill presents an opportunity to attempt to rationalise an ongoing situation. My noble friend Lord Ardwick misunderstood what I had said. I was not arguing that the extra half an hour would be used by people buying their drink earlier in order that they could consume it earlier. It is for the convenience of the ordinary shopper. I was making a case for the consumer who, having entered the store at 8 a.m., is confounded by his inability at being able to leave by 8.20 a.m. having purchased his goods. I am saying that we should look at that matter.
My noble friend Lady Ewart-Biggs pointed out the fact that certain shops open before 7 o'clock. The

881
Retail Consortium represents 90 per cent. of the trade and it confirms that more goods are being obtained from the larger stores whose pattern is to open at 8 a.m. If the argument is put forward that that may change, then we must look at the law yet again.
I am grateful to the Minister for accepting the amendment. I hope that the House will also accept it in the spirit of reasonableness and reality.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Kaberry of Adel Lord Kaberry of Adel moved Amendment No. 2:
Page 2, line 1, leave out ("five") and insert ("six")
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move Amendment No. 2 standing in my name and also in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Monson. I am indebted to him for supporting the amendment. It is consequential upon an amendment to Clause 1(2) agreed to in Committee. It gave public licensed premises an extra opening hour on Sunday in order that they may open between 12 noon and 3 p.m. Together with the evening opening hours permitted to public licensed premises, that gave 6½ hours' opening on Sunday, Christmas Day and Good Friday.
The present effect of the subsections with which we are dealing, relating to registered clubs, limits their opening to 5½ hours on a Sunday. Clearly there is an anomaly which should be corrected. The clubs referred to are of a wide variety, country clubs, sporting clubs of all descriptions, political clubs, nonpolitical clubs, working men's clubs and so forth. Each is autonomous but all have one thing in common. Their rules always provide that no person shall be elected a member under the age of 18 years. Therefore there is no question of any under-age drinking being permitted in a club. Clubs consist of law-abiding citizens who wish to see the rules strictly adhered to. There is no risk in amending the presnt subsection in order to give clubs 6½ hours opening on a Sunday, Christmas Day or Good Friday similar to public places to which the public may have resort.
The three subsections at the top of page 2 of the Bill clearly envisage clubs having flexible opening times. A club fixes its hours during which members may consume their own liquor in their own club. They are registered with a Clerk to the Magistrates. At present they could open from 12 noon until 3 p.m. However, 3 from 5½ leaves 2½ so there is little point in providing that they can open for 3½ hours in the evening as provided in this subsection. The simplest way is to give clubs parity with public licensed premises.
I should like to adopt all the arguments put forward in Committee. Sunday is a visiting day when families may go out, when they can entertain and so forth. In addition, clubs of a like kind can be grouped together. Political clubs can group within their own political affiliations and the Licensing Act 1964 clearly permits proper use of pass cards or inter-affiliation cards. They permit a member of a club in the north of England reasonable access to use all the facilities of a club, for example, on the South Coast during the summer time. It may be in Torbay, the Isle of Wight, Bournemouth, Blackpool or on the Yorkshire coast. There is a full interchange and Sunday is the great day when that interchange takes place.
One could quote one or two silly examples around the country where the club may be next door to the public house or maybe there is one across the road. It would be ridiculous to think that a club must be limited to 5½ hours on Sunday whereas the public house next door can open for 6½ hours. I hope that your Lordships will see the reasonableness of the argument and approve the proposed amendment.
12.15 p.m.
Baroness Ewart-Biggs: My Lords, I shall be interested to hear the Minister's response to this amendment. I think that the parity with licensed premises, as described by the noble Lord, is very important. He pointed out the growing tendency to eat out at lunchtime, when people like to use their clubs. There is a more controlled environment within a club. Clubs are more used by local people who do not go there in a car and therefore the danger of increasing drinking and driving does not exist. It would be a pity if club members went to their club only to find it closed and were then compelled to move on to a public house with expanded opening hours. I should like to support the noble Lord's amendment.
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, at the Committee stage of the Bill your Lordships chose to accept an amendment tabled by my noble friend Lord Harmar-Nicholls. The effect of that will be to allow licensed premises to keep their bars open until 3 p.m. at Sunday lunchtime instead of closing at 2 p.m. as at present. This means that the total number of hours available to licensed premises will be 6½ hours instead of the present 5½ hours.
It is in the light of that amendment that my noble friend Lord Kaberry has tabled the present amendment. It seeks to restore parity between licensed premises and registered clubs in terms of the total number of hours permitted on Sundays. I can understand the logic of this amendment since pubs and clubs have long been permitted the same total number of hours. But we have to say that we are not persuaded that there is any force in the argument.
If I understood the mood of your Lordships' House at Committee stage correctly, I believe that the amendment of my noble friend Lord Harmar-Nicholls was accepted because it took account of a specific need relating to Sunday lunchtimes. The case for an additional hour reflected the tendency to lunch later on Sunday, that it would provide an opportunity for pubs which do not presently find it viable to do so to provide meals, and that it recognised the needs of families. We do not believe that the primary intention was to provide an opportunity for an extra hour of drinking on Sunday.
Clubs already have a measure of flexibility in deciding when to use the hours available to them on Sundays. They may already stay open until 3 p.m. if they choose to do so. Consequently the specific arguments about the need to cater for people's particular needs on Sunday lunchtimes do not apply to clubs. The provision of an additional hour for clubs will effectively amount to the provision of an additional hour for drinking with no obvious justification.

883
As we have repeatedly made clear, the Government do not intend to lift the restrictions on Sunday hours. We are not persuaded that a convincing special case has been made out for this amendment and we therefore cannot commend it.
Lord Rippon of Hexham: My Lords, I am astonished by that answer. I cannot understand why the Government should accept the logic of the amendment and yet illogically oppose it.
Lord Monson: My Lords, at an earlier stage the Committee agreed to an extra hour for pubs. There was no Division and the Government did not oppose that. Therefore, why do they oppose bringing clubs into line? The other place has a right to decide the matter when the Bill returns to them.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, I heard my noble friend Lord Kaberry move the amendment in terms which I thought were completely compelling. I am surprised that the Government have not felt it right to accept the logic of the matter. I have listened to my noble friend's argument from the Front Bench and I am bound to say that the conclusion which he reached caused me some surprise. I hope that the Minister will, even at this point, give an undertaking to look again at the arguments. I hold an inter-affiliation card, in the way that my noble friend Lord Kaberry indicated. I cannot claim to use it very often but the logic of having the same hours for pubs and clubs seems to me to be absolutely irrefutable.
Lord Houghton of Sowerby: My Lords, the experience of licensing legislation is that whenever one gives an inch, the temperance lobby wants two inches. This is the same process. If a concession is given, it creates an anomaly, it does not go far enough or there is something wrong with it until there is a further increase.
We are discussing the hours during which people may indulge their addiction in alcohol; that is what we are talking about. I understood that addiction to alcohol can be very dangerous. The contradictions about this Bill and the amendment before the House at present and the anxieties about alcoholic excess are apparent all the time. I said at Second Reading that we ought to be looking at the curtailment of opportunities for doing this and not extending them. I support the Government.
The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, I should like to assure the Minister that I welcomed what he said. He put into words the misgivings or hesitations which I had and I believe that those misgivings deserve to be expressed a little more fully. They concern the familiar point about the English Sunday and there is some danger that it will be trickled away and eroded. Not long ago we had the legislation concerning off-course betting on Sundays. We now have another detailed proposal. Details work cumulatively and surely the whole question of the nature of the English Sunday and its observance deserves to be looked at in its own right.
I know that important and weighty considerations can apply and I have heard persuasive arguments
884
during the course of the debate on this amendment, however, I believe the better way to deal with this matter is to wait until the detailed matter can be subsumed under the larger subject of observance of Sunday rather than deal with it as a side issue.
Lord Ardwick: My Lords, I am glad that the Government have taken this view. I spoke earlier about the reasons why this 2 o'clock limit was laid. It seemed illogical that while everywhere closed at three on weekdays, they closed at two on Sundays. In the industrial areas the object was to get the men out of the pub and back around the dinner table for the family Sunday dinner. It was also to give the licensee—the small licensee with no staff and a family—a decent afternoon of leisure so that he might, for once in the week, go out in his car. I hope that that will be preserved and that the Government will stay firm in their intention to resist the amendment.
Viscount Montgomery of Alamein: My Lords, I rise to disagree wholly with the noble Lord, Lord Ardwick. This matter was discussed in Committee. I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Kaberry, is quite right and I hope that he will pursue his amendment vigorously. Perhaps I may go back to what my noble friend Lord Arran said in Committee as my name was coupled with the amendment tabled by my noble friend Lord Harmar-Nicholls which was passed by the Committee. This matter touches on the need for us to move forward. The intention of many of those in favour of liberalisation was that Sunday should be the same day as every other day, which is wholly logical. However, as only one hour could be obtained that was the best we could do for the time being. However, it is wholly illogical. My noble friend Lord Rippon put his finger right on the button as usual when he said that the Government, having accepted the argument, would be proceeding very illogically if they did not allow this amendment to proceed.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, perhaps I may help the House, and I also remind noble Lords that we are proceeding a trifle out of order. The noble Lord, Lord Monson, said that when this Bill was discussed in Committee, the Government accepted the amendment to increase the pub hours from 2 o'clock to 3 o'clock. The Government did not accept that. In Committee I explained very clearly that the Government had always decided that this Bill should not interfere with Sundays. However, a number of noble Lords considered that it would be appropriate for family reasons to allow the Sunday closing hour to be extended from 2 o'clock to 3 o'clock to enable people to enjoy their Sunday lunches. At that time I advised that the Government could not accept that proposal but your Lordships decided to do so. My noble friend Lord Kaberry now comes along, in the way that the noble Lord, Lord Houghton, has said. As soon as the door is opened someone tries to push it wider. My noble friend Lord Kaberry says that he now wants another hour for clubs. Clubs can open until 3 o'clock on Sundays. Therefore, to suggest that they should be allowed another hour means that they should be allowed another hour's drinking in the evening. That is against the point of the Government's Bill.

885
It was in order to endeavour to accommodate points such as the noble Lord, Lord Graham, reasonably made earlier regarding weekdays that we introduced this Bill to tidy up anomalies and not to run into Sunday and get everything confused. The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester was very fair, if I may say so, in suggesting that the House should not accept this amendment because it would run into the problem of Sunday and that that day should be dealt with in a much wider context.
I believe that my noble friend Lord Kaberry is not being wholly fair if he tries to persuade the Government to accept this amendment, because the analogy we should consider is whether the clubs can be open at the same time as the pubs are for Sunday lunches. The Committee accepted that amendment for pubs but I hope that the House will not accept this amendment.
Lord Kaberry of Adel: My Lords, to say that I am disappointed is to understate my feelings a million-fold. I sought to speak on behalf of 1½ million to 2 million club members around the country who hold pass cards or inter-affiliation cards which enable them to visit other clubs from time to time. It is that visiting time which is now granted for licensed premises to which the public at large can go which is denied to members of private clubs. Club members are just as worthy citizens as those who visit public houses.
I hope that my noble friend the Minister will think again on this matter and that he will have second thoughts from the point of view of parity between the two sides. I hope he will agree that it is grossly unfair that clubs should be denied the facilities that are granted in the Bill as it stands. No amendment has been tabled by the Government to delete what is apparently an offending paragraph in Clause 1. In the hope that wiser counsels may prevail, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
12.30 p.m.
Lord Graham of Edmonton Lord Graham of Edmonton moved Amendment No. 3:
After Clause 1, insert the following clause:
("Off-premises sales on weekdays.
. In section 60(6) of the principal Act (premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquor off the premises) the words "or Good Friday" shall be omitted.").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment seeks to bring logic into the situation primarily as it affects supermarkets and the retail trade. All the points made in the debate have been made with good intentions and it is clear that this is a complex issue. We are referring to Sundays and the effect of any amendment passed; and I take the point made by the right reverend Prelate, who is anxious to preserve all matters relating to Sundays until we have a major measure, which we expect will be coming forward. However, beggars cannot be choosers and we have an opportunity in this Bill to raise a particular point.
I will listen again to the Minister, as I did to his ministerial colleague when I previously raised a point. I am seeking consideration of an anomaly. The
886
present situation in England and Wales is that off-licences may sell alcohol on Good Friday between 12 noon and 2 p.m. and between 7 p.m. and 10.30 p.m. More and more of the larger stores—not necessarily in any one chain—open on Good Friday. They do so in order to meet the convenience of their customers or their community. When the larger stores open in Scotland there is no restriction on the sale of alcohol, but in England and Wales there is a restriction.
The Minister may say that he supports that anomaly. However, I ask the Minister to take account of the fact that when customers go into a large store, or even a smaller store, that is open on Good Friday—I am not making the case for stores to be open on Good Friday because under the Shops Act stores can legitimately open—they find that the stores have to control and supervise their alcohol sales so that alcohol is not available to the public except between the hours of 12 noon and 2 p.m. The hours of 7 p.m. to 10.30 p.m. are almost irrelevant because generally on Good Friday stores tend to close much earlier than their normal opening hours. They may well open at 8.30 a.m. and close at 4 p.m. or 5 p.m.
The case that I should like the Minister to accept, or to tell me why this is not an appropriate or good amendment, is that embarrassment and confusion occur when store staff have to explain to customers that the alcohol section is closed and that the store which has been legally trading all day cannot legally sell all of its goods. I believe that that situation is illogical and that this is the appropriate moment for the Minister to deal with it.
Lord Sainsbury: My Lords, I support this amendment. However much some may regret it, the fact is that for some time Good Friday, which in the past was treated as a special day, is now by public and trade alike no longer so treated. Therefore, it is becoming increasingly anomalous that restricted hours for off-licences should be applied to this day.
Lord Somers: My Lords, at the risk of being in a minority of one, or perhaps two with the presence of the right reverend Prelate, I must confess that I oppose this amendment.
For some time I have regretted the increasing disappearance of any desire to look upon Christian festivals as different in any way from the ordinary day. Sunday is merely looked upon now as the day when one does not have to go to work or to school. Christmas is regarded as a day when one must give one's children a lot of rather useless toys and as an opportunity to have an extremely good meal. Apart from that, the day has no significance.
In what I sincerely hope is still a Christian country, I cannot help regretting that tendency. I admit that the noble Lord's argument is completely logical but I suggest to him that logicality is not always the only argument.
Viscount Buckmaster: My Lords, I rise to support my noble friend Lord Somers as strongly as I can. To a great many Christians, Good Friday is the most sacred and special day in the whole year and it is, as

887
he said, distressing to see it abused in the way that it is now. Therefore, I very much hope that your Lordships will resist this amendment.
The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, for his kind reference to me just now. He spoke very persuasively in presenting his case on this amendment. I consider the amendment to be regrettable though hard to resist. We all know that Good Friday has long been a working day in some parts of the country, and increasingly stores are open on Good Friday. Given these facts, it would be difficult or repressive to try to prevent the purchase of alcohol on that day. I regard this amendment to be regrettable because I and many others consider much in the present observance of Good Friday to be regrettable. I shall be very much interested to learn of the Minister's views on this subject in due course.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, the purpose of this new amendment, which the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, has tabled, is to allow Good Friday to be treated like any other weekday for the purposes of the licensing hours as applied to off-licences and not to on-licences. It will not affect the hours on Good Friday for on-licence premises at all. On Sundays, Christmas Day and Good Friday off-licence premises are permitted to sell alcoholic drinks between 12 o'clock and 2 o'clock, and between 7 p.m. and 10.30 p.m. Off-licence premises can sell alcohol at present on Good Friday; but the hours during which alcohol as opposed to other goods can be sold is restricted.
The Shops Act allows shops to trade in normal goods on Good Friday in just the same way as on any other weekday. I can understand the restrictions which are imposed by the Licensing Act on licensed premises on that day. They can seem to be anomalous and unduly restrictive. The noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, said that in Scotland alcohol can be bought all day on Good Friday. He uses that as a perfectly sound argument. I realise that for many people any relaxation of Good Friday hours is really just another assault on the decorum of what is a special Christian day. The Government have said that we do not intend this Bill to affect Sundays. I thought that the right reverend Prelate, the Bishop of Manchester, was extraordinarily generous in his remarks because he might well have taken a contrary view.
There is a dilemma. There is a distinction to be drawn between Good Friday and Sunday. For the purposes of trading, Good Friday is not the same as Sunday. Nevertheless, it is a special day. On Good Friday it is permitted to trade in alcohol. It is only the times at which this can be done which are restrictive. The Government take a neutral view on this matter. It is not Sunday; and it is a special day. I respect and understand both points of view.
My Lords, I apologise if I referred to the Bishop of Birmingham; I thought I had said the Bishop of Manchester. I meant to say the Bishop of Manchester.
The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Belstead): No, you did not; you meant to say the Bishop of Newcastle.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I am so sorry. I apologise to the right reverend Prelate. I am confused now not only by what I did not say, but also with what I was trying to conclude as regards the amendment.
The conclusion is that from the point of view of the Government we consider that Good Friday, though not a Sunday, is a special Christian day. It is not the purpose of this Bill to interfere with Sundays. There is an argument which the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, has put forward very cogently about extending the hours. It is for your Lordships to decide whether or not you wish to accept that.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, I am grateful for the courtesy and care with which the Minister has made his remarks. I am not going to press this amendment to a vote because I am well aware that what has been said here can clearly put this matter in a wider context. All noble Lords who have spoken and commented upon my remarks have quite fairly pointed out that logic is on my side. I am very much taken by what the noble Lord, Lord Somers, said. Logicality is not the only matter that has to be considered regarding these issues. I am very much minded of the way in which not only the right reverend Prelate but others have alluded to the totality of the argument that one day will have to be joined about the whole rationale of our life on Sunday.
Many of those opposed to this amendment have said that they do not object to alcohol being sold but that they object to shops being open on Good Friday or Christmas Day. I can see the logic of that argument. However, this is the reality; namely, that the shops are open. There is an anomaly here in the shops being open; and then inside the shop there is the anomaly in what can and cannot be sold. What my amendment has sought to do is to remove at least that anomaly. I would blanch at the prospect of having to go back and change the whole pattern of consumer expenditure and demand.
With the differences between Scottish law and English law on Sunday; and between Scottish law and English law on the sale of alcohol and licensing hours, all those questions have to be tidied up at some stage in the future. I am satisfied that the case I have made has some good sense. The case will be deployed even more strongly at a later date. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
12.45 p.m.
Viscount Brentford Viscount Brentford moved Amendment No. 4:
After Clause 9. insert the following new clause:
"(Disqualified premises—garages.
. After section 9(3) of the principal Act there shall be inserted the following subsection—
"(3A) Premises shall be disqualified from receiving a justices' licence if they are sited within a location where the primary purpose is either the retailing of petrol or derv or the sale or maintenance of motor vehicles or both".).
The noble Viscount said: My Lords, it is with a measure of diffidence that I bring back before your Lordships the question of the sale of alcohol by garages. Your Lordships will remember that the debate on this subject in Committee went to a vote and the amendment was defeated. This is a different amendment. I make no apology for bringing this amendment before your Lordships because so many members of your Lordships' House have approached me and asked me to do so. I was not involved with the previous amendment. I believe that this matter is extremely important. I hope that your Lordships will pay attention to this amendment.
Perhaps I may make two points as regards the detail of the amendment. First, your Lordships will notice that the amendment says that "the primary purpose" is the sale of petrol, and so on. At Committee stage two or three of your Lordships made the point about the all-purpose shop that sold petrol, alcohol and everything else that one wanted because there was no other shop within a radius of 10 miles. This amendment would not affect the right of that shop to sell alcohol as well as petrol. It refers to those premises where the primary purpose is the sale of petrol.
Secondly, I draw your Lordships' attention to the words "sited within a location". I understand that quite often one or other part of the garage or the shop is used as a franchise and may not be owned by the same people. The object of the amendment is that where one has together a shop selling goods and a garage selling petrol, the shop should not be able to sell alcohol. Perhaps I may refer to a few important facts. Your Lordships will be well aware that the sale of alcohol at motorway service stations is not permitted. I find it very difficult to see why one can buy petrol and alcohol on an A road when one is filling up with petrol but not on a motorway. An A road may be a dual carriageway and the speed limit will be the same. Many of the factors will be the same. It is illogical that you may buy alcohol on one road but not on the other.
Noble Lords may say that this is not a matter of great significance because only about 150 garages have been licensed by the justices to sell alcohol. It may also be said that not a great many people will be inconvenienced if the House accepts the amendment. It is, however, important for reasons to which I shall come in a moment.
In a newspaper report on Monday of this week I discovered that in Llanelli in Wales the justices have licensed three garages to sell alcohol. According to the report, the Licensed Victuallers Association and the Rural Community Council are to appeal to my right honourable friend the Home Secretary to forbid the justices giving these licences. A good deal of anger has been created by justices permitting this. I should like to remind the House that drink driving convictions increased from just over 8,000 in 1965 to 107,000 in 1985. That is a substantial increase over that 20-year period.
In conclusion, perhaps I may give the two reasons why I should like the House to accept the amendment. The first is psychological. If the Government are rightly stressing the need not to drink and drive, how can we in Parliament permit
890
justices to license garages to sell alcohol? If we permit the two to be knit together it will make a nonsense of the drink driving campaign. My second reason is a practical one. How easy it is for somebody filling up with petrol to buy a few cans of beer and drink them as he is travelling along. He may not be driving at the time. He may take over the driving later. The question of drink driving is so important today that we have a duty to be seen to be taking every step to discourage it. That is the impact of the amendment. I beg to move.
Baroness Ewart-Biggs: My Lords, I have put my name to this amendment as I did to the similar amendment that we moved in Committee. I cannot add very much to what the noble Viscount has already said except to stress again that the previous amendment had powerful support from all sides of the House. The major argument put forward by the Minister was that there were few such premises. He said that the total in 1986 was only 150. From my personal knowledge I know that two or three have come into being since 1986. If I have such knowledge I cannot help feeling that the number may well have increased in the past two years more than one would have thought.
The Minister also argued that he did not share the view that the sale of alcohol in shops attached to garages will incite people to drink and drive. He said that in the vast majority of cases people will purchase alcohol in order to consume it when their journeys are over and not en route. That may well be the case, but why offer this handy opportunity to buy drink when it is not totally necessary?
I should like to stress again what the noble Viscount said in moving the amendment. It is the message that is important. Surely alcohol and driving is a mis-match. Everything that has been done by the Secretary of State for Transport over recent months has been geared to driving that message home. Surely the licensing of garages undermines the message, which is that if you drink do not drive, and if you drive do not drink. I hope that the House will give its support to the amendment and I hope that the Minister will as well.
Baroness Macleod of Borve: My Lords, my noble friend the Minister is aware that this amendment is supported by noble Lords on all sides of the House, although, unfortunately, the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, who spoke so eloquently in Committee is unable to be here today. I am grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Brentford, for putting the case so ably and well.
I did not come to the House yesterday because I decided to ask what we call "the general public" for their views on this amendment. I went round my local town and apprehended 15 people of all ages and both sexes. I asked them whether they thought that garages should be given a licence to sell alcoholic drinks. Every single person said, no. They added the rider that alcohol was far too freely available now and that to add another dimension of being able to buy alcohol en route when one is driving would be very detrimental.
I tried to explain my strong views on this matter in Committee and I do not think that a long speech at

891
Report stage is called for. I feel strongly that it is an added incitement to people to take a can off the shelf, as the noble Baroness has said, or to buy a bottle of gin. On the other hand, if they have to park their car (or their motorcycle, which is perhaps more likely) and go into a store to buy alcoholic liquid that is a different matter. Like the people I spoke to yesterday, I believe that too many places are able to sell alcoholic refreshment. To be able to add garages to that list is wrong in principle.
Viscount Montgomery of Alamein: My Lords, in the ordinary way I have spoken consistently in past debates in favour of liberation. This amendment is a restrictive one. However, there are some rather special circumstances.
Much reference has been made in our debates, today and on previous occasions, to logic. As regards logic it is unreasonable to suppose that everybody on the road who goes into a gas station to fill up and may buy alcohol will immediately become a raving homicidal maniac. That is totally illogical. On the other hand, this country and the Government have been engaged in an enormous campaign to restrict drinking and driving and they have been doing all in their power to move that campaign forward. As many noble Lords have said, there is a total mismatch between drinking and driving. In those circumstances the most telling argument produced by my noble friend Lord Brentford was the psychological one. How can it be that we are engaged in a major campaign and at the same time selling alcohol at petrol stations? That is the telling argument. There will not be a large number of garages involved. The psychological argument has the most impact today.
1 p.m.
Lord McNair: My Lords, in the unavoidable absence of my noble friend Lord Falkland, may I add my support for the amendment? I hope that the noble Viscount will take the amendment all the way.
Lord Monson: My Lords, I am sorry to disagree with the noble Viscount, Lord Montgomery, on this occasion, as I usually agree with him on matters touching upon licensing. I had not seen the amendment before today, and I have not had the time to study it in depth. It seems to me to go a little too far. If the amendment confined itself to preventing garages from selling spirits or fortified wines, or even ordinary table wines, one could not have any objection. One frequently wants to buy a can of lager or cider to have with a picnic when driving for a long distance. What on earth is wrong with that? No one can seriously argue that a can of ordinary strength lager (3 per cent.) can make one more accident prone. One would have to be of a curious disposition for that to be the case.
I do not know whether it is technically possible, but if the amendment could be redrafted and brought back at the next stage, confined to limiting the sale of stronger alcoholic drinks, that would be acceptable. It is not acceptable to me as it is at present.
Viscount Massereene and Ferrard: My Lords, it depends upon how many cans of lager or other beer one has, does it not?
Lord Monson: My Lords, with the leave of the House, for various obvious reasons, most ordinary people do not drink several cans of lager while driving long distances.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Brentford seeks to introduce a new clause to ban the sale of alcohol by garages whose primary business is the sale of petrol or the maintenance or sale of cars. My noble friend Lady Macleod said that she was very much in favour of the amendment. The noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, said that we should adopt the principle, "If you drink, you do not drive; if you drive, you do not drink". That is a good policy to adopt, but I do not think it is relevant to the amendment.
I can understand noble Lords feeling that it must be wrong to allow alcohol and driving to be associated in any way. However, there is no evidence that where alcohol is sold at garages it encourages people to drink and drive. Most garages with a licence will also sell other groceries and their customers use such premises in the way other shoppers use out-of-town supermarkets; they are a convenient place to purchase alcohol which will be consumed at the end of the journey or at some other time. I find it hard to believe that your Lordships believe that people go to a garage, buy some spirits, drink them and then drive off. That is wholly unrealistic.
My noble friend Lord Arran explained in Committee that the police are able to oppose applications from garages for a licence where they feel that the sale of alcohol from such premises may give rise to customers drinking and driving. Justices would normally respect that view in such cases. It is the opinion of the Association of Chief Police Officers and of the Magistrates' Association that that system provides an effective control whilst allowing the justices discretion to take into account all the local factors, including the availability of other off-licensed outlets in the area. If any licensed garage should give rise to difficulties, it will be open to the justices, using their new powers contained in Clause II of the Bill, to revoke its licence.
My noble friend Lord Brentford said that the only premises which are currently disqualified from holding a licence are motorway service stations. He said that he could not see any difference. There is a difference. Those premises provide an opportunity for motorists to rest and to take refreshment, and there is a real risk that the provision of alcoholic drinks there could encourage some drivers to drink and drive. But one does not rest at garages. They are not normally parking places. With respect to my noble friend the two are different.
Of the 150 or so licensed garages, the majority are in rural areas. When the department sought details of the numbers of licences granted to garages in 1986, it emerged that over half were to be found in the four counties of Devon, Cornwall, Norfolk and Dyfed. That should not be interpreted as those counties having people most likely to be inebriated. It merely

893
serves to illustrate the point that I tried to make, that in rural districts, in particular, there is a need for garages to meet customers' various needs, not simply the supply of petrol. For those reasons, I hope that my noble friend will agree that it is inappropriate to insert this clause into the Bill.
Viscount Brentford: My Lords, I am disappointed by my noble friend's reply. He does not seem to have answered the point put by my noble friend Lord Montgomery about the psychological impact of the Government permitting garages to sell alcohol. As he said, I believe that that is the most important point and that it undermines the Government's whole case for discouraging drinking and driving.
If we in Parliament approve of justices licensing garages to sell alcohol, we are doing two different things with our two hands. That is unacceptable. It is not what we should approve. My noble friend the Minister said that the garages are largely in rural areas. I do not know the town of Llanelli, which featured in Monday's press, but it has three garages all of which are entitled to sell alcohol. I therefore do not believe that it can be a very rural town.
In view of your Lordships' support for the amendment, I do not propose to withdraw it. I wish to put it to the vote.
1.7 p.m.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 4) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 63; Not-Contents, 45.

DIVISION NO. 1

CONTENTS

Addington, L.

Leatherland, L.

Amherst, E.

Lloyd of Hampstead, L.

Ardwick, L.

Longford, E.

Ashbourne. L.

Lovell-Davis, L.

Birdwood, L.

McGregor of Durris, L.

Blatch, B.

Mackie of Benshie, L.

Brentford, V. [Teller.]

Macleod of Borve, B.

Broadbridge, L.

McNair, L.

Buckmaster, V.

Massereene and Ferrard, V.

Campbell of Eskan, L.

Molloy, L.

Carter, L. [Teller.]

Montgomery of Alamein, V.

Cox, B.

Mountevans, L.

Craigavon, V.

Munster, E.

David, B.

Nelson, E.

De Freyne, L.

Newcastle, Bp.

Donaldson of Kingsbridge, L.

Nicol, B.

Elwyn-Jones, L.

Norfolk, D.

Ewart-Biggs, B.

Northfield, L.

Fortescue, E.

Peston, L.

Gainford, L.

Reay, L.

Graham of Edmonton, L.

Rippon of Hexham, L.

Hanworth, V.

Rugby, L.

Hayter, L.

Stallard, L.

Henderson of Brompton, L.

Strabolgi, L.

Houghton of Sowerby, L.

Strathspey, L.

Hunt, L.

Taylor of Gryfe, L.

Ingleby, V.

Thurlow, L.

John-Mackie, L.

Whaddon, L.

Kaberry of Adel, L.

White, B.

Killearn, L.

Williams of Elvel, L.

Kilmarnock, L.

Wise, L.

Lane-Fox, B.

894

NOT-CONTENTS

Alexander of Tunis, E.

Lawrence, L.

Arran, E.

Lindsay, E.

Attlee, E.

Long, V.

Beaverbrook, L.

Lucas of Chilworth, L.

Belstead, L.

Melville, V.

Bessborough, E.

Merrivale, L.

Blyth, L.

Monson, L.

Cameron of Lochbroom, L.

Norrie, L.

Campbell of Alloway, L.

Plummer of St. Marylebone, L.

Carnock, L.

Reigate, L.

Cottesloe, L.

Rodney, L.

Davidson, V. [Teller.]

St. Davids, V.

Denham, L. [Teller.]

Sempill, Ly.

Dundee, E.

Skelmersdale, L.

Effingham, E.

Somers, L.

Erroll, E.

Strathcarron, L.

Ferrers, E.

Swansea, L.

Glenarthur, L.

Terrington, L.

Hesketh, L.

Teynham, L.

Hooper, B.

Thorneycroft, L.

Hylton-Foster, B.

Trefgarne, L.

Joseph, L.

Ullswater, V.

Lauderdale, E.

Resolved in the affirmative, and amendment agreed to accordingly.
1.15 p.m.
Lord Graham of Edmonton Lord Graham of Edmonton moved Amendment No. 5:
After Clause 12, insert the following new clause:
("Applications for justices' licences.
. In paragraph 8 of Schedule 2 to the principal Act, for the words "renewal unless objection is made to the renewal" there shall be substituted the words "transfer of a justices off-licence when the applicant has been the holder of such a licence for the past five years, or in the case of a renewal, unless objection is made to such application, for transfer or renewal").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, although, quite clearly, this amendment is relevant to the Bill, it deals with a very distinct and different aspect of the Bill. We are not primarily concerned here with what can be sold where and by whom. We are concerned, and I am particularly concerned, with the extent to which time is taken both in the justices' licensing courts and by those who are employed in the trade in carrying out what one would call proper administrative functions.
I believe that there could have been a misunderstanding of the wording of the amendment dealing with this matter which I brought before the House at Committee stage. The noble Earl, Lord Arran, said quite fairly:
"The amendment would apply to transfer applications not only in respect of off-licensed premises, but also in respect of, for example, public houses". [Official Report, 15/3/88; col. 1110.]
That was never the intention of the amendment. However, on re-reading it, I find that that is what my amendment said. Therefore I draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that the intention of this amendment is to deal wholly with off-licence premises.
The Minister made another point. He said:
"In many cases the nature of the new store would not be significantly different and the fitness of the applicant to hold a licence will have been established on an earlier occasion".
We are talking about a person put forward to accept the transfer of a licence in his name, who for five years has been a licence holder with an unblemished record and against whom no objection is lodged by the

895
police, as being a fit and proper person to have the licence transferred into his name. On the last occasion the noble Lord said at col. 1110.
"I do not believe that we should allow transfer proceedings to become a mere formality".
Nor do I. Nor do those in the trade who, I repeat, are very conscious of their responsibilities.
The noble Earl used illustrations concerning a licensee transferring from a small country pub to a substantial city centre establishment who would no longer expect to appear before the licensing justices to demonstrate that he was capable of maintaining control of the new premises with perhaps a record for attracting young people, trouble-makers or even drug-pushers. It is a vastly different scenario when one compares a very busy supermarket and a very busy pub. Supermarkets, whether in an urban or a rural setting, are invariably operated in precisely the same way. One does not hear about fights or disorder breaking out in supermarkets and certainly not because of alcohol having been consumed.
We are saying here that the time of executives, the senior management, of the major retailers has, quite often, needlessly to be spent in court. I shall give the House some illustrations of this. At present 146 transfers are required each year by Tesco stores, 150 by Sainsburys and 77 by Asda. I give those figures not only to highlight the administrative burden but more importantly the judicial burden created by the present arrangements. Out of the 146 transfers sought by Tesco the company representative was actually called to appear on approximately 42 occasions. In other words on more than 100 occasions,—two out of three—an executive or a senior manager together with a legal aid official had to attend in case there was an objection.
The Minister was quite right on the previous occasion to point out that they did not have to attend but when the livelihood of many people as well as the profitability of the business is involved the executive and also the legal representative must attend.
If a person has to have satisfied the law by having kept a clean sheet for five years, and if that person is also scrutinised by the police and there is no objection, in those circumstances it is reasonable that the time of the court and the time of the business should be saved for administrative as well as judicial reasons. I believe that this is a reasonable and a sensible amendment which has very much to do with justice if not as much to do with the consumption of alcohol. Even more importantly, it has much to do with the ability of businesses to survive in the very competitive business environment in 1988. I beg to move.
Lord Sainsbury: My Lords, I support this amendment covering the transfer of a justices' off-licence because it would be particularly helpful for multiple companies faced with changes of personnel from one store to another. Although in law the licence is held in the name of the individual, it is run for the company and in accordance with the company's methods and instructions. The inclusion of this amendment would considerably ease the administrative burden on the courts and the police
896
without in any sense reducing the real level of control exercised by the police and the magistrates. It does not reduce the opportunity for the police to object, and in the case of any objections a personal appearance would be necessary. This is a technical amendment which would generally help in my opinion in the administration of the law.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, has explained very fairly his amendment and I am grateful to him for doing so. Indeed the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, has supported it and has said that it would ease the position of the courts and of firms. I understand that position but I do think that the transfer of a licence is in many ways analogous to the grant of a new licence and to that extent I think it is important that licensing justices should retain the right to ask applicants to appear before them. This means that they can then retain a clear picture of who holds licences in their area which in itself is an important aspect of maintaining a proper control over all licensed premises in the district.
I realise however that larger retail companies can find that onerous and irksome. The nature of their stores does not vary greatly and they ensure that their licensees are well trained and are fit to hold a licence.
When the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, first put his proposal to us in Committee, my noble friend Lord Arran explained that we could not accept it, in part because some transfer applications give rise to serious considerations about an applicant's fitness to take on new responsibility.
I realise that the noble Lord. Lord Graham, has altered his amendment and has tried to tie it more closely to the needs of large retailers where stores will be run on similar lines with similar degrees of responsibility.
But even as now drafted the amendment will cover a person who may have a been a small, independent off-licence holder, who has a clean licence but who changes his job possibly to join a large multiple retailer. I think it is reasonable and desirable that licensing justices should be able to question this man especially if he is new to the district and unknown to the justices.
It is important to realise—the noble Lord, Lord Graham, quite rightly drew attention to this fact—that the law as it stands does not compel the attendance of a transfer applicant. Licensing justices know that licensees are very busy people, but I think that it is right that licensing justices should continue to have that right even if they need not exercise it.
The fact that many licensing committees call most transfer applicants reflects the importance which licensing justices themselves attach to the transfer proceedings. I understand the problem which the noble Lord, Lord Graham, has very fairly put, but I think that it would be better to leave the licensing justices with this right.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, I am disappointed with what the Minister has said. In effect, he acknowledges that I have arguments; but with great respect to him, he chooses to ignore them. The Minister is saying that there is no difference

897
between a new applicant and an application for a transfer: that is that a person who has not previously held a licence and about whom nothing is known presents the same situation as someone who has held a licence for five years with an unblemished record and against whom the police, having made investigations, have no objection. I believe there is a difference there.
The point that the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, made, is absolutely right. If there is any question of someone who has been a licence-holder for five years in a weak environment and who seeks to move to a larger perhaps more troublesome store having an objection raised against him that is the end of the matter. This amendment would not be applicable to such a person.
We are not anxious, and I am not anxious, to have a situation where a person who is unfit by all the measuring rods to be the manager of a large store obtains a licence and, because he is unfit to hold a licence, is unable to manage the store efficiently and effectively. That not only causes trouble in the community, but also trouble to his company. I believe that all large stores without exception are very jealous about their reputation and about the protection of their employees. They would not lightly be party to a situation that brought them into disrepute.
The noble Earl told the House that many justices do call applicants. That may very well be true. Besides what the Minister has been told, I shall repeat what I have been told, and I shall name names. Tesco has said that of 146 applications which it made to transfer a licence from one of its employees to another, in more than 100 cases the applicants were not called. That is the reality. It is obviously different from the experience of the Home Office. I respect that. However, that is what it is like in the real world. Because of that, such businesses are saying that it is reasonable to obviate that situation.
The Minister was present and listened to our Second Reading debate. When I made the same point and suggested that I would move the amendment, I said that the views of the police and magistracy would be very helpful. The Minister has given us his views and the views of those advising him. Before I decide how to proceed on the amendment, perhaps he can tell me whether the views of the police and the magistracy have been sought. Is his view reinforced by their reactions to these matters? If I am told that the police and the magistracy object to it, I shall have second thoughts about pursuing the matter. If they have been asked about the matter and have said that they are benign towards it or welcome it, that puts a different gloss on the whole question. I am very conscious that we do not wish to make a situation which needs to be watched even more difficult. However, I should be grateful if the Minister would respond.
1.30 p.m.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, perhaps with the leave of the House I may make one further intervention. In considering the Bill, a large number of organisations were consulted including the police and magistrates. It would not be correct for me to give the impression to the noble Lord that they were both specifically
898
questioned about his amendment. However, they have been concerned in all parts of the Bill.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, I well understand that as regards a clean sheet the views of the police would be sought in the consultative processes that have taken place between the Minister, his advisers and others. However, were their views sought on every amendment and on specific amendments? I think that it is still possible for the Minister to reflect on what the amendment tries to do. If he is seeking to provide justices with the opportunity to review every transferee and transferor, I am prepared to withdraw the amendment. I do not ask him for a commitment. But between today and the next stage of the Bill perhaps he can seek the views of those who I have mentioned and who have a very real locus in the matter—the police and the licensing justices. In the meantime I shall beg leave to withdraw the amendment and perhaps return to it in another form at a later stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Lucas of Chilworth Lord Lucas of Chilworth moved Amendment No. 6:
Before Clause 18, insert the following new clause:
("Intoxicating liquor.
. In section 201(1) of the principal Act, in the definition of "intoxicating liquor", in paragraph (a), the words "of an original gravity not exceeding 1016 and" shall be omitted.").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the purpose of the amendment is parallel to some of the general purposes of the Bill which were described by the Minister when he was responding to Amendment No. 1. He said that in part the Bill was designed to remove unnecessary burdens and outdated restrictions. I refer in the amendment to an outdated restriction, and the amendment is somewhat technical.
The purpose of the amendment is to remove from the definition of "intoxicating liquor" in Section 201 of the principal Act an anachronistic criterion which does not relate to the alcoholic strength of the drink and which inhibits the manufacture and sale of alcohol-free and low alcohol products. Under the present text of Section 201, a drink which has been fermented at any stage during the manufacturing process has to pass two tests before it is regarded as not being intoxicating liquor. Those are that the alcoholic content should not exceed 1·2 per cent. by volume and that the original gravity does not exceed 1016 degrees.
The reference to alcohol content speaks for itself. It directly affects whether or not the drink is intoxicating. However, the orginal gravity test does not in itself have any bearing on that. The original gravity of a liquid which has been fermented assumes a gravity before fermentation took place and is a variable figure. The reason that the licensing law contains that definition for intoxicating liquor, with that apparently otoise reference to the original gravity, is that from the 19th century until recently retailers were required to have an excise licence as well as a licence under the Licensing Act.
The rules were formulated before there was any interest in, or indeed any adequate technology for, drinks being produced by fermentation and then being stripped of the alcohol before sale, or being

899
prepared from worts with such a high proportion of unfermentable sugars as to be incapable of producing enough alcohol to reach the duty or Licensing Act threshold. Both those techniques are now in use and consumer demand for the product grows rapidly.
The retail excise licence was abolished by the Finance Act 1967. Wholesale licences remained. The definition of "intoxicating liquor" in Section 201(3) of the Finance Act was simply amended. Wholesale excise licences were in turn abolished by the Finance Act 1981 in Schedule 8 and the Licensing Act definition was again amended, this time to create the same effect as before but without reference to an excise licence.
The anomaly still exists that if the product has an alcoholic strength not exceeding 1·2 per cent. it is not subject to control as to where, when and to whom it is sold under the licensing legislation if the original gravity does not exceed 1016 degrees. If, however, it does, it is subject to those controls. In order to produce an acceptable quality of alcohol free or low alcohol beer, it may be necessary for the manufacturer to put in sufficient body—a sugary material—which will in turn cause the original gravity perhaps to exceed 1016 degrees.
It seems to the industry that there is no conceivable reason why the licensing legislation, which is fundamentally a social measure designed to control the sale and so on of alcoholic drinks, should concern itself more with the sugar content of the drinks in question simply because they are drinks that have been fermented at some point or time in their manufacture. The legislation is not concerned with the sugar content of other soft drinks and indeed it may come about that soft drink manufacturers may design and produce a beer-tasting drink without the use of any fermenting process. Those will fall only under the requirement that the drink should have less than 1·2 per cent. of alcohol by volume.
Perhaps I may give some examples. Bass's Barbican product and Guinness's Kaliber product are labelled quite lawfully "alcohol free", in that they have no alcoholic content; Whitbread's White Label bitter and Elgood's Highway bitter are quite properly labelled "alcohol free" although they have 1 per cent. of alcohol by volume. Those products are derived from a fermenting process, but because they fall below the 1·2 per cent. alcohol threshold they can be labelled in that way.
The only difficulty arises in that the sellers and retail purchasers do not know whether that product was derived from a beer that had an original gravity in excess of 1016 degrees. That is where the confusion arises. My noble friend Lord Arran said that he was not aware of any confusion. However, it is a fact that the manufacturers are inhibited from creating a wider range because of that confusion. Retailers are inhibited from stocking and selling a wider range of alcohol-free and low-alcohol beers because they do not know where they stand and have been challenged.
We are left with the Licensing Act, which is concerned with what makes a product alcoholic. We are left with an original gravity criterion which originates from the last century and has very little to do with the alcoholic content or the intoxicating
900
nature of the drink. It has no bearing whatsoever on the measurement of alcohol. It produces uncertainty and confusion about products. It restricts the freedom of brewers to produce a product with an acceptable taste; and, lastly, it flies in the face of the ministerial working group on alcohol abuse and the Masham Committee recommendations in regard to alcohol. For those reasons—which are essentially technical reasons—I suggest that your Lordships should agree with me that this now anachronistic and artificial barrier should be removed. I beg to move.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, I rise to support the case that has been made by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas. Both at the beginning and at the end of his speech he quite rightly said that this is very largely a technical matter. I listened with great respect to the Minister when he argued on technical grounds about this amendment. As I understand what the noble Lord has said, this is an attempt to make it easier for alcohol-free or reduced alcohol content drinks to be not only produced but produced more easily.
Because of my preparation for other amendments, I happen to have a copy of the report of the Working Group on Young People and Alcohol which was chaired by our highly respected Member, the noble Baroness, Lady Masham. One of the recommendations in the report says:
"We call upon the alcoholic drinks industry to build upon its existing work against alcohol abuse by providing the resources to set up a wide range of alcohol-free facilities in co-operation with local agencies and the community, and to evaluate their effectiveness".
In the summary, the report talks in terms that,
"Alternative facilities for young people are one means of attracting them away from under-age drinking and alcohol abuse".
Those are the words of a ministerial working group. I certainly subscribe 101 per cent. to what has been said by our highly respected colleagues.
I listened to what was said. If the purpose is the advancement of what we want—namely, the discouragement of the drinking of alcohol by under age and young people—and, if this measure will aid and abet that, I am all for it.
Baroness Ewart-Biggs: My Lords, I cannot claim to have followed the technical presentation of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, but I very much enjoyed his explanation. I understand that the confusion arises from the modern process of producing non- or very low-alcohol beer from which the alcohol content has been extracted. As my noble friend Lord Graham said, I understand the purpose is to remove the confusion and restrictions concerning the availability of low-alcohol or non-alcoholic beer to the public. Surely that must be beneficial. Moreover, perhaps I may mention that the Government gave a very strong indication that they supported that objective when in the Budget they lowered the taxation on low-alcohol drinks. I think that should be borne in mind in considering the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas.
As my noble friend Lord Graham said, this is supported by the committe chaired by the noble Baroness, Lady Masham, as something which will help to prevent young people from drinking alcoholic drinks. I hope that the Minister will look favourably at this amendment.
1.45 p.m.
Viscount Montgomery of Alamein: My Lords, I rise to support my noble friend Lord Lucas, who has moved this amendment very comprehensively. It is a technical matter but I think that the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, need not be unduly worried. Throughout this legislation she has been concerned about alcohol abuse and quite rightly. By and large, alcohol is measured as a percentage of net pure alcohol by volume, whereas some of the archaic methods to which my noble friend referred go back to the measurement by fermentation and gravity in which sugar is re-added in order to give some substance and body so that it is palatable.
The whole purpose of the Government's legislation, and, as the noble Baroness has mentioned, the thrust of recent tax adjustments, has been to encourage the sale of low-alcohol or nonalcoholic beverages. Those non-alcoholic beverages must be considered as soft drinks, which the alcohol abuse lobby is trying to encourage. Therefore it must stand to reason that if there are archaic pieces of legislation that still measure the alcohol strength or gravity of the product which has been created by sugar, that is not only incorrect but irrelevant.
I like to think that we should be removing that anomaly. I hope that the Government will be able to support my noble friend's amendment, because it seems to be to be in the spirit of what they are trying to achieve on the social front.
Lord Monson: My Lords, I too should like to support this amendment. For reasons of health and safety, if not revenue, the Government would like the public to switch from high-alcohol drinks to low-alcohol drinks. People will only do so if the latter can be made more palatable. If this amendment can help to make low-alcohol and non-acoholic beers and lagers more palatable, it can only benefit the nation as a whole.
The Earl of Arran: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Lucas gave warning at Committee stage that he would try again to amend the definition of intoxicating liquor found in Section 201 of the Licensing Act 1964 so as to exempt from licensing controls the sale of low-alcohol and no-alcohol beers and wines. The intended effect of the present amendment is the same as the amendment that was before us at Committee stage, although it approaches the problem from a slightly different angle.
We can accept the logic of my noble friend's argument. He is seeking to make sure that the licensing regime only covers drinks which are clearly alcoholic, leaving other products to be sold without restriction. From a strictly legal or technical point of view, it makes sense to deal with products solely according to whether or not they are alcoholic.
But there are, I think, wider considerations which cannot be left out of this argument. There seems little doubt that if we removed these drinks from the control of the Licensing Act altogether, manufacturers would seek to sell them from a much wider range of outlets and as a result could exploit the youth market.
902
It seems to us that there is a considerable danger that, by encouraging children to drink these products, we shall be developing their taste for beer and wine at an all too early stage in their lives. The habit of drinking will be formed and the progression to the alcoholic varieties will inevitably follow. Such a move may give rise to serious long-term consequences which will outweigh the technical benefits this amendment may bring.
The amendment represents a significant change. We do not, of course, wish to discourage the drinking of low-alcohol drinks by adults; but we think that we have other ways of providing incentives for them. We do, however, think it would be wrong to encourage the young to start drinking beer of any kind. In those circumstances, we cannot accept the amendment.
Lord Lucas of Chilworth: My Lords, I admit that the amendment is the same one as I moved previously although I have taken a slightly different angle. I apologise for any inadequacy in my explanation at Committee stage, which has meant that I have taken a rather longer time this afternoon amplifying my intention. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Graham. I confirm that the purport of the amendment is to encourage manufacturers to invest the considerable sums of money required to produce low alcohol and alcohol-free products which taste and smell like beer, so some people tell me. I am grateful to the noble Lord for having quoted the passage from the Masham Committee report.
I am also grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, who reminded your Lordships that in his Budget proposals the Chancellor made certain changes, much welcomed by the industry, designed to encourage the further production of these products. Again, the noble Lord, Lord Monson, was extremely helpful, as was my noble friend Lord Montgomery.
I hope my noble friend Lord Arran will forgive me when I say that his reply was just about the poorest explanation for the rejection of an amendment that I have heard from the Front Bench since the beginning of this Session. It demonstrates to me—I do not know whether noble Lords feel the same—the possession of a puritanical mind absorbed by the necessity for ensuring that no under-18-year-old should get a whiff of the barmaid's apron. Dear, oh dear, the practical reality is very different!
Since the soft drinks manufacturers, such as Cadbury-Schweppes, Corona or Tizer, can produce synthetically a drink that smells and tastes like beer, why deny the legitimate industry that has very many more outlets the opportunity for doing precisely what the Government and their advisory bodies want?
My noble friend the Minister has produced a non-answer. I believe that the strength of support around the House may demonstrate to him that he ought to think again. I shall give him that opportunity. I ask him to think again about these matters between now and the next stage of the Bill when I shall return to the subject. Meanwhile, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Schedule 4 [Repeals]:
Lord Graham of Edmonton Lord Graham of Edmonton moved Amendment No. 7:
Page 21, line 24, after ("words") insert (" "half-past" and").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, before the Question is put, perhaps it might not be inappropriate, as this is the last amendment with which we are to deal in the Bill and this is our last business before we go away for Easter, for me to wish not only your Lordships but everyone associated with this building a happy Easter. Those wishes go not only to noble Lords but as much to the staff, the staff whom we see and the other staff whom we do not always see, but on whom rests with equal seriousness the responsibility of running the House.
I fear that in going away for Easter it may not be a fixed Easter, but I hope that we all enjoy the happy Easter spirit. Those modestly irresponsible attitudes that always accompany an impending Recess, have overtaken your Lordships today on one occasion and ensured that an amendment was passed against the Government's advice. Despite that, I wish your Lordships and all the staff a happy Easter.
Baroness Nicol: My Lords, at this point I should like to respond and say how warmly we on these Benches endorse those remarks, particularly as regards the staff. We are very conscious of the efficient and willing support that we receive from staff in all quarters of the House. We hope that they will have a relaxed and cheerful Easter and will enjoy their rest.
904
Perhaps it is not inappropriate to say that we hope that the Ministers opposite will also enjoy a happy and relaxed Easter and will come back feeling generous. A happy Easter to all from these Benches.
Lord McNair: My Lords, I should like to associate myself with the seasonal wishes which have come from the noble Earl and the noble Baroness. In this House we are protected, serviced and refreshed by a host of people, some of whom, as the noble Earl said, we never see. We are most grateful to every one of them. I hope that they as well as your Lordships will have a very enjoyable Easter.
Baroness Hylton-Foster: My Lords, from the Cross-Benches we also should like to join in the good wishes for the Easter Recess, and also to express our thanks to those, seen or unseen, who look after us all so well.
On Question, amendment agreed to.

Housing (Scotland) Bill
Brought from the Commons; read a first time, and to be printed.

Merchant Shipping Bill [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to with amendments; the amendments ordered to be printed.
House adjourned for the Easter Recess at two o'clock, until Monday, 1lth April.

  WILLIAM AND MARY TERCENTENARY
  WILLIAM AND MARY TERCENTENARY
  TERRITORIAL SEA LIMITS
  TERRITORIAL SEA LIMITS
  PLANTING GRANTS: APPLICATIONS AND APPEALS
  PLANTING GRANTS: APPLICATIONS AND APPEALS
  ILEA: HOSPITAL SCHOOLS
  ILEA: HOSPITAL SCHOOLS
  BRITISH LIBRARY: PROJECT PLANS AND COST
  BRITISH LIBRARY: PROJECT PLANS AND COST
  EC SOCIAL AND REGIONAL FUNDS: UK DESIGNATIONS
  EC SOCIAL AND REGIONAL FUNDS: UK DESIGNATIONS
  CORPORATION TAX: RECEIPTS 1988–89
  CORPORATION TAX: RECEIPTS 1988–89