Sitting of 8 December 1989

Preamble
The House met at half-past Nine o'clock
PRAYERS
[MR. SPEAKER in the Chair]
PETITIONS

  Broadcasting (Deaf People)
  9.35 am
  Mr. Harry Greenway: I wish to present a petition to the honourable Commons of the United Kingdom, Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the people of the constituency of Ealing, North and elsewhere
  sheweth that the broadcasters are not providing complete access for deaf television viewers, for example, with subtitles or sign language; the number of viewers affected are at least 4 million; deaf viewers, as equal members of the general public, are entitled to equal access to television programmes.
  The petition is led for my constituents by Mr. A. D. Murray of 15 Courtfield gardens, Ealing, London W.13 and Mr. R. W. Gillies of 59 Argyle road, Ealing, London W.13 with whom I strongly agree that proper provision must be made for deaf people to see and understand television with sub-titles so that they know exactly what is happening in the programmes. They are surely entitled to that.
  Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable House will ensure that legislation be passed placing an obligation on television channel operators to make their programmes more accessible to deaf people by using Teletext sub-titles, sign language or other means and to reach complete coverage by a fixed date.
  And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
  To lie upon the Table.

  Barking—Dagenham and Redbridge
  Mr. Neil Thorne: I wish to present a petition on behalf of more than 300 constituents who wish to object to the proposals of the Boundary Commission to
  580
  disregard the wishes of the London borough of Barking and Dagenham and of the London borough of Redbridge for the division between those two authorities.
  The humble petition of the residents of the London borough of Redbridge in my constituency who are affected by the recent Boundary Commission proposals sheweth that
  they object to the Boundary Commission's proposals to transfer their property from the London Borough of Redbridge to the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham.
  Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your honourable House will ask the Boundary Commission to reconsider their proposals and accept the original recommendation put forward by the London Borough of Redbridge.
  And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
  My constituents wish to remain in a low-rated area. The low rates are the reason why they bought their property in the London borough of Redbridge.
  To lie upon the Table.

  Broadcasting (Deaf People)
  Mr. Neil Thorne: I should like to present a petition regarding the deaf. It is the humble petition of the people of Ilford, South and is also presented on behalf of the constituents of my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke). They state that they are concerned because
  the broadcasters are not providing complete access for deaf television viewers, for example, with subtitles or sign language:
  the number of viewers affected are at least 4 million; deaf viewers, as equal members of the general public, are entitled to equal access to television programmes.
  The petition states:
  Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable House will ensure that legislation be passed placing an obligation on television channel operators to make their programmes more accessible to deaf people by using Teletext sub-titles, sign language or other means and to reach complete coverage by a fixed date.
  And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
  One of the television companies' main arguments for introducing television to this honourable House was that it would enable the deaf to see exactly what was going on. My constituents and I find it extraordinary that those same television companies, which have achieved their objective of getting television into the House, now deprive the deaf of the opportunity of knowing what is going on through the use of subtitles and other means.
  To lie upon the Table.

Drugs Missuse
[Relevant documents: Sixth Report from the Home Affairs Committee in Session 1988–89, Crack: The Threat of Hard Drugs in the Next Decade (House of Commons Paper 536), the Seventh Report, Drug Trafficking and Related Serious Crime (House of Commons Paper 370), the Seventh report from the Social Services Committee, AIDS ( House of Commons Paper 202) and the Government's response to that Report, Cm. 925.]
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn. [Mr. John M. Taylor.]
9.39 am
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. David Mellor): I am glad to have the opportunity in the early stages of my return to responsibilities at the Home Office to discuss with anxious colleagues the problems of drug misuse.
During my previous incarnation at the Home Office I had the privilege of chairing for four years the ministerial group on the misuse of drugs. One of the best experiences of my time in this House resulted from the genuine goodwill on all sides that we should try to work together to find a common solution. I particularly recall the Opposition's tremendous co-operation in passing the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986. That has been a striking success, but I also take careful note of and welcome the observations of the Select Committee on Home Affairs about the way in which it can be improved.
I do not want to inhibit genuine, legitimate criticism from anyone and I take in good part criticism about the way in which the drug problem is handled. We always need to be stimulated to evaluate what we are doing and to make greater efforts. I hope that this debate will give us an opportunity to renew a shared commitment. We should also recognise the crucial fact that, although it is obviously for Government and elected representatives to give a lead, we alone cannot carry the burden of winning the battle against drugs. We shall succeed only if we galvanise everyone in society into a shared endeavour to deal with the menace of drugs.
I shall be as candid as I can about the present drug situation, informed, I hope, by recollections of my experiences. I shall also say something about the experience of the United States, which is highly relevant to the problem of cocaine about which I have particular concern. I shall also mention the report of the Select Committee on Home Affairs, which by happy chance was published yesterday; we therefore have an early opportunity to discuss it. I cannot give my final view on that report, but because of my previous involvement in these matters I know enough about the thinking behind the report to say some helpful and constructive things about it. I shall also speak about the future development of Government policy. Above all, I welcome this opportunity to listen to what concerned colleagues say and I shall take on board any points that are made.
It is two and a half years since I held any responsibility for drugs policy. As I read myself back into this problem, it is interesting to recollect my fears and hopes during my four years in office. It is interesting to see how things have turned out. Inevitably, if one is realistic, there are good and bad indications.
This year all the figures—I shall give them to the House shortly—show that a greater attempt than ever before is being made by international drug traffickers to bring drugs
582
into this country. That is a sombre and inescapable fact, and it is important that it is ungarnished and is given in the round. It forms an essential background to our debate.
It has not all been gloom during the time I have been away on other matters. I remember the concern felt by everyone in 1983 and 1984 when "chasing the dragon"—smoking heroin—appeared to be on its way to becoming a major activity among mainstream youngsters and not just among the deviant fringe. It appeared that that practice would lead inevitably to a spread of injecting heroin. At that time there was great apprehension about whether that threat to many youngsters would prove to be unstoppable. Although there is no room for complacency in the figures, it is clear that such widespread misuse has not occurred. There is evidence of a much higher level of herion misuse in our society today than any of us can take comfort from, but it has not spread in the way in which some people feared in the early 1980s. We can take some comfort from that.
During the early 1980s I remember saying that there was nothing inevitable about our nation succumbing to the menace of drug misuse. If we can work together on intelligent and sensible policies, it is in our power to prevent that from happening. There is some encouragement from the figures which show that, as a result of the sustained effort made in the Government's anti-heroin campaign, the efforts made by so many hon. Members, by outside elected representatives and by concerned groups in society, a strongly negative message about heroin has come across. Heroin misuse has therefore not become the mainstream youth culture event that many people feared.
When a cross-section of teenagers are asked about heroin, about 95 per cent. regularly say that they would immediately reject an offer of heroin. What is even more important is that that is not a knee-jerk rejection, but is based on informed opinion. When those conducting the survey ask the youngsters why they would not take heroin, their replies are usually based on informed opinion about the known consequences of the drug. That much is good news.
In autumn 1986 I visited Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador and Colombia and I saw the size of the cocaine problem faced by those countries. I appreciated that what we were dealing with were criminal enterprises of a scale to rival the existing Governments of some of those countries. The insolence of the drug barons of Colombia is such that just yesterday they blew up the headquarters of the anti-drug forces. They did not care that they killed 40 innocent passers-by and seriously injured many others. Therefore, one is dealing not with a state within a state, but with a state that rivals the legitimate state.
Near the border between Peru and Bolivia I remember flying over the fringes of the Amazon by helicopter. I flew ove hillsides from which smoke was coming. It was rather like a scene from "Apocalypse Now" and the aftermath of a particularly bloody encounter in the Vietnam war. The smoke resulted from the hurried burning of wonderful trees of the rain forest, which were being cleared so that more and more slopes could be devoted to the production of cocaine.
I was briefed then on the scale and sophistication of the laboratories, which rivalled pharmaceutical laboratories for legitimate purposes, and on the insidious interrelationship between the drug traffickers, with their massive sums with which to corrupt, and the activities of the guerrilla groups who, in return for money, offered

583
protection. That has spilled out in recent allegations of international mercenaries being involved. I hope that it is clear when one reads newspaper articles or reports, but it was even clearer to me when I went to south America that the scale of the problem was such that, notwithstanding the seemingly boundless commitment in the United States to receiving increasing quantities of cocaine because of the extent of misuse there, there was a glut of cocaine being produced and that Europe would be targeted increasingly. I fear that that has happened.
I shall give the latest Customs figures for as recently as last week, which will confirm the scale of the problem with which we have to deal as we all work together against cocaine. Our feelings need not be all doom and gloom. There must be proper understanding of the scale of the problem, and anybody who holds office or responsibility and who tries to underestimate the scale of the problem does the public no service. I always see it as my task to find out the facts and to tell people clearly about them, not so that people feel overwhelmed by the problem, but so that they will sit up and take notice. I have a profound conviction that we can see off this problem if we work together and devise the necessary strategies.
The latest figures from Customs show that, in the period from 1 January 1989 to 5 December 1989, 309 kg of heroin were seized by Customs compared with 211 kg in the whole of 1988. Although that is a high figure, it is not as high as some of the figures that were reached in the mid-1980s. The figures for cocaine are deeply troubling. Between January 1989 and 5 December 1989, 392 kg of cocaine were seized by Customs compared with 264 kg in the whole of 1988. I want immediately to pay a warm tribute to the work of the police and Customs authorities in seizing those quantities of drugs.
However, we all know—and I want to say this before anyone else can—that there is no escape from the drugs problem down the law and order route. Whether society falls victim to a drugs problem turns on the willingness of individuals within that society to reject offers of drugs. In a free society, however professional the police and Customs officers are, there will always be a way through. In a free society, we should not want the erosion of freedom that would follow if every packet was opened, everyone coming through airports was searched or every container was opened; and heaven knows what scale of human resources would be needed.
We are applying the most modern techniques and working through world-class organisations such as the National Drugs Intelligence Unit. There has been an expansion of resources which hon. Members of all parties have rightly called for over the years and they have ensured that pressure has been put on the Government to increase resources. We have a fully professional police and Customs service which seizes an ever-increasing proportion of the drugs that come into this country, although it by no means seizes all drugs, or even the majority.
While I am troubled by the figures of heroin, it is interesting that, although on the face of the figures it appears, as a result of the increase in the number of seizures, that more heroin must be coming in, at street level—and I asked for this to be studied especially in the past few days—there is no evidence of increased availability of heroin, of a increase in its purity or of a reduction in its price. We must not become complacent about heroin peaking at far too high a level, but there is no evidence of an increased amount of heroin being available on the
584
streets. That may lead us to the conclusion that our police and Customs are seizing a greater proportion of heroin, which is a good and valuable development.
Some people are in danger of underestimating the cocaine problem. We have not as yet seen a great influx of cocaine misusers at the drug clinics, but let no one draw false comfort from that. It is a question of time, and one of my central points today is to reveal some of the American experiences. I have toured some of the inner-city areas of the United States and I know that a number of other hon. Members have done the same. In those areas, crack has become a major habit. Even I have not been prepared for some of the shocking statistics that are now apparent in the United States. I say that not to frighten or shock people, but simply to report the evidence from a developed western society which has more than 20 years' experience of cocaine. That experience warns us what may lie in our path if we do not work together to deal with the problem.
Mr. Frank Haynes: We all realise the marvellous job done by the Customs and police on this problem. Several years ago, I was lucky enough to ask the Prime Minister a question about whether the Customs service had the required manpower to cover the job properly. At that time there had been a serious reduction in manpower. What is the position now? What will be the position in the future?
Mr. Mellor: Those are fair questions. I am happy to say that there has been a tripling of the number of Customs investigators since 1979, and an additional 854 preventive Customs posts, dealing mainly with drugs, were established between 1984 and 1988. I accept that it is a key feature that those numbers should be expanded. They are kept under constant review. We have never said that enough is enough. One cannot expect people to do the job unless we give them the resources to do it.
Mr. Tim Rathbone: I should like to remind my hon. and learned Friend of one category of Customs officer that he did not mention in his response to the intervention, and that is the increased number of intelligence officers abroad. I do not want to go into detail, but I must say that they are doing a magnificent job of intelligence gathering without which the interdiction in this country would not be as effective.
Mr. Mellor: When I visited the National Drugs Intelligence Unit a few days ago, I was encouraged enormously to see how much that system had developed, with police officers and Customs officers being stationed overseas. As my hon. Friend says, for obvious security reasons one cannot give great detail, but having experienced personnel working alongside enforcement agencies in the countries concerned and welcoming their representatives here, as we are doing, is a way of building a sense of co-operation on personal rather than abstract principles, which is important.
We know that large quantities of cocaine are coming into the country, and we know that there is a time lag between a misuser's first experimenting with the drug and the development of the problem. That is the present position, and let no one be in error about that. As there is the financial incentive for traffickers to bring drugs into the country, they will use every piece of ingenuity to evade the restrictions. As direct routes from the countries of origin

585
are now assiduously searched, traffickers will bring in drugs through two or three other countries and increasingly complicated routes are now being used. I cannot disguise from the House my continued and increasing concern since I was last at the Home Office about the extent to which drugs are being brought into certain other countries in the European Community and then being shipped across to the United Kingdom.
Customs figures show that in 1988 30 per cent. of the heroin seized in Britain—and, even more disturbing, more than 50 per cent. of the cocaine seized—had been routed through a European Community country. Sometimes people are tempted to say that the British Government are being bolshie, difficult and tiresome about Europe when we say, "Hang on a moment" in response to rhetoric about open frontiers. Apparently, to qualify as a good European, one has to say, "Yes indeed. Me too, me too." But in practice we cannot afford to have open frontiers with countries such as the Netherlands because the consequence would be that an increasing amount of drugs would come into Britain.
I hope that this will not become a partisan matter. I hope that hon. Members throughout the House will understand that, while we work faithfully for the implementation of the open market in 1992, we cannot do away with border controls between EEC countries except at our peril, and it is too high a price to pay.
Mr. Barry Sheerman: I agree with most of what the Minister has just said but the Select Committee report underlined the lack of linguistic skills on this side of the Channel, which is most important. We urgently need police and Customs officials with those skills who can co-operate with their counterparts in other countries to ensure that we have the best possible intelligence. For too long Britain has lacked such skills, and the police simply reflect that fact.
Mr. Mellor: That is a helpful practical point. It is true that we rely heavily on others' ability to speak English, and it is fair to argue that one way of helping international co-operation would be to improve our linguistic skills.
Mr. John Greenway: My hon. and learned Friend referred to drugs coming from south America direct to Europe. Those of us who went to the National Drugs Intelligence Unit at El Paso, where all 10 law enforcement agencies of the United States are represented, were shocked to discover that the centre is monitoring shipments of cocaine and other drugs from south America direct to Europe—especially to Spain and Portugal, because of the Hispanic link, but also to Holland. As my hon. and learned Friend said, the maintenance of our border control is paramount.
Mr. Mellor: Yes. And it is not a matter of politics; it is a matter of common sense. This is a practical problem. The gap between rhetoric and reality apparent in some people's effusions about Europe always distresses me. We are talking about the practical business of putting up shutters as best we can against the importation of drugs.
I should be failing in my duty if I attempted to find a bit of good news about heroin to persuade people that there was not a problem. Nevertheless, it is worth drawing attention to evidence of policies taking effect. It is good
586
news that our drugs branch inspectorate is reporting that there appears to have been a levelling out, if not a reduction, of the availability of heroin in some areas. That leads me to hope that the problem has reached a plateau, albeit at much too high a level.
As with the AIDS figures, the number of addicts reflects what was happening in society some years ago. People become a little involved with drugs, then a little more involved, then they become hooked and satisfy their cravings on the illicit market, then, at a certain point—some never reach that point, but many do—their dependency reaches such a pitch that they turn themselves in to the authorities in despair.
I pay tribute to the work of our many drugs clinics, which work effectively to try to offer addicts some hope. Although the number of addicts is increasing, there are signs that the addict population is aging. That is most interesting. The proportion of new addicts aged under 25 notifed to the Home Office fell from 54 per cent. in 1985 to 48 per cent. in 1988. That may be an early indication of what I hope will be a trend and evidence that the present generation of teenagers is not falling prey to heroin as the previous generation did.
Ms. Diane Abbott: It is encouraging to think that heroin consumption has reached a plateau and that we have an aging addict population. But there is anecdotal evidence in the inner city to suggest that the pattern of drugs consumption is changing and that communities in which the drug of choice has traditionally been marijuana are now turning to heroin and crack. That is happening on council estates in my constituency, and it is a cause for great concern.
Mr. Mellor: There is much in what the hon. Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms. Abbott) says, and I shall be particularly interested to hear her views on cocaine, which I shall be discussing a little later. Sad evidence is emerging that members of the Afro-Caribbean community, who have not previously been involved with hard drugs, are now becoming involved with cocaine, and perhaps that was the trend to which the hon. Lady was referring.
Different drugs are fashionable at different times and we must hope that as heroin consumption reaches a plateau there will not be a tremendous upsurge of interest in cocaine. Nor are we talking about heroin and cocaine alone. The problems of drug misuse in Britain are much more complex than that. Most people's introduction to drugs is via amphetamine-based drugs. If I am not to prevent other hon. Members from speaking, I must be disciplined in what I say and about the length at which I say it. I may not be concentrating on amphetamines, but that does not mean that I underestimate the problem.
There is a problem in key inner-city areas. One cannot generalise. What is true for one area is not true for another, and the balance and extent of drug misuse varies, as does its interaction with other deeply anti-social activities such as alcohol misuse. I regard alcohol misuse among teenagers as every bit as troubling as illicit drug misuse—in some respects, more so. That is why we have devised a system of inner-city drug teams, which we intend to work with the organisations in the community to help to restrict drug taking. We hope to announce the establishment of the first nine of the teams and the central

587
co-ordinating unit in January and to increase the number to 30 over a two year period. We should certainly consider seriously the problems referred to in the constituency of the hon. Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington.
Mr. Keith Vaz: I am somewhat concerned about a remark that the Minister made in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms. Abbott). He referred to the Afro-Caribbean community and the use of crack. The evidence that members of the Select Committee of Home Affairs saw when they visited America was that crack knew no boundaries of race or gender. Does he agree with me on that?
Mr. Mellor: Oh yes. I hope that that is not the impression that I gave. I was paying a compliment to the Afro-Caribbean community by saying that previously it had not been much involved with hard drugs. As the hon. Gentleman says, cocaine knows no racial boundaries, and it is sad that it seems to have started to affect the Afro-Caribbean community as well as the rest of us. I am not saying that it is a particular problem in that community because it is certainly not, but the increase in its use is a sign of the insidiousness of cocaine, which has attractions that heroin does not have and can involve groups that heroin does not involve. The evidence from America is that 50 per cent. of so-called crack-heads are women. We have never before seen such a large percentage of women being involved in any form of drug misuse.
We must realise that cocaine is not just a different drug posing the same problems as heroin. It is an equally serious drug which, if anything, poses even worse problems the most pernicious way of taking cocaine—smoking it—is also the easiest. One does not have to stick a needle in one's arm—the ultimate turn-off, especially at a time when AIDS is rampant.
It has always been foolish to inject drugs because the drugs themselves cause damage and people inject amphetamines as well as heroin. Impurities in the drugs add to the health hazards, and people injecting themselves without medical supervision and often not knowing how to do so properly run the risk of all manner of infections.
Self injection of drugs was always ill-advised, but it is foolish beyond belief to do it now and especially to share equipment at a time when we know that the AIDS virus is becoming increasingly rampant among the drug-addicted community in Europe. In Spain and Italy 60 per cent. of the AIDS cases were contracted through intravenous drug misuse. So far in the United Kingdom it is only 4 per cent. but we have nothing to be complacent about because in Scotland over 50 per cent. of the HIV-positive people obtained the virus through the sharing of drug-misusing equipment.
While much attention has rightly focused on homosexual activities, and while much has been done by the homosexual community to change their habits in order to minimise the spread of AIDS as I know from my previous responsibility in the Department of Health, we need to focus on the fact that in Europe the number of AIDS cases resulting from homosexual activity is doubling every 14 months. However, the number of cases contracted through intravenous drug misuse in Europe is doubling every nine months. I need hardly add that as most drug
588
addicts are heterosexual, and whatever so-called commentators in the popular press may say, it is clear beyond peradventure that AIDS can be spread by heterosexual activity. No one should be in any doubt about that. A high HIV-positive rating among intravenous drug misusers is an inevitable bridgehead into the hetrosexual community. That is a crucial matter.
I have already said that the Customs seized 392 kg of cocaine up to last week compared with 264 kg in 1988. Cocaine is a major problem, and we do not just have to look at it in the form of crack to be able to say that. Any form of cocaine abuse is to be deplored. The figures show an increasing problem of crack misuse. There were 12 seizures in 1987, 27 in 1988 and 124 from January to November this year.
Crack is not a magic substance. Any one of us could make it in the kitchen in half an hour if we had cocaine and another readily available ingredient. The greatest buzz, the greatest high and that which causes the greatest chaos afterwards comes from smoking cocaine, and that is because of the immediate impact on the brain. Once cocaine appears in any form in a community, it is inevitable that sooner or later people will turn to the ultimate form of drug misuse—free-basing or crack smoking.
The drug traffickers take a cynical view and as a result cocaine enjoys a spurious reputation as a champagne drug, although we know that many well-known champagne lifestyles have been greatly damaged by its impact. The fact that someone is a well-known champagne-successful chap gives him no immunity from the destructive effects of the drug. It hits people in high society as hard as it hits people anywhere else. Crack is a shrewd marketing ploy by the dealers because it can be sold in much smaller quantities. People do not need to buy a gramme of cocaine powder and the small quantities of crack usually cost more than anything else. But that fact is disguised by the availability of small quantities.
We must expect the drug taker to gravitate towards crack in search, as many drug users are, of a higher and higher buzz. However, the drug dealers will direct all their commercial pressures to getting people into crack because it is the easiest way to market to the widest community. We must gear ourselves to meet that. Thank goodness the Select Committee on Home Affairs had no truck with the people who say that some drugs should be legalised. Such appeasement is pathetic and is no response to anything. How could one legalise such substances when the figures show that in 1983 the United States Drug Enforcement Agency reported 328 cocaine-related deaths while by 1988 the figure had risen to 1,078.
I should like to deal with current American experience, and in that context I am indebted to Mr. Michael Campbell of the Drug Enforcement Agency in London who provided the figures. The latest assessment for the United States shows that there are 5 million to 6 million regular users of cocaine there and that as many as 22 million Americans have tried it. The United States authorities make no bones about the fact that in the 1970s and perhaps for too long cocaine misuse was not a matter of uttermost concern in American society. It was able to gain a hold and in the 1980s there has been a desperate battle to regain control. That proves that when control is lost it is difficult to get it back.
In 1988, 17,000 people appeared in emergency rooms in hospitals in the United States overdosed with cocaine.

589
Infants exposed in the womb are 10 times more likely to die from cot deaths than babies whose mothers do not use the drug. A recent random study of 36 United States hospitals found that at least 11 per cent. of 155,000 women surveyed had exposed their unborn babies to illegal drugs, with cocaine far and away the most common. The impact of drugs is devastating on people who choose to use them. Who can defend the pictures that we have seen of cocaine-addicted babies whose lives are blighted before they have even begun?
Some hon. Members may have visited Dr. Mark Gold's cocaine hotline. I went there when I was in the United States just over four years ago. Dr. Gold's experience of running that hotline illustrates the pace at which the cocaine problem develops in society and who is caught up in it. When he started his cocaine hotline five years ago he thought that he would get about 10,000 callers a year. He has received 1,000 calls a day every day for the past five years. It is interesting to see the spread through society. Initially his callers were people aged 31 or more. They were mostly white, male Americans and mostly people with a substantial education background who were moving ahead in their careers. Today, only five years on, his callers are less well educated, younger, and mainly unemployed. That shows the spread through society. In 1983, only 16 per cent. of Dr. Gold's callers were unemployed, but in 1988 the figure was 61 per cent. In 1983, 50 per cent. were college graduates, but today the figure is 11 per cent. Last year the average age was 26; in 1983 it was 31.
It is interesting to consider the method of taking cocaine. Free-basing is the inhalation of cocaine fumes. In 1983, 21 per cent. of those who called on the hotline were free-basing, but in 1988 it had risen to 64 per cent. That is inevitable, and that is why we have to take the matter seriously.
Some people say that perhaps one should be able to buy it like cigarettes across the counter. They say "What is the difference?" It is interesting that when Gold analysed people's responses to the drug and the impact it has had on their lives, over 70 per cent. of those who called told him and his colleagues that the use of cocaine was more important than his or her own family. Seventy per cent. of callers said that cocaine was more important than friends, and 90 per cent. said that, although they did not consider themselves addicted, they would use every bit of cocaine in their possession as soon as possible. It is a highly addictive drug, and 37 per cent. of callers had reached the conclusion that their only escape from cocaine abuse was suicide.
The legalisers seem to assume that one can go on being dynamic, bouyant and successful whilst just having a sniff or a smoke or sticking a needle in one's arm, just as one would have a cup of coffee to keep one going through the day. It does not work like that. As Dr. Gold said, 79 per cent. of callers said that, because of their cocaine abuse, they were regularly absent from school or work, and 59 per cent. said that they were high at school or at work. Fifty-one per cent. said that they were beginning to be disruptive and 48 per cent. of the students who called said that they were becoming actively involved as cocaine distributors within their school in order to support their addiction. That is part of the insidious drawing in to criminal activity.
Mr. Vaz: The Minister has now been on his feet for 50 minutes. I do not mean to criticise him as I have listened carefully and he has presented some interesting facts. He mentioned Dr. Gold's crack hotline which was mentioned by the Select Committee on Home Affairs, and I have raised it with other Ministers. What is the Government's view of the establishment of such hotlines in Britain to determine the extent of cocaine use and of publicising the telephone number of the hotlines or helplines in schools and colleges?
Mr. Mellor: We have for some time had drugs and AIDs helplines. My mind is open to whether we should have a specially designated cocaine hotline. Currently a number of drugs helpline numbers are readily available. I am open to persuasion as to whether a dedicated cocaine helpline would help or hinder. Poly-drug misuse is a problem that must be acknowledged. Some people abuse only one drug, but many abuse a great number of drugs, depending on what is available.
Mr. Rathbone: The Government's energy and money would be better directed to supporting local information services under the local drugs advisory committees. In my area of Sussex there is an excellent drugs advisory information service run by the East Sussex county council. It understands the problems. Rather than a national hotline, as suggested by the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz), it would be better for the people concerned if there was a build-up of a network of local hotlines.
Mr. Mellor: My hon. Friend knows that a key part of our strategy is to assist financially a range of local efforts. We have substantially increased the sums of money available year after year to such projects.
I do not want to outstay my welcome, and although I have spoken for only 40 minutes, and not 50 minutes as the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz) said, he is right to make me keep my eye on the clock.
It is not piety that makes me say that I always find it enormously encouraging to work with the Select Committee on Home Affairs. I do not know of any Department that has had a more constructive—not cosy—relationship with a Select Committee. It is based on mutual respect for the job that we are all trying to do. I hope that that will continue, and it is in that spirit that I looked at the report.
I was glad to see in the report total opposition to the legalisation of drugs. It says what I have stated until I am blue in the face, that measures to reduce the demand for drugs will be the key. That cannot be said too often.
Mr. Anthony Nelson: Will my hon. and learned Friend accept that he is probably uniquely qualified and experienced in the House to be making this speech with his background in the Foreign Office, the Department of Health and the Home Office?
Experience in America suggests that there is in demand reduction a major role for the private sector working by itself and possible in joint venture with Government. I am thinking of such bodies as the Miami coalition and the campaign for a drug free America. Drawing on his experience, does my hon. and learned Friend think that there is a greater role for the private sector and that regional health authorities and his own Department ought to be working, stimulating and pump-priming the voluntary, charitable and commercial sector?
Mr. Mellor: That is an interesting idea. We have kept faith with the idea of putting specialist drugs experts into education authorities to stimulate curriculum development locally.
Having looked at the drugs projects in Australia devised by the Rev. Ted Noffs and his team, I think that there is plenty of scope for voluntary or other bodies to become involved. It is at our peril that we slam the door in the face of any significant element within society that wants to become involved and help. Unless we harness the energies of all, we shall fail to deal with the problem. None of us has ever wanted the Government, local authorities, the Health Service or other parts of the public sector to dominate. They have a duty that they cannot shirk. I should like to see more involvement from the private sector. That is already possible through the wider drug prevention initiatives of the Home Office, and will be possible through the inner city projects that I mentioned earlier.
Because great minds—or even not so great minds—think alike, we are already doing a number of things for which the Committee asked. When I returned to the Home Office it was clear to me that we should use the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Bill to give us the powers to ratify the United Nations convention. I am glad to say that the Bill has been expanded to contain that. The Bill allows us to ratify the 1957 European convention on mutual assistance in criminal matters. I regret the hidebound nature of the legal profession—I admit that I am as guilty as anyone—and the undoubted difficulties of a common law system coming to terms with the rules of a civil law system. It is over 30 years since the 1957 convention and our being able to ratify it. However, it is better late than never as international co-operation is a necessity rather than an option.
We were asked to provide money to meet some of the additional costs of international drugs investigations, including rewards to informants. As a starter, we have made £1 million available.
I looked at what was said about the confiscation powers under the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986. The idea of a working group to look at its operation and to smooth out the difficulties is important. it is good that £22 million worth of restraint orders have been obtained and £13 million worth of confiscation orders have been issued by courts. When taking the Bill through the House, I would have settled for that over two years. However, we still have a long way to go. Plainly, with an innovative piece of legislation, which is what the report called the Act, there will be some problems. The various professional groups involved need to work closely together and, above all, the courts will have to use their powers. I want to look at evidence which shows that some courts are not using their powers as widely as they might.
I shall bring my remarks to a conclusion. Because I know that we are dealing here—
Mr. Vaz: Does the Minister share the criticism of the Select Committee's report that some people may have about his speech? He has spoken for a great deal of time on important matters such as statistics from America. He started to speak at 10.24 about demand reduction. Perhaps the Select Committee and the Minister have not spent enough time looking at this and outlining the schemes that the Government intend to set up. Before he concludes, may we hear a little about that from the Minister?
Mr. Mellor: There was a debate on this matter not long ago, so rather than reiterate the well-known and well-established paths that the Government and others have consistently followed, I felt that it would be better to reflect on the key indicators to stimulate us to greater effort. Demand reduction is crucial. As I have already said, this comes on a number of levels. We are planning a new advertising campaign, which will deal with the problems of poly-drug misuse. The evidence clearly shows that the heroin campaign, which was a challenging campaign, had a key role to play in the number of teenagers who said no to drugs. We were not posturing to them in terms that would appeal to those of us of increasing middle age and saying the things that we wanted to hear about drugs. Instead, we went out and listened to what teenagers wanted to hear about drugs. They did not want to hear, "It is bad for you" or that drugs were illegal and kill. We discovered that we could reach out to them if we said that drugs made one a boring person or ill in a more down to earth way than just killing one off, but equally insidious in terms of one's ability to function as a person. Above all, it made one unattractive to a person of the opposite sex. One may prefer to be able to reach out to people on a different basis, but the evidence shows that that approach works, and we shall build on that with the national campaign.
We also wanted to have regional and local elements because there is no such thing as a British drug problem. There is a whole host of different local problems, which becomes a set of British statistics. Moving down to the regional level, the money should be given to local authorities and other groups to work in their local community. The efforts that we shall make through the Home Office initiative to co-ordinate initiatives more all bear on drug demand reduction. There is also the work being done in schools through curriculum development to ensure that kids, in being taught the parameters of a healthy lifestyle, understand about drugs and understand the problems that they face.
There are international elements in demand reduction. The hon. Member for Leicester, East will know that we have called a world conference on drugs in April, which must be more than a talk shop. It is no good giving people only the opportunity to emote emptily over a problem. It must have a practical outcome. One of the things that we want to do is have a working group on demand reduction looking seriously at the problem with discussions led and stimulated by acknowledged experts. It is no good us all inventing the wheel individually. We must try to reach common strategies on demand reduction.
I may have been long on diagnosis and short on cures to the problem, but that is because I think it is important for us to take stock of where we are. At the outset of the problem the Government identified key approaches to deal with a problem for which there is no one solution—those approaches being to support international action, to reduce the production and trafficking of drugs, to strengthen police and Customs enforcement, to maintain tight domestic controls and effective deterrence, to develop prevention publicity and education and to improve treatment and rehabilitation. As every year, or even as every month, has gone by, a new layer of bricks has been put on the wall. We continue to build the wall. There is no one single answer, but there is a range of useful initiatives that help us to build on. We have no monopoly of insights.

593
We rely on the insights of others—experts in the subject, Members of Parliament, concerned members of the public—to put to us other ways in which we can do this.
I hope that I can take as read that the House will not expect me, although I could do so, to reiterate the many different policy strands under each of those headings. I have had a chance to talk about some of them in reply to interventions. However, I should welcome further suggestions as to how we might refine it. If we are honest, we are all on a steep learning curve with this problem, which has a greater dimension today than it ever has before, in the experience of any of us. We had best work together to get on top of it.
We are a long way from becoming a nation awash with drugs and drug addicts. I hope that we never shall become one. However, it is clear that, although there have been undoubted successes in recent years in the battle against drugs, we are being put to the test even more severely today than ever before. The fact that drugs are not as much in the headlines as they were tells us more about the fashionability of the issues in the press than about the seriousness of the threat. We must not be deterred, because not everybody is hanging on our every word about drugs, from laying down the further strategies that are needed.
We can take some comfort, but not a lot, from the fact that heroin has moved towards its peak; but cocaine will pose the worst threat yet because it is so insidious. I hope that everything that I have said will persuade people of that. When we look at poly-drug misuse and at the range of substances with which some people constantly delight in discovering to abuse their bodies and minds, we must recognise that we must not let our vigilance slip. I hope that the House will join me in renewing our commitment to keep the battle against the drugs problem as a top priority, knowing full well that society will not survive in its present form if we succumb to it.
10.36 am
Mr. Barry Sheerman: The Opposition welcome the opportunity to discuss the problem of drug misuse and to consider effective ways to tackle this major social problem. I come to the problem fairly freshly in comparison with the Minister, who has returned to it. However, I know something about the problem because I have close contacts with south America, and Peru in particular. As the Minister will know, I also have experience of trying to help an informant who was based near my constituency some years ago. The Minister and I worked together, and realised the limitations of the law then in giving a reward and anonymity to those who help the police with their inquiries. We have some shared experiences.
This is an important day, because this is a most remarkable Select Committee report. If I were marking it in my days as a university teacher, I would mark it alpha plus, because it is an excellent report. It covers all the ground. My only caveat is that it could have built a little more on how we help the peasants who live so close to starvation in places such as Peru that they can grow only coca unless someone supplies an alternative. It is no answer to defoliate and ruin their livelihood. There must
594
be something else for them, and western nations must not just condemn those people. They must take seriously their responsibilities.
The amount of money in international and bilateral aid is piffling. The whole of our overseas aid to South America is £12 million annually. The amount of money needed to solve the problems of drugs, the growing of coca and the destruction of the rain forests puts into perspective the relationship between the rich countries that are the users of the drugs and the poor countries. The rich countries bear the burden of drug misuse but we also have a responsibility to those parts of the world where people have no alternative to growing this crop. I am talking not about the dealers but about those whose livelihood depends on growing something to make a living. With that slight criticism I welcome the Committee's report.
It is vital not to make cheap party points on this subject. I shall make some points, as one would expect from the Opposition, but I shall try not to make them too party political or too cheap. Often on a Friday morning, with fewer Members in the House, we get a better debate, and I undertake to cover this issue seriously.
It is easy to attract attention with alarmist statements about drug misuse and about crack, but we run the risk of increasing interest in that most dangerous drug. Already, there are worrying signs that media coverage in America has resulted in a bonanza that advertising companies would have been happy to achieve for reputable products. Everyone in public life must try to keep a balance. We must avoid hyping up the interest in a drug which, as yet, has not hit Britain to the extent that it has hit other countries, such as the United States.
We must keep the drug problem in perspective. I agree with the Minister that drugs do not produce anywhere near the number of deaths, illnesses, problems with unemployment and social and legal costs that legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco produce.
Several months ago, the Under-Secretary of State for Health, answering parliamentary questions, said that alcohol-related diseases cost £2 billion a year. Most ordinary British citizens, if they want to preserve life and limb, must avoid not drugs, but our town and city centres on Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights because of drunkenness, disorder and violence. We must bear in mind the balance between problems caused by legal and illegal drugs.
Nevertheless, drugs are of great social concern. We have heard a lot about crack, but the real problems at the moment are related to heroin and amphetamines. Heroin was the epidemic of the 1980s, but it has now peaked, and I am glad that the Minister gave figures to substantiate that. The epidemic started in the 1960s and peaked in the 1980s, but it has had a devastating effect on many individuals, families and communities. It is estimated that we now have between 100,000 and 180,000 heroin addicts in Britain. Let us consider the misery that that causes.
Amphetamine abuse is highly dangerous, and we have to find methods to tackle that addiction. Also we have to prepare for dangerous new substances such as crack and ice.
The Minister did not have time to cover all the issues involved but he has visited the United States to talk about the problems, and he mentioned the changed behaviour patterns of people under the influence of some of those new drugs. We must bear those changes in mind.

595
Some drugs lead to a docile state of mind, but some of the new drugs seem to lead to a paranoid state or one that induces violence. That is the difference between the drugs that we have become accustomed to in Britain and some of the new drugs that may now come into Britain. Behaviour patterns change when people use some of the new drugs and that may have serious consequences for non-drug users, who may become the victims of violence on the streets.
One aspect of drug addiction that has not been given a great deal of prominence is the link between addiction and crime. I do not mean international crime, but the type of everyday crime that we see increasing in the crime statistics year after year. One of the reasons that we do not know a great deal about that link is that the Government have not published the research that they have commissioned in the past. I am not being partisan, but I believe that all right hon. and hon. Members and experts outside the House would appreciate it if the Home Office published as soon as possible the research that it has conducted. Even if the results are slightly embarrassing, we would like to see the Home Office's evaluation of the research into the link between drug addiction, anti-social and violent behaviour and crime.
All we have had is a tantalisingly brief summary in the Home Office research bulletin. From that we learn that Howard Parker's research in the Wirral estimates that the local heroin market is worth £22 million a year.
Mr. John Greenway: I agree entirely with the hon. Gentleman and I want to help him. The link between drug addiction and crime was one of the major factors behind our inquiry into drug trafficking. I draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to paragraph 16 of our report. During evidence, Home Office witnesses told the Committee that the National Drugs Intelligence Unit has assigned a section to examine the link between serious crime and drug abuse and trafficking. It is a serious matter.
Mr. Sheerman: I thank the hon. Gentleman for reminding me of that report. People indulge in petty crime in particular, to raise the money to buy drugs on the street. Howard Parker estimates that the local heroin market is worth £22 million, and that is an astonishing figure. Cindy Fazy's research shows that there are more than 1,000 heroin users in Liverpool, and they spend on average £280 a week on illicit drugs, and that they need to raise £7 million a year from the proceeds of acquisition offences.
Wagstaff and Maynard have estimated a total expenditure on illicit supplies of heroin in 1984 of between £111·7 million and £237·8 million. That is a lot of money to be raised by people with a drug habit. Even the most conservative estimate would be that more than half is obtained through theft, burglary and shop lifting. The cost to the victim is much higher, because stolen goods are sold at much less than their real value. One can work out what the value of the goods that are stolen must be.
I look forward to hearing from the Minister that the research will be published in full, because we could learn a great deal from it. Research is vital, and I think that all right hon. and hon. Members will agree with that.
We do not want simple solutions to a complex problem. We want to know of remedies for this plague so that we can apply them and control the problem. There are many questions about the problem of drug abuse for which we do not have any answers. What sort of education
596
campaign works with the young, and with other people? What treatment works? Where should resources be targeted?
The Government have spent very little money on research into drug abuse. I shall table a question today asking how much has been spent on research, apart from on the "Heroin screws you up" campaign and on the evaluation of that work.
Drug abuse is not an easy problem to solve. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers and no instant solutions. One has to be pragmatic, and set priorities to decide where efforts should be maximised and where one can best intervene to break the chain and to tackle abuse.
Clearly there are two ways to deal with the problem of drug abuse. The first is to limit supply, and the Select Committee considered that in great depth. I shall not spend much time on that side of the debate. Like the Minister, I prefer to talk about the second way to deal with the problem—how we reduce the demand for drugs in Britain. The former Home Secretary, now the Foreign Secretary, made it clear that more emphasis should be put on reducing demand. The Opposition welcomed that proposal, and I hope that the new Home Secretary and the new Minister of State will continue to support it.
We must learn from American mistakes, but we must also learn from other countries. In an intervention earlier, I mentioned the lack of linguistic skills of most British people. Sometimes it is almost too easy to examine only the American experience. I have seen recent research from Holland which offers some interesting lessons.
Mr. Mellor: I entirely agree. While whittling away four hours of my five-hour speech, I left out the section on the Pompidou group, which is the Council of Ministers group on drugs. That group conducts many exchanges of research and joint research projects. I shall be happy to send the hon. Gentleman some of the evidence. He is right. There is a European aspect which is not the same as the United States experience. We must not link ourselves only with the English-speaking world.
Mr. Sheerman: I am glad that the Minister and I agree on that as well. My mind has been changed by the Select Committee's report. I approached the subject of legalisation with a fresh mind. Research of the Dutch experience changed my mind on that option. I agree with the Select Committee's recommendation—it would be highly dangerous to legalise any of the drugs that we are discussing this morning. I emphatically agree with that. I am attempting to draw conclusions on the basis of research rather than prejudice or badly-researched evidence.
We go to the United States to learn from some of their mistakes. The Reagan Administration poured millions of dollars into attempts to cut the supply of drugs to the United States, but to very little effect. It is not entirely unreasonable to draw the analogy of building a dam to withstand a massive tidal wave. It will never be possible to stop up every means of getting drugs into this or any other country—demand will ensure that supplies get through.
It is important not to follow the American line. The United States has been one of the least successful countries when it comes to dealing with drugs. That must be borne in mind. There is growing recognition there that their balance of priorities has been wrong for several years. There are, however, improvements that can be made in our

597
attempt to curtail supply. It may be more cost effective for the police to concentrate on middle-market dealers based in Britain who prey on communities and make a fortune out of drugs rather than on the big international dealers who are extremely difficult to catch. Breaking the chain in the middle is important and would be helpful.
The Select Committee on Home Affairs this week published its report on drug trafficking. At paragraph 110, the Select Committee comments approvingly on the Broome report and the stratified model there for dealing with traffickers. It describes three levels of traffickers—local, distributor and importer. Those tiers are dealt with by the local police, the regional police and Customs and Excise respectively. I understand the recommendation, but there has been a survey of more than 400 serving police officers at all levels of the criminal investigation department and the drugs squad. It shows that serving officers feel that the three-tier system does not work, that the market is more flexible and is not organised like that and that it would be better to have one general agency for drug enforcement. I understand that this project report to the Police Foundation for the Association of Chief Police Officers has been withheld from publication. It would be helpful to have that report so that we can make an informed decision. If information has been gathered and research has been done, such is the importance of this basically non-political subject that it can only add to our knowledge and the level of debate.
The Select Committee recommends on page 23 of its report that the proceeds of drug trafficking should be put into a central fund administered by the Home Office. I have already mentioned the bizarre situation in which I found myself when I tried to get an award for an important drug informant. I was told that the authorities would like to reward his useful information but that there was not a budget with which to do so. There was a long struggle to ensure that things turned out right. I campaigned in a general way for just such a recommendation, so I warmly approve of it. I hope that, if the funds are divided between enforcement agencies, the division will not be simply the basis of success at arresting traffickers, but rather on the basis of supplying and sharing good quality information. It would be too easy to give enormous plums to, perhaps, the Metropolitan police or some other force that makes arrests, but it is much more important to encourage all forces to provide all levels of information that add up to a sophisticated operation.
I would like some of the proceeds—perhaps this is a moral point—to find their way to a fund for treatment facilities so that the profits of drug trafficking help to treat some of those whose lives have been wrecked by buying this disgraceful merchandise.
The Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Bill is to start in another place, and we shall see it some time in the new year. I have some worries about the clauses on precursor chemicals which are used to make illicit drugs. I welcome the clauses, which enable Britain to ratify the Vienna convention, but information has been passed to me about the controls of precursors. This is a good example of how good policies can have disastrous and unforeseen consequences. It is suggested that, as the controls on precursors have begun to bite, manufacturers have started to use other chemicals which are not monitored so tightly.
598
They have moved on from making amphetamine sulphate to metamphetamines, which can be injected and are more dangerous. I hope that that will be investigated as a matter of urgency.
In general, I believe that a system of priorities for precursors should concentrate on chemicals which make class A drugs. It is also important to establish a set of priorities for drug seizures. I believe that effort should be concentrated on class A drugs—those highly damaging drugs such as heroin and cocaine. In the Metropolitan police area, in 1988, 90 per cent. of seizures involved cannabis and 83 per cent. of seizures on the streets involved cannabis. When there are scarce resources and scarce staff, I would like more attention to be directed towards really dangerous drugs. That is not to say that I believe in decriminalisation. I believe that concentration of effort is important against those most dangerous drugs.
The most party-political part of my speech concerns the demand for drugs and ways in which to reduce that demand. I detect a great deal of hypocrisy in the Government's comments about stemming demand. Some of the clearest information to come out of research into drug misuse is the link between drug addiction and poverty. The heroin epidemic of the 1980s has been concentrated in the most deprived inner-city areas. That is not to say that others do not touch drugs, and nor is every inner city affected—the supply lines work in a much more complicated way than that—but where heroin reached, it was concentrated amoung unemployed youth in poor areas.
Research which is to be published in the new year will reinforce that view and show how addiction is concentrated among the most deprived citizens of our country—people who are becoming detached from society. The beginnings, may I say, of an underclass. The Prime Minister has suggested that drug addiction is a problem of prosperity. I believe that her comments are unfortunate and a million miles from reality. For an international comparison, we have to look only at the ghettos of north America.
Mr. Steve Norris: I have listened to the hon. Gentleman's speech with great interest, as I did to the speech of my hon. and learned Friend the Minister. I am sorry to part company with the hon. Gentleman for the first time this morning, although he admits that this is the only controversial part of his remarks. Surely neither that which he has represented nor his brief and, I suggest, less than wholly accurate description of the remarks of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is the basic truth. Drug taking is not the result of affluence totally and it is not the result of poverty totally. The hon. Gentleman's approach is hardly consistent with his earlier comment that a habit is likely to cost about 15,000 a year to sustain. Does that square with his assertion that drug taking is likely to be more prevalent among an underclass? Surely drug taking is the result of aimlessness, hopelessness, lack of direction and lack of feeling of a place in society. Surely these are the greatest social causes of drug misuse, and are likely to span the entire economic and social spectrum.
Mr. Sheerman: I am sorry to disagree with the hon. Gentleman. He is right, however, to say that drug addiction touches all parts of society. I suggest that research shows that drug addiction is rooted mainly in deprivation. There is the image of the yuppy sniffing

599
cocaine, for example, but the real problem of heroin addiction is to be found in poverty in the inner cities and in unemployment. When I spoke of the cost of addiction I went on to say that those who are unemployed and living on the margin have to steal or engage in violent crime to sustain the habit.
The Government's proposals for demand reduction is to set up nine drug prevention units. That must be welcome, as every such initiative must be, but the Government have fallen into the same trap as they fell into with the safe city programme. Once again, they have ignored local authorities and opted for a rather gimmicky initiative. As with crime prevention generally, local authorities have a key role to play in the improvement of the environment, housing, education, leisure and recreation for young people and the social services. All these services have a part to play. Local authorities have a unique responsibility and an ability to bring services together. When we consider the way in which the prevention units are set up, the local authorities should be given a key role in the partnership that must be formed. We want a partnership that involves every sector of the community. I believe that the local democratically elected role is a key one and that the Government should not shirk from acknowledging that. Failure to use the skills and the range of work that is undertaken by local authorities is disastrous to effective prevention.
I am interested to know what the units will look like and how they will function. I have not found anyone who is involved in the prevention of drug misuse—I have talked to many about these matters—who has any idea how the units will operate. Everyone is waiting and saying how pleased he or she will be when the Minister says exactly how the units will operate and make their contribution.
The running of education campaigns is part of an agreed policy between the Opposition and the Government. It is important to target campaigns on groups that are especially at risk. I am encouraged by the work of the "fast forward" project in Edinburgh, which will be described in Crime Concern's forthcoming handbook on youth crime prevention projects. I compliment hon. Members on both sides of the House who have a great deal to do with Crime Concern. The "fast forward" project works directly with young people in youth clubs. It uses the peer group approach. Young people aged between 16 and 25 years educate other young people. Similar projects in the United States, such as the one in Boston, have been extremely successful.
It was interesting that the Minister did not say too much about this, but the press has been full of suggestions that he might consider a new scare advertising campaign on crack that will be similar to what we believe to be the rather useless "Heroin screws you up" campaign. In our view, scare advertisements do not work. They do not relate to the experiences of young people who are beginning to experiment with drugs. The rather effete young man in the heroin posters became a pin-up for some young girls. The Home Office commissioned an evaluation of the campaign, and I understand that it concluded that the campaign was a waste of money. It must not be repeated.
Mr. Mellor: The allegation that the young man became a cult figure has never been proved. It was a mere assertion by someone which has never been substantiated. The young man appeared in one of a series of advertisements. I am not afraid of being wrong. When I am in error, I am
600
proud to admit it. When in uncharted seas, there is no shame in having turned the tiller the wrong way. The evaluation confirmed the success of the campaign—I regret that it has been attacked by some—and I shall send the hon. Gentleman a copy of it. It is not a shock-horror approach to show someone looking listless, spotty or run down as a result of being on drugs. It would be a shock-horror approach if we showed a dead person and implied that everyone on drugs would die. We rejected that approach. It will be difficult to decide how best to tackle the cocaine and crack problem through advertising. I stand by the decision of my predecessor that we shall not launch immediately into that advertising. I shall certainly not rule out advertising against crack. I think that it was John Wesley who said, "Why should the devil have all the best tunes?" If people's minds can be affected by advertising on every other issue, why not on this one?
Mr. Sheerman: I take the Minister's point. I understand that when he made his decision he acted with the best of motives and on the best advice. I am saying that time has passed on. The evaluation that I have seen of the success of the campaign would not lead anyone to the conclusion that the Minister has reached. Some time will elapse between the campaign to which I have referred and the next one, and I hope that he learns from the previous campaign. We must all learn from it. I do not want to make cheap party points. I merely say that we must have the right campaign. We are talking about a lot of money. I would rather see millions of pounds being spent on treatment centres, on putting the subject into the curriculum and on getting it into schools. When I am the Minister responsible for these matters after the next general election, I shall be tempted to go home and say, "Look at my television campaign. Isn't it wonderful." That must always be a temptation, but let us not have another campaign unless research tells us that it will be effective. I think that the Minister and I can come to some form of armed truce on this issue.
Mr. Norris: In the co-operative atmosphere of the debate, I wish to comment on the nature of the message. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman will be aware that for a long time the Home Office spent a considerable amount of money on crime prevention campaigns. For many years it concentrated on messages such as, "Watch Out, There's a Thief About" and, "Lock It or Lose It". It was pretty standard stuff and it went in one ear and out of the other. When the same amount of money was expended on a campaign that introduced the slogan "Crime—Together We'll Crack It" there was a tremendously greater degree of response. Apparently, there was a measurably different response when crime figures were examined. I have every sympathy with what the hon. Gentleman says but I want to know whether he is suggesting that we should lessen the advertising element of our fight against drug trafficking or that the message should be altered.
Mr. Sheerman: I am suggesting that both things should happen. We have to learn, and there are sophisticated ways of evaluating what message will get through. We shall have to evaluate advertising campaigns and consider whether it would be better to spend the money on a different approach. I do not rule out the campaigns that the hon. Gentleman suggests, but they must be evaluated carefully.

601
I have been much involved in transport and safety matters, and I know that it is difficult to get the message right. Drug misuse is a much more difficult area than transport, for example, in many respects.
Mr. Mellor: As my hon. Friend the Member for Epping Forest (Mr. Norris) says, this is a co-operative debate. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for allowing me to intervene. I do not do so in any spirit of rancour. The campaigns that we have run have been market researched. That research led us to put in the wastepaper basket messages such as, "Heroin Kills" or, "Heroin is Against the Law." A company which is separate from the one which produces the advertising evaluates the campaign. A report from a non-governmental source made a number of criticisms. Our research, which comes from a completely independent company, makes it clear that we have reinforced the anti-heroin message by producing reasons why people should be against heroin. It was not merely a straightforward no, prompting someone to say, "Why?", only to be told, "I don't know." Reasons were given. That is my approach. Had the results been different, I would have changed it.
A relatively low-key—but, I hope effective—campaign will begin on television in a couple of months. There is no monopoly of wisdom in this matter, and if the hon. Gentleman has any ideas about the campaign he might like to let me have them. I do not think of it as the Government's campaign; it is a campaign that the Government are sponsoring on behalf of a whole range of concerned people, of whatever political view.
Mr. Sheerman: I shall send my suggestions to the appropriate Minister.
In spending money on campaigns, we must remember that education can take other forms. Many of the delivering agencies have been undermined by the Government. The youth service is decimated and teachers, general practitioners, social workers and probation officers are demoralised by frequent criticism. It is hardly a sound basis for a major educational initiative when so many of those on whom we rely to deliver the message believe that the Government do not think them to be quite the right sort of people and not quite up to the job.
Treatment and rehabilitation are crucial parts of a strategy to tackle drug misuse. I recognise that the Government have increased expenditure in that area—something not often said from this Dispatch Box. Many good projects have been established and are in operation throughout the country. However, expansion has only just kept up with the increased number of users, let alone with the additional worries about AIDS and drug use.
There is also concern that many projects have been financed by pump priming money to regional health authorities, which continually have to find the funds themselves from other parts of their budgets. Pump priming is all right; it is good to have new initiatives. However, when the pump priming runs out, and what to the public eye might appear to be a more attractive proposition arises, the competition is very tough. The Minister must play a positive role in ensuring that that pump priming does not mean that the many schemes that look good on the surface last for only a short time and then disappear, thereby disappointing the staff involved and
602
not delivering the continuing service that is needed. Drug addicts may lose out to more popular groups of patients, especially when hospitals control their own budgets or opt out of regional health authority control.
We need a continuing expansion of treatment facilities to meet the needs of the tens of thousands of young people addicted to drugs. One particular area of concern is that current treatment facilities rarely meet the needs of black addicts. Evidence shows that few people are treated at such centres and that there are very few black staff. The Minister should pay particular attention to that problem.
In one highly important area of the system, treatment is woefully and dangerously inadequate, and that is in the prisons. I know that it is a shared responsibility between two Ministers, but I hope that they get together on this problem. An increasing number of addicts are finding their way into prison as a result of their offending, yet only minimal treatment facilities are available inside prisons. Drug addicts in prison take part in the most dangerous form of drug misuse—intravenous injection with dirty needles. It is well known that some young people, who have not previously experimented with drugs, become addicted while inside. Many young drug-takers will go straight back to offending to finance their addiction on release. It is of great concern that our prisons do not have the right level of treatment for young people and others who go to prison because of drug addiction, which has led to crime, which means going to prison and so the cycle goes on.
Society must tackle that, and we need a two-pronged policy to do so. First, we need to divert as many young drug takers, as safely as we can, from prison and into alternatives to custody schemes specialising in dealing with drug addiction. The Government acknowledge that in their Green Paper "Punishment, Custody and the Community". It states:
"The chances of dealing effectively with a drug problem are much greater if the offender can remain in the community and undertakes to co-operate in a sensibly planned programme to help him or her come off drugs."
If that is to be achieved, we need a radical expansion of such programmes.
Indeed, it would be useful if, at every stage of the criminal justice process, major agencies were aware of the need to get drug offenders into treatment. In Southwark, for example, when the police caution drug users they give advice on referral to treatment projects. By next year, it is hoped that six to eight of these schemes will be operating throughout the country, with the support of the Institute for the Study of Drug Dependence.
Secondly, we must improve treatment facilities within prisons for those who must be imprisoned to protect the public. That links to the major health risk already mentioned by the Minister—that of AIDS. It is no exaggeration to say that prisons may be a bridgehead to the spread of AIDS into the heterosexual community. That is because of the high-risk behaviour that takes place within prison such as injecting drugs and homosexuality. Drug users who are injecting while in prison will have to share dirty syringes among many inmates, with a great risk of spreading the HIV virus.
Homosexual activity is more widespread in prison than in the outside community because some men who are usually heterosexual take part in homosexual activities in prison. Those men are then released and can spread the virus. The Home Office, having developed a training

603
package for prison officers and prisoners, has become remarkably complacent about AIDS. We need research to discover the extent of high-risk activity in prisons and ways to tackle the problem. It is no good burying one's head in sand because homosexuality is deemed to be illegal inside prison and because drugs should not be getting in. That is nonsense. One has only to talk to prison governors and officers to learn the reality.
I have visited prisons while carrying out my responsibilities and I have been told that drugs are a very real problem. Indeed, a prison officer who recently took me around a prison said, "How do you think we could keep the lid on this place if it were not for drugs?" That statement shook me, but it is one that will be made by any candid and honest prison officer. If there is a danger of prisons being a bridgehead to the spread of AIDS in the community, what happens in prison cannot be forgotten. We cannot pretend that it does not exist. High standard treatment facilities for drug addicts would be highly beneficial to minimise illicit use.
I want to conclude by dwelling on the real problem of AIDS, which has a profound effect on the way that the drugs problem is perceived in this country because of the link between AIDS and shared syringes. It is now widely accepted by bodies such as the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs that the threat from AIDS is greater than the threat from drugs. It has become vital to stop drug-users injecting. The advisory council produced two important reports on AIDS and drugs in 1988 and 1989. So far, the Government have failed to act on its proposals. Indeed, they are yet again displaying remarkably complacent attitudes to that major threat.
The Health Education Authority's AIDS education unit has been closed and research on sexual behaviour has been halted. We understand that that was at the personal direction of the Prime Minister. We cannot, as a society, afford such a negligent approach. The threat of AIDS means that we must act urgently to provide effective treatment for drug-users to minimise the risk of their behaviour and to co-ordinate the work of all agencies and all Ministers to deal with the HIV virus. The need for action to tackle drug misuse has never been more pressing.
The Minister emphasised the importance of the problem across parties, organisations, sections of society and indeed nations. Opposition Members concur with that, and hope that we shall see action to deliver the necessary policies in the coming year.
11.19 am
Mr. John Greenway: I welcome the opportunity to draw attention so early to the seventh report of the Select Committee on Home Affairs, which was published yesterday. As my hon. and learned Friend the Minister said in his opening remarks, the debate is very timely. I have no doubt, however, that he instigated it, which is, I think, a tribute to his commitment to the fight against drug trafficking and drug abuse.
I am sorry that my hon. Friend the Member for Westminster, North (Mr. Wheeler), the Select Committee's Chairman, is unable to be present today. He sends his apologies, for, having considered the problem in such a close and detailed fashion, he too welcomes today's debate. Let me also pay tribute to the Clerk of our Committee, Mr. Colin Lee, who, I believe, is listening to
604
this discussion. He has contributed some sterling work to the preparation of not only yesterday's report, but our earlier report on crack.
The Select Committee report follows several months of investigation, including a visit to the United States in June. It makes no fewer than 49 recommendations, but I shall have time to highlight only some of the more important. An essential question posed in the report is, "How serious is the drug problem in the United Kingdom?". Quantifying the extent of any illicit activity is difficult, but quantifying that of drug abuse and drug trafficking is notoriously so, as we point out in our report. Section II details recent evidence of seizures, which my hon. and learned Friend has brought up to date this morning; it also describes police intelligence work and money-laundering activities. That information convinced the Committee that there could be no doubt of the seriousness of the drug problem in the United Kingdom, both actual and potential.
The hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) spoke of the link between drug abuse and AIDS. That is undoubtedly a serious problem, especially in prisons, but what is so frightening about the use of crack and free-based cocaine is that it is not associated with the use of needles. Research suggests that young women who smoke, particularly in the United States, are more likely to smoke free-based cocaine and to use crack.
There is no doubt that law enforcement has a major role to play in countering the problems of drug abuse and drug trafficking. In recent months it has again become fashionable to suggest the legalisation of drugs as an answer, but that idea must be strenuously resisted. In section III of our report we advanced some of the many arguments against decriminalisation, and the Committee's interim report—the sixth report, entitled "Crack: the Threat of Hard Drugs in the Next Decade" and published in July—drew attention to the horrific and deeply disturbing effects of drug abuse on social behaviour in the major cities of the United States. My hon. and learned Friend mentioned some of those effects, and I should like to mention others; there may be some overlap.
There has been a 400 per cent. increase in reported cases of child abuse in the United States over the past two years, and three quarters of the children who were battered to death last year had cocaine or crack-using parents. It is estimated the last year in the United States 375,000 babies were born to mothers with drug-related problems: that is 10 per cent. of all births in that country. Drug related emergency admissions to American hospitals have increased by 120 per cent. in three years, with crack addicts especially experiencing chronic chest pains, brain seizures, eating disorders such as anorexia, heart attacks, strokes and even death. That is the horror of cocaine—in a country where in 1976, just 13 years ago, President Carter's drugs adviser told the people that cocaine was a harmless middle-class drug. What irresponsible stupidity; what stupendous madness. That cannot be what we want for this country.
Many serious drug-related crimes of violence are a direct consequence of the effects of drugs. We have already heard today about the different effects created by some of the new amphetamine-based drugs—feelings of paranoia and irritability, a false sense of physical strength leading to violence and assults with weapons, child abuse and even murder. Those crimes have nothing to do with sustaining

605
a habit, and everything to do with the debilitating influence of drug taking: they would clearly continue if drugs were legalised.
Another argument is that, as drug law enforcement is costly and difficult, it would be better to spend the money on health care for addicts and on preventive and educative measures for everyone else. It seems a colossal contradiction, however, to say that we could persuade youngsters of the evils of drug-taking if we had just legalised drugs. As I mentioned in an intervention on the speech of my hon. and learned Friend, we have evidence from surveys done in South America; and we know through intelligence that there is no shortage of drugs—particularly cocaine—being supplied to Europe by those countries. If those drugs were more freely available, there could be only one consequence: there would be more drug users, and drugs would be used more frequently.
Our report advances a further argument, which I found to be increasingly held in the United States. It was succinctly presented in the recently published "National Drug Control Strategy" from President Bush. That argument is that health considerations would undoubtedly necessitate heavy regulation of any legalised drugs to restrict availability. Substantial excise duties are already imposed on alcohol and tobacco, and they are supported increasingly on health grounds. Legalised drugs would be subject to a massive tax addition in an effort to reduce and restrict consumption.
Habitual addicts, robbed of personal dignity and social stability by the degrading influence of drug-taking, would thus be unable to pay for their drugs, and would be just as likely to commit petty crime as they are now. Legal drugs would be expensive, and links between drugs and crime would not be severed, whether those links were forged by the habitual addict funding his addiction or by trafficking in the black market. Certainly we could not countenance the sale of drugs so cheap that children could buy them with their pocket money.
I shall quote directly from our report only once. Paragraph 25 states:
"The tragic social consequences and the enormous costs of the misuse of addictive drugs are so damaging that to risk increasing their misuse by legalising them would be the greatest folly. On health grounds alone, we cannot support the wider availability of addictive drugs or other illicit drugs. We therefore restate our outright opposition to any proposal to legalise the use of any currently illicit drugs."
I speak so forcefully not because hon. Members on both sides of the House do not agree about this matter, but simply because I am worried about a growing trend. I thought that that was an argument for decriminalisation. The debate provides us with an opportunity to answer those suggestions.
What should be the Government's strategy for tackling drug abuse and drug trafficking? Drug trafficking is an international problem and demands international action. The Committee examined several aspects of international co-operation. They are detailed in part IV of the report. The Committee concluded that the 1988 United Nations convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances represents an important milestone in international co-operation. Ratification of the treaty is a priority. It will require amendment of section 24 of the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 so that United Kingdom law on money-laundering complies with article
606
3 of the convention. I am pleased that the Government intend to include the necessary amendments in the recently published Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Bill. I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House will support the Bill when it comes to this House from the other place.
The Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Bill will also enable the United Kingdom to ratify the European convention on mutual assistance in criminal matters, thereby pre-empting another of the report's recommendations. During our inquiry a number of witnesses drew attention to difficulties in conducting international investigations into drug trafficking. Attempts to gain evidence from abroad for prosecutions in Britain reply upon obtaining commissions rogatoires under a statute of 1873. The delays that result from this antiquated procedure are unacceptable in today's world of international drug barons and the action we need to take against them. I welcome the Government's prompt response to the clear need that emerged during evidence for urgent changes to be made.
My hon. and learned Friend paid tribute in his speech to the work of the Home Affairs Select Committee. He seemed to suggest that the Committee co-operated with the Home Department more readily than with some other Select Committees. One reason why I believe that is so is that the Committee always seems to be able to find a subject where clear Government policy and additional effort are required. We inquire into what needs to be done and find during our deliberations that the Government recognise that more needs to be done. On the basis of the evidence that we have gathered, changes are made. For example, before we had published our forensic science report about a year ago, the Government gave a clear response to it. As two of our reports are being discussed in the debate, that is a trend that other Select Committees might follow. That would be greatly to the benefit of Government policy and would lead to action being taken on important social issues, on which the country rightly demands action.
Further changes to the law relating to money-laundering must also be considered. Part V of the report shows how the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 has proved to be a successful weapon in the war against drug trafficking. That Act followed the Home Affairs Select Committee report on drugs in 1985.
To gain further successes in tracing and confiscating the assets of drug traffickers, it is essential that police efforts to seek restraint orders are not thwarted by suspects being able to remove funds from their banks before those orders are granted. The issue of restraint orders needs to be speeded up. The Committee believes that that would happen if the police were able to obtain restraint orders from the district registries of the High Court.
A further important change to the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 would be to allow a confiscation order to be varied to cover interest earned, or any appreciation in value, between the time the order was made and the time that it was ultimately satisfied.
Urgent consideration must also be given to the significant threat to the well-being of Britain's financial institutions from the sheer scale of money-laundering activities. The national drugs intelligence co-ordinator at Scotland Yard estimates that there could be at least £1·8 billion of illicitly obtained laundered money in the United Kingdom banking system. That is a frightening statistic.

607
There have been remarkably few prosecutions for money laundering offences under the 1986 Act. Despite consultations between the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Crown Prosecution Service, which also involved the National Drugs Intelligence Unit coordinator, the Bank of England and the Committee of London and Scottish Bankers, no clear consensus as to how the law could be strengthened has emerged, yet the threat to Britain's financial institutions is of such magnitude that the United Kingdom is regarded in the United States as an offshore banking system. At the very least, the Government and the Bank of England should undertake an urgent inquiry into the scale of the threat to the banking community that is posed by money-laundering, with a view to establishing what legislative or other changes are needed to counter it. I urge the Minister to look at that as a matter of priority.
As to the use that is made of money and assets that are seized from drug traffickers, the Committee strongly believes that the proceeds from drug profit confiscation should go to a central fund to be administered by the Home Office. That would allow additional money to be allocated to specific aspects of enforcement. The idea has the support of more than 100 right hon. and hon. Members, and it is the subject of an early-day motion. If the money were to be used by the Home Office, it would overcome objections to the direct use of such funds by police and Customs. It would enable the money to be spent where it is most needed, in the fight against drug abuse. Apart from law enforcement, that would involve education, prevention of drug taking and rehabilitation.
I shall refer briefly to the other three parts of our report. Amendments to reinforce the law will be successful only if they are supported by effective law enforcement. We spend over £4 billion each year on the fight against crime. Customs is spending another £200 million. It is essential that the organisation of enforcement should ensure that the money is well spent. A national drugs enforcement agency is not required, but urgent improvements need to be made to the co-ordination and coherence of law enforcement by strengthening, for example, the drugs wings of regional crime squads. I welcome the Home Secretary's recent announcement that 51 additional officers will be appointed to regional crime squads next year to reinforce their drugs wings.
The report also recommends the setting up of joint task forces by regional crime squads and drugs officers. Professional language training for police and drugs squad officers is needed. We need better resourcing of payments to informants.
Perhaps the most provocative recommendation in our report affecting the criminal justice system is that we need a review of the guidance issued to police officers on the law of incitement and matters relating to unconventional operations against drug traffickers. There is no doubt that the use of sting-type operations in the United States has proved extremely successful in tackling the problem of drug trafficking, especially at street level, but there is a major case for saying that in terms of international drug traffickers we need to ensure that our rules and regulations on the use of incitement are brought up to date so that the police can operate under cover. Drug trafficking involves sophisticated criminals and we need sophisticated techniques to deal with them.
The report also stresses the importance of intelligence to effective law enforcement. We should like to see an
608
enhancement of the role of the National Drugs Intelligence Unit at Scotland Yard. We should also welcome an increase in the number of drugs liaison officers, some from police forces and some from Customs, who do such invaluable work abroad to ensure that our police forces have the most up-to-date intelligence available.
The Governments of the countries in which the drugs are produced rightly emphasise the importance of reducing the demand for drugs. That is one area of the fight against drugs abuse on which we did not spend a great deal of time in our report because, as the title of the report makes clear, we were concerned to look at drug trafficking on an international scale and its relationship with serious crime. Nevertheless, it is clear to all hon. Members who served on the Committee—I believe that the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz) wishes to speak on that point later—that major demand reduction programmes need to be put in place. A dinner was held in our embassy in Washington to advise the Committee on what to do., at which were gathered all the best drugs enforcement brains in the United States. In that informal setting, I posed the question, "What constitutes an effective demand reduction programme?" That sparked the most intense debate and argument. Suffice it to say that no one really knew the answer. This is an area in which we have to learn and to research. We must look at all sensible suggestions, but reducing demand for drugs must be the key.
The United States authorities admit to having paid too little attention in the past to education and prevention, so we must not repeat that mistake. Therefore, as I have said, proper emphasis must be given to a demand reduction programme and to rehabilitation and treatment. General practitioners should be given more advice about how to spot and deal with the problems of drug abuse.
In the war against crime, there can be no greater prize than the defeat of drug trafficking and the scourge of drug abuse. Only a wide-ranging, comprehensive and balanced strategy has any chance of success. Our report sets out clear and precise ways in which that strategy can be improved. I commend it to the Government and the House.
11.43 am
Mr. Keith Vaz: Drugs are the menace of today and the monster of tomorrow. The evil that they represent is so clear that we as legislators would be failing in our duty if we urged caution in dealing with this agonising problem that already causes misery to millions of people throughout the world and to thousands of our fellow citizens.
Like the hon. Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway), I, too, have the privilege of serving on the Select Committee on Home Affairs and I, too, commend its sixth and seventh reports to the House. The facts revealed at the publication of the report yesterday, that just under £2 billion from the profits of drugs is laundered through the banking system of our country, shows the enormous scale of the problem.
In all the work that I have done as a Member of Parliament, nothing has been as worthwhile as serving on the Committee and looking at the way in which drugs have engulfed American society. If we want to know what life will be like in Britain in a few years time if we do nothing in the war against drugs, we need only look at America.
I listened carefully to the account given by the Minister of State and have little to disagree with on the facts and

609
figures that he gave. The Americans themselves estimate that 70·4 million people—37 per cent. of the population—have tried an illicit drug at least twice in their lifetimes. The report notes that there are now 9 million regular drugs-users and 10 million heavy users—that is, people who use drugs over 200 times per year.
The crack problem is clearly an epidemic in America. It knows no racial, class or gender distinctions in terms of those who use it. However, the Minister is right to say that of all drugs perhaps this is the one most used by women. Crack is five to 10 times more addictive than other forms of cocaine. The worrying thing that we noted was that crack is almost instantly addictive. In all the reports that we read and in all the evidence we considered, we have yet to discover a single case of a person who has recovered from being a crack addict. Although millions of pounds are spent on treatment and rehabilitation, there is no known researched treatment that actually works. That is the terrifying consequence of the crack epidemic.
Available widely in almost all the states of the United States, it is a drug that affects people of all social demeanours. A year ago I visited Milwaukee, a state in the mid-west which is known as the "dairy" state. It is not the kind of state that one would identify as having a great number of drug users. I had dinner there with a middle American family—in that mid-western state in the middle of America—and spoke with the son of the family, a young man with great promise. He had a brilliant career ahead of him, but the money that his professional parents had allocated for his future education at school and university was having to be used to help him get rid of his drug habit. The family have switched their resources from education to social services and to health to save their child from death.
The Minister was right when he said that the striking feature about crack is that it is so cheap. When the Committee visited America we saw crack changing hands for about $2 or $3 a piece. The hon. Member for Ryedale has already mentioned the effects of using crack—the chest congestion, brain seizures and the other illnesses that eventually lead to death. It is also right to point out the connection between crack and petty and violent crime. Last year 50 per cent. of all arrests in New York city related in some way to the crack epidemic, and 60 per cent. of those arrested in Washington DC were tested positively for the drug. Violent crime in Washington DC is closely connected with the drug and there is strong evidence to connect all 400 or so homicides in that city with the problem. Statistics show that 47 per cent. all users of the drug have been involved in a physical fight.
Hon. Members are right to draw attention to the link between the use of that drug and child abuse. The Committee's report mentions that we saw a young man aged about 12 being arrested because of crack. We have all read in the newspapers the harrowing story of the mother in Los Angeles who sold her daughter for the purpose of sexual abuse to satisfy her craving for the drug. Last year in America 375,000 babies were born with drug-related problems. The crack babies are causing massive problems to the American health service. The Committee mentions that $500,000 has been spent in trying to protect and to treat 11 babies suffering from crack.
610
The expression of grief that exists in America is reflected in a statement from a senior Congressman, Mr. Ron Dellums, who met my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms. Abbott) on a recent visit to Washington. He said that in America babies were having babies, that mothers were crying and children dying. We must not repeat that experience in Britain.
The American mistakes are there for all to see. We mention them not because we want to gloat, but because we want to learn from American experiences and failures. The first point to note is that the Americans underestimated the level of the crack addiction and the speed with which it would spread. The Committee mentions a previous visit to America in 1985 when the use of crack was not prevalent. Within four years, however, that drug has engulfed most young American people.
The Committee was concerned at the lack of co-ordination between the enforcement agencies. Thirty-seven federal agencies 40,000 local forces, the FBI, the CIA and the Drug Enforcement Agency are involved. That problem of co-ordination resulted in the President appointing a "drug czar" who is responsible for co-ordination, at a crucial executive level, of the war against crack. That appointment, however, came far too late.
Not enough money has been spent on demand reduction. In 1985, $950 million was spent on demand reduction, but $2,936 million was spent on supply reduction. That imbalance has not only affected speeches of hon. Members today, but the way in which the Select Committee report was written. The Committee also noted that America has not spent enough on the treatment and rehabilitation of those with problems.
We have seen the future in America and we do not like it. The Minister has already said that the situation here is getting progressively worse. He has already told us that, in 1987, there were 12 crack seizures in Britain. I am grateful to him for giving us the current figures. From information given to me in parliamentary answers it is clear that the crack addiction and supply is worse in certain areas. Up until October there were 48 seizures in the Metropolitan police area and that is a matter for concern. In Greater Manchester, there were seven seizures, in Merseyside, there were five, in the West Midlands, there were nine and in Avon and Somerset, there were nine. Even in places such as Nottinghamshire, there were seizures of crack, although I am happy to say that there were none in my home county of Leicestershire.
The value of the crack that was seized is also of interest. Although the Minister did not give us the latest figures, I know from parliamentary answers that in 1987, the street value of the crack that was seized in Britain was £800, which does not seem much, but by September 1989, the figure had reached £21,000. That may not seem a tremendously high figure, but it represents a 200-fold increase in two years, which is enough to make us feel extremely worried. Similarly, the amount of crack that has been seized by Customs has increased from 35 kg in 1984, to 309 kg, the figure that the Minister kindly gave us today.
I note the work that is being done by the ministerial group on the misuse of drugs, and my remarks on this are said in a friendly spirit. The Minister and I have been getting into a relationship that is affecting my political orientation. We seem to be having to agree on many issues.
Ms. Abbott: Shame.
Mr. Vaz: It is. We agreed on all the important issues and almost hugged each other during the passage of the Children Bill. I say to the Minister in all friendliness that we want to agree with the initiatives that he has taken. I have looked at the reply that he gave me only yesterday about the number of times that the ministerial group on the misuse of drugs has met. It may be as a result of the fact that the Minister was away from his portfolio at the Home Office and that he was at the Department of Health, that there does not seem to have been a tremendous increase in the number of times that the ministerial group has met. It has met 39 times since 1984. It met four times in 1984, six times in 1988 and six times in 1989. Is it a coincidence that it met previously on 16 October, but met this week only two days before this debate?
It is important that the group, which brings together senior Ministers, meets far more regularly. With the increase in seizures and other figures, I should have thought that there would be a corresponding increase in the number of meetings of the group. I take the Minister's point that there is no point in the group meeting just to have coffee and sandwiches, and to talk about the problems, and that we need effective action. I make the friendly suggestion that the group should meet more regularly.
The Government are not spending enough money on research. I had a reply recently from the Minister for Health who, in response to a question that I had tabled on whether the Home Office or any other Department was hoping to fund research into the patterns of use of cocaine and crack, said that she and the Home Office were "hoping to fund" a study that would cost around £300,000 over a three-year period. I am sorry that, because of constituency commitments, I cannot wait until the end of the debate and I apologise for that. However, I hope that when the Minister replies to the debate, he will tell us that it is not merely a matter of the Minister for Health "hoping" for that research, but that she is promising that there will be research.
There is a problem of co-ordination. The Metropolitan police central drug squad, 52 local police forces, various wings of the regional crime squad, the National Drugs Intelligence Unit and HM Customs and Excise are the principal agencies dealing with the problem. I do not wish to cast aspersions on a report that, in effect, I co-authored, but when I read it again after its publication, I wondered whether we were wrong not to have been more forceful in our suggestion that we should have a national enforcement agency to co-ordinate the various functions. I realise that that is one of the roles of the intelligence unit, in the sense that it gathers information, but I wonder whether we should have taken into account American experience and learnt from American mistakes. The Prime Minister has a long list of consultants. Perhaps we should have a drugs consultant at prime ministerial level, with the same high profile as the "drug czar" in the executive office of the American President.
Mr. John Greenway: The Select Committee report recognises the importance of the National Drug Intelligence Unit and its co-ordinator. I think that we went part of the way towards answering the hon. Gentleman's question in our recommendation that the national drugs intelligence co-ordinator should have stronger executive powers to call for intelligence and evidence from other police forces—powers which it does not yet have.
Mr. Vaz: The hon. Gentleman is right that we made that recommendation but the Government may wish to go a step further.
What is the solution to the problem? How can we learn from experience and reduce demand? The Minister made an able speech which contained a great deal of useful information. My criticism of it is that he spent the vast majority of his time outlining the problems. I believe that the hon. Member for Ryedale also touched on the fact that in a sense the Select Committee has done the same. We have spent far too little time talking about demand reduction and preventive action. We discuss the issue in a positive and constructive way but we do not say how we think the problem should be eliminated. Our primary task should be to take preventive action to eliminate the customer before the customer is eliminated by addiction. If one removes the market, one removes the ability to exploit people. Such action would immediately affect the profit made by those who sell drugs. It is to the victims that we should address ourselves. The bottom line is greed. People sell drugs at a profit because they want to satisfy their lust for money. We must eliminate the method by which people make those profits.
It is essential that the Government consider urgently the establishment of specialist crack lines. The Minister spoke of the crack hotline established by Dr. Gold and made available to the House the useful information to be obtained from the specialist cocaine line. I realise that drug helplines are widely publicised, but we should not wait until the problem reaches epidemic proportions in Britain as it has in America to establish more lines and target schools and colleges with their telephone numbers. It is important that young people in particular should be aware that they can ring up—that they can report to the relevant authorities the fact that they have been approached by people wishing to sell them drugs or seek help and medical assistance anonymously, which they could not if they went to their GP. The Government will then be able, at a stroke, to target where sales of crack are increasing.
We also need a sustained public awareness campaign. I welcome the Minister's commitment that an advertising campaign will be launched. I hope that he will take into account the information given and the concerns expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) and that he will seek to involve young people in the public awareness campaign. There is a view that if we discuss an illegal activity or one that is seen to be banned there is a risk that young people will automatically engage in it.
A similar argument was put forward by people who suggested that sex should be taught in schools. It was said that if young people were taught about sex they would want to indulge in various activities. The answer to the problem lies in telling young people the exact consequences. If we prepared a video that show'td the effects of crack and cocaine that have been described by me and other hon. Members, there would not be many drug-takers among our young people. The Minister will know from the effects of the AIDS awareness campaign that such a campain affects the way in which people behave.
I should like to see the Government doubling the amount that is currently spent on research. I know that £300,000 sounds a great deal but when compared to the amount being spent on the privatisation of water and other

613
nationalised industries, it is a small amount. Money spent on researching the health and welfare of our young people is money well spent.
We have to look at four local areas. First, we need to make sure that there is a teacher in every school who is properly trained to deal with drug issues. He should understand the problems arising from crack and be aware of the ways in which they can be dealt with. That could be done in the same way as teachers are designated in schools to deal with other socially-important problems. Secondly, initiatives must be publicised not just in schools and colleges of further education but in sports and leisure centres and youth clubs—places to which young people have ready access. Thirdly, the family is an important weapon in our campaign against crack, and parents should be given the information that they have not been given in the past. The workplace is the fourth area where we can gain by telling employers and by co-operating with trade unions in ensuring that information is readily available.
I should like to see the development of a local drug prevention panel in the same way as we have a crime prevention panel. It would contain the people that my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield mentioned—elected councillors, officials, representatives of the local education department and health authority and even people from the recreation and leisure departments of local councils. That is important.
We need more co-ordination. Regional crime squads are far too big to deal with the problem. I commend the statements by the chief constable of Nottinghamshire. Although the figures show that there were only two seizures of crack in the whole of Nottinghamshire in 1989, at least he realises that there is a potential problem. I should like to see county forces working together in a much more localised way. In the midlands I should like to see the chief constable of Leicestershire co-operating with the chief constables of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire to try to deal with the problem.
At the moment the Government budget for treatment and rehabilitation is £17·5 million. That budget should be increased. I should like to hear what the Minister has to say about acid house parties because I do not think that he mentioned them in his opening speech. That form of drug abuse results in our police officers chasing down the M1, and M6 and other motorways to try to head off revellers who are all the children of the revolution that has occurred over the last 10 years and who clutch their mobile phones trying to find the nearest acid house party. Let us hear some positive and constructive proposals from the Minister about the matter. Who knows, some of them may even live in Putney.
Our task is to break the necklace of terror that may strangle our society. It links drug abuse with violent crime and the destruction of families and communities and leads eventually to the breakdown of society and those essential services upon which we depend—the police, the Health Service and the education services. If the Minister and people ask, "Where are the resources to be found?", my reply is that they simply must be found. The price that we will have to pay if we do not do enough will be one which the American experience teaches us can neve be paid. I urge the Government to act, and to act now.
12.10 pm
Mr. Tim Rathbone: I am pleased to speak after the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz); I agree with much of what he said. His plea to the Government to increase the amount of money spent on research bears repeating. I echo to the skies his accent on the need to reduce demand. I shall take up three—I think minor—points in his speech. The hon. Gentleman should be wary about advocating the appointment of a "drugs czar" similar to Mr. Bennett in the United States. The truth is that, sadly, despite all his efforts, Mr. Bennett has not been able to co-ordinate Government policy and he has no co-ordinating function or power within the Cabinet. Newspaper reports say that he is already looking upon it as a lost war.
As I said during an intervention in the Minister's speech, I believe that the hon. Gentleman should be wary of advocating national telephone lines. The existence of local lines is more effective, not just because of the locality but because the people answering the calls know more accurately the problems of their area. However, I endorse his suggestion about local drugs panels. Such panels exist in many parts of the country. An excellent example can be found in my area of East Sussex. The East Sussex drugs advisory council is a good blueprint for the hon. Gentleman in setting up such a council in his area.
I welcome back to the Front Bench my hon. and learned Friend the Minister. As one of my hon. Friends pointed out, he is uniquely suited to supervise the co-ordination of the Government's activities. I welcome what must be his initiative in having this debate today. It is remarkable that this is the third major debate on drugs misuse that we have had in as little as four or five months. That shows the Government's and the House's concern about this enormously complicated and horrifyingly threatening problem.
Other hon. Members have identified various aspects of the problem and others were touched upon in recent debates. However, I should like to confine my remarks to three or four areas. I shall start by mentioning Colombia.
I was lucky enough to be a guest of the Colombian Government only a few weeks ago, and I went there specifically to study the problems of drug trafficking. The House and the Government should bear in mind certain factors when planning how to tackle drug trafficking from this part of the world. It is necessary to remind the House that Colombia is not an illegal drug-producing country; tragically, it is in the forefront of illegal drug production —that is processing—and trafficking. As we are reminded in our newspaper reports day by day and week by week, the violence, bombings, shootings and bribery are a threat to the Government of that extraordinarily beautiful country. It is a country with a proud record of 100 years of democracy, so this production and trafficking are a threat also to the continued proper operation of the judicial system.
I spoke in an intervention of the job being done by our drug liaison officers, and that applies throughout south America. Proper intelligence gathering is essential, both inside and outside countries. Such basic items as proper secure communications networks for the Government and the security forces are imperative. It is good to know that Britain is helping in the supply of such equipment, and that that equipment is much appreciated. I have never visited a country where, in every meeting that I had, with Ministers,

615
officials, politicians and business men, there was greater or more emphatic appreciation of what this country is doing to help that country in the task that it has set itself. Praise was heaped on the hard work and understanding of our ambassador to that country, Mr. Richard Neilson, and his staff. The depth of understanding that he has shown and the warmth of the relationship that he has established with his opposite numbers have helped us to help Colombia.
Intelligence is essential not only to helping the operation of the Colombian security forces, but to the international effort to fight narcotic traffickers. We have to bend our endeavours to interdict their drugs and confiscate their earnings along the long line of distribution from Colombia to the United States and into western Europe. There is admirable co-operation between forces. However, I ask my hon. and learned Friend the Minister to confirm that international agreements exist, particularly with all producer and transit countries, for the exchange of intelligence of all kinds as it bears on illegal drug trafficking, and especially of the agreements that exist between the security forces of the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia, including the CIA and the NKVD. The accent on the importance of security underlines those agreements, and we cannot re-accent it enough this morning.
I was glad of the previous Home Secretary's assurances that border inspections and immigration controls within Europe would continue to the extent needed to meet the drugs menace. I hope that my hon. and learned Friend the Minister will elaborate on his emphatic mention of this, just to confirm specifically that the position taken by the former Home Secretary still holds. It will become more and more important as the single European market becomes a fact, because sadly some European countries are less committed than others to the gathering of intelligence on drug trafficking and to taking action on the intelligence that is fed to them. They do themselves no service by such attitudes or inaction, but they also put the people of other European countries at risk.
Perhaps the efforts of our own Customs and police, the new initiatives by the Association of Chief Police Officers to improve co-operation and co-ordination between British police forces, the establishment of the first joint national investigative unit between the police and Customs, and the new Bill which seeks to improve international co-operation, will all help international pan-European action to cope with the threat from drugs in our continent.
Recently threats have been made to the Colombian judiciary. There is the threat by fear, so often referred to as the promise of lead, and the threat of bribery, which is referred to as the promise of gold. We provide Colombia with basic security equipment. I hope that we can also draw upon our considerable experience to offer and communicate basic advice to members of the judiciary and their families to help them to minimise their exposure to risk. It was tragic that a member of the judiciary was shot down on a street corner outside his house recently. He stood there at the same time every morning, waiting to be picked up by the same car. A knowledge of the most basic security or counter-terrorist activity might have saved his life.
I wonder whether there will be an opportunity for us to help the Colombian judiciary to do its job as well as possible in the difficult circumstances that it faces. We could offer advice and training in court administration,
616
criminal investigation and in prosecution and preparation. There may be room for initiatives from the Lord Chancellor's Department, from the Bar and from the Law Society. I would like the Minister to bear that in mind, even if he cannot give specific assurances on those matters, because he knows the law infinitely better than I do.
I am sure that such help from professionals to professionals would be much appreciated, and represent good value for effort and for money. I suggest that the British Council could provide a ready-made channel for such assistance.
Also, it is crucial that we do all we can to help Colombia in its Herculean task. There is always a risk that the time, effort and cost required may erode its national commitment to deal with the problem. We must minimise the risk of that happening, and we must get other countries to help.
Only yesterday we saw newspaper reports about 50 people who were killed in a bomb explosion in Bogota. It might be appropriate for the House to send a message of condolence to the families of those people who lost their lives, and our good wishes to General Maza Marquez, who is the chief of the Colombian forces who are responsible for fighting drug abuse and drug trafficking.
It is worrying that the cocaine barons feel that they can blackmail the Colombian Government and, at the moment, the Senate, to agree to a referendum on whether extradition should be disallowed, because it is difficult, if not impossible for politicians to stand up and give counter arguments.
Our activities are not confined to Colombia. We must continue to support United Nations' efforts to ratify the United Nations convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, and to seek ratification from other countries. We must continue to support United Nations' work through various agencies and the United Nations fund for drug abuse control, which is the agency that is most actively involved in the crop substitution programmes which are so important. Those agencies need and deserve extra resources, both from direct national support and through larger allocations from the United Nations budget. I sincerely hope that the Government will support such additional resources being made available, especially during the special General Assembly session on drugs next February.
The House may be interested to learn that, only yesterday, the Western European Union Assembly in Paris resolved unanimously that the supply of arms and industrial goods with military applications must he prevented, that this is essentially a Government responsibility, and that administrative and financial difficulties should not interfere in that responsibility because, as we all accept, internal and external security is the prime task of any Government.
In response to an intervention, my hon. and learned Friend the Minister drew attention to the work of the Pompidou group, which is presently under British chairmanship. It continues to work positively, although I have heard worrying reports that there may be dissent in the French Government about its future activities. I wonder whether one might call them jealous disagreements about to whom the Pompidou group and its activities should be reporting in the French Government—the President or the Prime Minister. It is all the sadder to hear such reports when we see in yesterday's The Times a minor headline:

617
"Crack becomes chic on the Paris Métro circuit".
That should bring back to everybody in France the importance of the Pompidou group's work. I ask my hon. and learned Friend the Minister, in conjunction with his colleagues in the Foreign Office, to wield whatever power and influence they can to ensure that the French Government maintain their commitment to the excellent work that the Pompidou group has done.
We must ensure ever greater vigilance regarding the destination and end use of exported armaments, which all too easily can stray to Narco terrorists, and of precursor chemicals, which are essential to the manufacture of cocaine. I welcome the Government's plans to do both of those things and to change the legislation where necessary. Without arms, the violent rule of drug barons cannot be maintained. Without the chemicals, much of the drugs they peddle cannot be produced.
Whatever we do to improve international controls, countries such as Colombia must still wage their own war. Their economies must be sustained to enable them to do that. By comparison with that of many other countries, Colombia's economy has been buoyant. Historically, it was based on gold, emeralds, rubber and coffee. More recently, it has had coal, a growth of tourism and increasing exports of flowers. It is now the world's second largest flower exporter. Nevertheless, the trading blocs of the developed world must try to expand their trade with Colombia and other developing countries in south America. The European Community and the United States must bend their energies to obtain co-operation from Brazil and other producers for a viable new coffee agreement. Without a strong economy, Colombia and other countries in south America cannot do their best in this war, which is crucial to us all.
These best efforts will not solve the world problem of illegal drugs without even greater energy and money being applied to reduce demand. It is interesting that President Barcos knows that, not least because he recognises a worrying growth of demand in his own country. We should not be tempted into the trap—people still are tempted into it—of dividing countries between producers and consumers, because the producers consume and the consumers produce. We in the developed world must appreciate that all our efforts to tackle the problem will be ineffective unless we can be sure that more people will not be attracted to drug misuse. I fear that President Bush did not show sufficient appreciation of this in his otherwise admirable anti-drug initiatives. It is to be hoped that the first international conference on demand reduction, which is to take place next April as an initiative of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and under the Government's sponsorship, will add greater urgency to prevention everywhere.
As the prevention effort increases, I draw the attention of the House to the uses that can be put of the assets that are confiscated as a result of preventive actions. As my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) said, there is an early-day motion on this matter which has 129 signatories to date. It suggests, as the Select Committee on Home Affairs endorses, that confiscated assets that were gained as a result of drug trafficking should be used to establish a central fund specifically to help finance schemes to reduce the demand for and the supply of illicit drugs. The motion requests Ministers to
618
make the necessary arrangements urgently. I hope that my hon. and learned Friend the Minister, as the co-ordinator of all of the Government's activities in this area, will bend his energies to that.
Unfortunately, as my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale said, some see the task of fighting the drugs misuse battle as so great that they have lapsed into the argument for legislation, to the consternation of many. It seems that the legalisation campaign has two main arguments. The first is economic in nature and was outlined in an excellently written but, I believe, completely falsely based article in The Economist recently. Broadly speaking, it is that drugs are dangerous and so is the illegality that surrounds them. In legitimate commerce their sale could be controlled, taxed and supervised. The dangers could be proclaimed on every packet. In this way drugs would poison fewer customers, kill fewer dealers, bribe fewer policemen and raise more public revenue. In summary, it is said that the cost of legalisation is less than that of prohibition.
The second argument is advanced by some producer countries and by some who are concerned with reaching addicts for treatment. According to this argument, our political, judicial and medical systems are being undermined by the illegal activities of the drug traffickers, who are merely meeting demand. I fear that these people have accepted the use of drugs as a permanent feature of society, with legalisation or decriminalisation as an alternative to prohibition, which they consider to be costly, ineffective and an obstacle to demand reduction.
The Select Committee's report and the tenor of comments made in the House this morning correctly argue in the opposite direction. The frustration of legalisation proponents, especially those dealing with the effects of drugs in the United States and countries such as Colombia, is understandable but their proposal is not. Aside from the array of legal questions which would accompany, if not prevent, implementation—the questions are myriad—the arguments are based on poorly founded assumptions. In consumer countries, for instance, users and addicts will continue to rob and steal to fund their habits. They will continue to depend on illicit dealers for the supply of drugs of higher potency than those administered in legal doses. In producer countries, neither price nor terrorism is likely to decrease. With their monopoly of production and distribution and the $6 billion profit that it brings yearly, the cartels will use their resources to maintain their control of the market and their profits as well.
I believe that legalisation would undermine the education efforts that are now under way to prevent drug misuse and would make drugs more attractive by removing the legal inhibition on those who do not like acting illegally.
The Home Affairs Committee report correctly states in paragraph 22:
"Even if legalisation were to affect at the margin the extent of criminal activity surrounding the drugs trade, it would almost certainly increase drug addiction and the social evils attendant upon it."
We should, as a House, this morning endorse one aspect, even if we endorse no other, of that report, and it is paragraph 28 which states:
"We therefore see effective law enforcement as a basic weapon in the reduction of supplies of drugs available on the streets and as an essential disincentive to those likely to trade in, sell and misuse drugs."

619
I endorse the report almost 100 per cent. My only rider is on the section relating to demand reduction and rehabilitation. Paragraph 169 states that
"it became clear that demand reduction and treatment and rehabilitation are of vital importance to the fight against drug misuse."
I endorse that 100 per cent. However, paragraph 175 refers to President Bush giving
"some indication of the requirements of the sort of comprehensive and co-ordinated demand reduction policy which we believe is urgently needed in the United Kingdom."
The report has it wrong.
The Bush Administration, in an attempt to contain the horrifying growth of drug misuse in that country, have launched a mammoth programme that is almost entirely concentrated on interdiction of drug trafficking. As the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) said, it pays far too little attention to the reduction of demand. It should be noted that the Bush Administration have replaced the Reagan Administration cuts in the Federal budget to fight drug misuse, but they have not yet replaced the Carter Administration cuts, so they are a long way removed from establishing the same sort of accent and financial support for the fight against drug misuse that were established by the Nixon Administration. We should not give a wrong impression, either to the United States or to ourselves, that we believe that sufficient is being done on either that side or this side of the Atlantic to reduce demand.
Mr. Nelson: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has done so much as chairman of the all-party drug misuse group to tackle these problems. Does he agree that one of the problems with demand reduction, both in the States and in this country, it that there is not wide enough understanding of what works? What is desperately needed, and it was recognised by the Home Affairs Committee, is more research. Perhaps that is something that the international drugs conference next April could start quickly. It should devote urgent funds and impose a short time scale for really good empirical and analytical studies of what works, so that the necessary funds can be applied in the most effective way.
Mr. Rathbone: I am immensely grateful to my hon. Friend and neighbour, who, with his normal perspicacity, has anticipated one of my closing remarks. It is essential that we build a better body of knowledge and understanding of what goes on in the minds of people who are tempted into drug misuse—through, among other things, more fundamental, frontier-breaking research into the genetic influences that bring about a propensity to misuse not only drugs but alcohol and other substances.
My hon. and learned Friend the Minister mentioned the life education centres established in Australia by the Rev. Noffs. Those centres have been emulated in various parts of this country, and, as my hon. and learned Friend knows, I have urged the Government to give far more support to this marvellous method of instilling—especially in young people—a better understanding of the values of good health. I refer hon. Members to our previous debate on this subject, in which I developed that view.
I fear that, whatever we do to try to stop drug trafficking and production, the continually changing patterns of drug misuse will circumvent any rules that we draw up. Misdirected human ingenuity will invent new drugs; misdeveloped natural resources will provide the raw materials. The development of cannabis, heroin, valium
620
and LSD will no doubt continue, as will the processing of crack from cocaine and—in a roughly equivalent process —the processing of amphetamines into ice, the newest drug from the west coast of the United States. In any event, we require a better understanding of the problem through better research and better health education, particularly among the young. We also need improved treatment, because we want to stop people from returning to the world of drug misues.
I have described an aspect of the battle against drug misuse that is neither glamorous nor the stuff of party political points. It is not likely to imbue members of any Government with a warm and successful feeling, but it is none the less the most essential part of our continuing task, and even our own Government must give it increasing emphasis. I am certain that, under the guiding hand of the new Minister in charge of Government co-ordination, they will do so.
12.42 pm
Mr. Tony Banks: I intend to adopt a somewhat different approach from that of other hon. Members. First, I shall direct my remarks towards the possible legalisation of certain drugs; secondly, I shall make an exceedingly brief speech. While the former may not commend itself to hon. Members, perhaps the latter will.
I do not accept the implication by the hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Rathbone) that the legalislation of certain drugs would necessarily lead to a progression to more dangerous drugs, any more than I believe that someone who drinks a glass of sherry at lunchtime ends up as an alcoholic. The central question is just how damaging drug taking is to health—and, of course, that depends very much on the drug that is taken.
Many—perhaps most—drugs are about as damaging to health as alcohol or nicotine, and it is probably indisputable that more people die of smoking-related diseases than of diseases related to the use, at least, of drugs. It could probably be argued that more die from the effects of criminal activities associated with the supply of and demand for drugs than from drug-taking itself.
Not all drugs are destructive of health. Marijuana cannot be classified with heroin, and cocaine derived from coca has been taken by Andean Indians for generations as a protection against cold and famine. The materials that are mixed with cocaine—for example, baking soda to produce crack—are the most dangerous element.
It is not desirable to use drugs. It is not particularly desirable, either, to over-use alcohol or to smoke. However, people do all three. Controls are needed, but at different levels. Control over demand as well as control over supply must be strict.
What concerns and alarms most people on both sides of the Atlantic is the criminal activity surrounding the use and supply of drugs rather than the damage that certain drugs can do to health. To treat all drugs in the same way is rather like treating low-alcohol beer as though it were neat alcohol. The Dutch have adopted a different approach. They deal with different drugs in a different way. They are selective. According to the statistics, few youngsters in Holland die of drug abuse, and hardly any of them contract AIDS after using infected needles.
Mr. Rathbone: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Banks: No. I said that I would make a short speech, and that is exactly what I intend to do.
I do not say that drug-taking should be made legal because I do not know enough about the subject. I read the article in The Economist and a previous series of articles that it carried. There have been articles on the subject in The Sunday Times, which I have also read. Neither of those newspapers is popular with hippies. The reports did not reflect a rabid, Left-wing, Socialist point of view. The case was well argued and the articles were written by responsible journalists. I ask the Government to consider some of the arguments that they advanced and to acknowledge the growing concern that we are not dealing effectively with the problem.
I hope that the Minister will consult scientists, psychiatrists social workers, the police and doctors and obtain their views about the problem. If we are not tackling it succesfully, should there not be an objective, impartial assessment of drug taking, especially of soft drugs? The case should be put before Parliament when all the facts can be given. If the evidence clearly suggested that we must prohibit the use of all drugs and criminalise the supply and use of all drugs, I should be prepared to accept the evidence. We should not adopt the single approach that has been advocated so far in the debate. There should be a broader assessment of the problem so that the evidence can be put before those of us who still remain to be convinced.
12.48 pm
Mr. Chris Butler: I apologise in advance for the fact that I shall have to leave the House before the end of the debate in order to keep an important constituency engagement. Unfortunately, the Government have not yet spent the money that they have announced they intend to spend on the improvements to the M1 and M6, which would have enabled me to reach my constituency in good time after the debate had ended.
Once upon a time the United Kingdom suffered a severe balance of payments problem and resorted to skulduggery of a dubious moral nature to cure it. That problem concerned China. In 1729, the Emperor of China, in an early attempt at narcotics control, banned the sale and smoking of opium. In 1729 the British merchants were importing about 200 chests of opium into China a year. After that date the British, aided by the United States, drove the opium trade until 1860, when opium imports reached 60,000 chests per year.
At about that time the balance of payments began to swing back in favour of the United Kingdom. Inscrutably, the Chinese complained about that because in return for their silks they were getting a drug-addicted population. We retaliated by engaging in two wars against them, killing as many of them as we could, beating them and forcing them to legalise the trade in and consumption of opium. We also forced them to discontinue the use of the word "barbarian" to label those blessed western people who had introduced the trade to them and addicted such a large proportion of their population.
The interesting thing about this is that for 30 years after the legalisation of opium in China, opium imports rose rapidly. Legalisation did not undercut the market. Since then the United States and the United Kingdom have been reaping the whirlwind of their misdeeds. We heard earlier about how the countries that we used to regard as
622
supplying countries have become consuming countries themselves, feeding on their own poison. The potted history that I have given shows that legalisation, argued for so seductively by experts of both the Left and the Right, does not work. In my view, it would lead only to an increase in drugs abuse, and the state having to pick up the cost of broken lives and broken families. If one country legalised drugs before others, there would be a massive increase in drug abuse in that country as seedy junkies from all over the world congregated like flies to a honeypot—
Mr. Tony Banks: Or like Members of Parliament.
Mr. Butler: The current debate about drug abuse seems to divide people into two factions—the decriminalisers and the enforcers. However, enforcement alone is not the answer because of the enormous numbers of people who are already taking drugs and because of the enormous profits that are made from the drugs trade. Those profits would increase if the drug was made more scarce.
Even in the USSR, with all the totalitarian instruments at its disposal, there are 40,000 registered drug addicts in Moscow alone. It is estimated that there are 300,000 drug abusers in the United Kingdom. If we were to arrest them all tomorrow, they would fill our gaols six times over. The drug enforcement agencies in New York last year arrested 90,000 people. Goodness knows how the criminal justice system there deals with all of them.
Enforcement alone cannot be the only answer and legalisation does not work. However, as I tried to develop in the debate on 9 June this year, there may be a third possibility. If complete prohibition and liberal availability do not work, the controlled availability that we had with heroin until the 1960s might be made to work again, at least for heroin. Until the 1960s there were only 500 heroin addicts in this country, compared with what was already a complete disaster in the United States in terms of the number of heroin addicts.
However, if controlled availability is to work, it will need both carrots and sticks. The carrot would be a positive offer of controlled unadulterated drugs for those addicts currently using the illicit market and alienated from the drugs agencies that already exist. The stick would be even more rigorous enforcement of those users—and even more, the pushers—who still remain in the illicit market. The law and the community would need to be persuaded of the advantage of forcing drug users into a controlled space.
Mr. Mellor: When we tried that in the late 1950s there was a haemorrhage of drugs from the so-called licit market —those who had the drugs prescribed to them by doctors —on to the illicit market. That is the inevitable consequence of making drugs available under such circumstances.
Mr. Butler: My hon. and learned Friend was unable to be present on 9 June when I dealt with that particular point. I do not want to be diverted on to that argument now. There was an illicit supply of drugs to the United States when some dubious doctors over-prescribed. I do not believe that my suggestion would necessarily lead to such dubious doctors behaving as they did in the 1950s. That problem could have been solved, but it was decided that many of the drug services available at that time should

623
be withdrawn. That decision forced the drug-using community into the black market. Perhaps my hon. and learned Friend could look at my contribution on 9 June.
In 1987 a drug watch centre was founded in Chester by a young barrister, Brendan Anderson. It has proved to be extremely successful. The police admit that Chester has a deep-rooted heroin problem. The aid from a spectrum of voluntary organisations and the backing from local industry has enabled the drug watch team to act as a warning beacon to the community of the dangers of drug use and of pushing. It encourages public assistance to the authorities in detaining those who push drugs in the community. That centre is almost an extension of the neighbourhood watch concept. It makes the community alert to the dangers of drugs and it makes it more difficult for pushers to operate. It has raised a lot of money and has recycled it into educational projects against drugs. It has also opened a telephone line through which information can be passed confidentially on a 24-hour basis to the drug squad.
The drug watch concept is slowly spreading. I initiated one in Warrington, which is under the chairmanship of Mrs. Lucy Morris. I hope that those centres will spread further and I hope that the Home Office will encourage that trend by giving guidance to those new organisations and perhaps a small amount of seed-corn money to help them set up.
Drug watch effectively means that the problem cannot be swept under the carpet. That must not happen because the problem, already horrifying, is getting worse. There are already 300,000 drug abusers in Britain. Seizures of cannabis by weight went up by a factor of three last year although I accept that that might be due to more rigorous enforcement. Heroin addiction seems to have reached a plateau, although a distressing one. We have all heard of the large increases in the seizures of cocaine by Customs and Excise, but that must be related to the increased imports that are getting through. We have also heard of the great increases in the number of crack seizures, a large number of them in my general region of Greater Manchester and Merseyside. Those areas, apart from metropolitan London, are particularly badly affected.
The use of drugs seems to correlate with the crime wave that we have recently experienced. Of the drug addicts and offenders arrested in Cheshire 79 per cent. of them already had a conviction for some other offence. One third of prisoners on remand are cocaine and heroin users. If crack takes off we must beware. This year parts of Miami experienced a 30 per cent. increase in robberies. The local police blamed crack and the "rob till you drop" syndrome. Some of those guys are so desperate that they will engage in 15 or more robberies and will then race back in between to get more crack.
Given that general situation it is remarkable that people still say that it cannot happen here. Nothing is more conducive to the spread of the problem than the attitude, "Sweep it under the carpet. Don't talk to the children about it." How wrong can one be!
Experts in the United States and in the United Kingdom now agree that preventive education must play an important role, but education is not the responsibility only of the state. The most important vehicle for education is the family. Dr. Maura Daly, senior policy analyst on the drug abuse prevention staff of the United States Department of Education says that the number one factor preventing drug abuse are familial, community and
624
religious values. The Hazelden Foundation has found that one of the most important factors in keeping children off drugs is the amount of concern that they believe that their parents would feel if they were taking drugs. That is a comfort to those parents who believe that all their words go in one ear and out the other. Their words do sink in and do make a difference. The genteel approach of believing that we must not talk about something nasty to the children simply does not help.
We have as a warning the experience of the United States where it was believed for many years, "It can't happen here." In 1982, the Scientific American said:
"Use of cocaine is probably no more addicting than eating peanuts or potato chips."
Americans told themselves that and many of them believed their own garbage. The problem was that it takes a relatively long time to become addicted to cocaine—up to 18 months—and by the time that the Americans found that out, there were 12 million regular users of cocaine in the United States who had a bit of a problem, to say the least.
Crack was unknown four years ago. It is far more addictive than cocaine; 75 per cent. of users become addicted after the third smoke and there is no known cure. In 1986, many Americans outside New York were saying, "Those crazy New Yorkers with their funny accents are all nuts. Crack will never come out of the ghetto." It is now the major drug of abuse in 49 out of 50 American states.
The hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) took the line that drug abuse can be correlated with deprivation, but that is not true of crack. Bob Stutman of the drug enforcement agency, when speaking to the Association of Chief Police Officers, emphasised that crack was now a major drug of abuse in the heart of conservative middle America. He said that it affected rich, poor and in-between, that it had left the ghetto in the United States and that it had gone on to suburban America.
Road blocks were set up in the inner city and cars were stopped when going in. Last year, 1,000 cars were seized in seven months. Bob Stutman said that 80 per cent. of the 1,000 cars were driven by white kids from the nice suburbs who were coming in to buy crack and who had taken their daddy's car. Crack is the equal opportunity drug which affects all classes, all races and, as we have heard, women as much as men. That is sad because one of the last vestiges of family life in the American inner cities depends on the matriarchal element and Americans are now finding that those last vestiges are disappearing as a result of the violence and the personality changes that crack causes to its victims.
My mathematics is not very good, but I made a quick calculation. I reckon that seizures of crack in this country increased by 450 to 500 per cent. this year compared with last. I heard experts for whom I had considerable regard say recently on television that we should not sensationalise the issue of crack because we might add glamour to it and therefore, increase usage. However, the history of the United States shows that the Americans severely underplayed the issue.
Bob Stutman gave a ringing end to this story in his speech to the chief police officers. I must add, incidentally, that I found it hard to obtain a copy of his speech because the Association of Chief Police Officers wanted to sweep it under the carpet, but I managed eventually to arrange for a copy to be placed in the Library and I urge all hon. Members to read it. Stutman warns:

625
"I will personally guarantee you that two years from now you will have a serious drug problem because we are so saturated in the United States with cocaine, there ain't enough noses left to use the cocaine that's coming in. It's got to go somewhere and where it's coming is right here."
1.5 pm
Mr. Geraint Howells: Hon. Members on both sides of the House listened with interest to the Minister, who rightly recounted his own experiences and told us of his visits to south America and elsewhere. The story that he told was sad and sombre and, unfortunately, true. We wonder whether the problem is getting out of hand in many parts of the world, and we realise that many harsh decisions will have to be made to combat drug misuse.
In my view, the situation is very grim in this country as well. I am delighted that hon. Members on both sides of the House are united in their determination to try to conquer drug misuse. If we all unite—Government, people and especially parents—we can make a significant effort to put an end to drug misuse by the early 1990s.
I shall concentrate on three of the key issues in the United Kingdom, although I know that there are many more. The first is information. In only a very few places are any professional attempts made to collect information about drug misuse. The Government's information comes from convictions and referrals to hospitals, but those figures are only the tip of the iceberg. We need databases in every area so that policy decisions can be based on up-to-date information. We need more schemes whereby general practitioners, voluntary agencies, the police and others combine to provide information to a central source. Where that happens, the provision of services is more cost-effective and more effective in saving lives.
Another of the key issues concerns education support grants. We must ensure that young people are given the message that they must say no to drugs. It is vital that local authorities should continue to employ teachers to train others to carry the message into schools and youth clubs. In the past 10 or 15 years we have learnt much from our campaign to persuade youngsters to give up smoking. It would be interesting to find out how many people in Britain do not start smoking at an early age. I believe that eventually youngsters will respond in the same way to the campaign against drugs.
Local authorities are struggling to retain staff that they appointed three years ago because the Department of Education and Science has reduced its grant from 75 per cent. to 50 per cent. Although fourth-year funding continues at that reduced rate, no commitment to fifth-year funding has been forthcoming from the Government. That is a danger. If the Government are serious about this matter, proper funding should be given as soon as possible.
My third key issue is the National Health Service review. Some of the Government's proposals will lead to a poor deal for drug users. Will general practitioners want to take on drug users? Such people take up much time and form a high HIV risk group. They also cost the National Health Service a gread deal.
If hospitals become self-governing, what will happen to specialised services? Will they be provided in only a few locations or not at all? Drug budgets will be formulated on
626
basic list prices, but an addict may need a more effective option because of his addiction. He may not get it if the doctor has to watch the local family practitioner committee's ability to reimburse pharmacists.
I shall now deal with HIV and AIDS. The latest statistics show that a growing number of intravenous drug users are HIV-positive. Department of Health figures show that, of the 11,218 HIV cases, 1,678 are intravenous drug abusers. In Thailand, in 1987, 1 per cent. of drug users were HIV-positive. Three years on that has risen to 40 per cent. of drug users. I have been told that by many general practitioners that in terms of drug abuse the United Kingdom is sitting on a time bomb and that the biggest problem is in Scotland. The Government must act quickly and get away from representing AIDS as a homosexual problem. They must recognise the link between drug users and the heterosexual community.
All pilot needle exchange schemes have been successful and such schemes reduce the spread of diseases and especially HIV. They also lead to contact between the agencies and drug misusers, uncover hidden problems, and lead to better habits. However, in the United Kingdom, only 1 million needles are exchanged each year and there are 27 million injections. That means that a ninefold increase in needle availability is needed to avoid needle reuse. The Government should increase funding in order to extend needle exchange schemes into every area.
My party recognises the extent of the problem, but the Government do not even begin to comprehend it. I said earlier that we are sitting on a time bomb. I am afraid that the fuse has almost burned out and that the impact is just about to hit us. We need more information and better education for our children. The Government must not go ahead with the National Health Service review. We must recognise that the AIDS crisis will affect everyone. We need a Government who will act, and act now, on the recommendations of the Select Committee. I am grateful to members of the Committee for their recommendations. The Government must give extra funding wherever it is required in order to combat drug misuse.
1.13 pm
Mr. Steve Norris: It is always a pleasure to take part in packed House debates on a Friday morning when the number of hon. Members in the Chamber is exceeded by the number of attendants, never mind the number of visitors in the Strangers' Gallery. The debate has the intimacy of an Adjournment debate, but it is none the worse for that except that we are debating a most important subject. I listened to every word of the debate, and it is a great shame that many other colleagues are not here. I do not blame them for not wanting to make a contribution but they should listen to the debate and get a flavour of the extent and nature of the problem in the United Kingdom. Every speaker, including the hon. Member for Ceredigion and Pembroke, North (Mr. Howells)—but particularly the two Front-Bench spokesmen—have shown a degree of unanimity with just a few understandable differences of view that are to be expected. They have shown one of the few shafts of light in this whole scenario by their willingness to be broad-minded, accept suggestions and agree that this is an issue that will require funding and intensive investment in our community if we are to crack the problem.

627
Unlike the Select Committee, I did not go the United States in the summer to look particularly at drugs. However, I did go because, as the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) mentioned in his speech, between being the hon. Member for Oxford, East and then the hon. Member for Epping Forest—in the period that we actors call resting—I formed an organisation called Crime Concern which is the national crime prevention body that specialises in trying to encourage voluntary crime prevention. We invited the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz) to become a member of the advisory board, and I am delighted that he accepted. Conservative Members have a special affection for the hon. Gentleman for reasons unassociated with any of his parliamentary qualities.
The Crime Concern study involved visiting the National Crime Prevention Council in Washington with which we went on visits in Washington, Baltimore and elsewhere to see how the United States is combating crime by crime prevention initiatives in the community. Incidentally, this is now an even lonelier debate than an Adjournment debate.
Mrs. Llin Golding: That is no reflection on the quality of the speech.
Mr. Norris: I am grateful to the hon. Lady. I do not know whether it is a rule in the House that the quality of the speech must always be in inverse proportion to the number of people listening to it. That may be the case.
In the United Kingdom we are worried about shoplifting and theft from vehicles, but in the United States people are worried about death from drugs and guns. Their prevention activity is devoted to trying to stem a wave that seems–as many hon. Members have pointed out—to have got completely out of control. In America there is a vivid poster showing a family of young black children taking a coffin down the church steps after they have been to a funeral service. The banner underneath says, "This poster is brought to you by a young drug abuser with a gun". That sums up the terror and hopelessness of the position there.
Drugs are a problem not merely of abuse by individuals, but because of their relationship to crime and criminality. In the great trinity of supply, demand and price, the greatest is demand. The need to do something about supply is important, and I agree with my hon. and learned Friend that the need to police borders reinforces the need to regard with caution some of the more optimistic assumptions about 1992 and the abolition of frontiers. There may be a place for grower subsidies in south America, but I am cynical about anything that we can do in that area. In view of the scale of the economy of drug production in south America, anything that we could do would be dwarfed by the vast national budget-style scale of the economy there. We have to concentrate on what flows from restricting demand—a reduction in the price, to drive the coca farmer to look for a more suitable form of agricultural lifestyle.
If reducing demand is the key to our success, how do we do it? I do not believe—and this stems from the experience that we have had in looking with Crime Concern at work with young people—that we have had anything like enough investment in the young people who are the vulnerable audience for drugs and crime. The peak age of offending was, until recently, 14 for females and 15 for
628
males. That is not among youth offenders but among all offenders. It is a tragedy that, because of the changes in the cautioning system, the figure has risen to 18 for both sexes.
That statistic shows where the pressure has to go. Simply to talk in numbers of policemen, courts, sentencing and all the traditional vocabulary—often uttered stridently by my hon. Friends—is to have an inadequate picture of the solution. We have to do a great deal of work with young people to change their attitudes, and to do something about their approach to each other. Both my hon. and learned Friend the Minister and the hon. Member for Huddersfield spoke about the importance of trying to engender an atmosphere in which young people simply see drugs as past—not hip, not funny, not clever and not smart any more. That is the kind of image of drugs that we shall have to create if we are to do something about the problem.
I am concerned by the comment of the hon. Member for Huddersfield that it is merely a problem of poverty. I may be doing him an injustice because he did not say quite that, but he did try to establish a link between income and social poverty. Sadly, the truth is closer to what my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington, South (Mr. Butler) adduced, which is that drug crime spans all of the economic spectrum. It is perhaps identified by an absence of parental interest and involvement in the family, whether that is at the level of the very rich—the brats taking cocaine—or the very poor over whom there is little parental influence.
We need a partnership not just with the conventional social agencies and the Department of Education and Science but, as the hon. Member for Huddersfield said, with the local authorities. We cannot deal with this without the help of the local authorities. They are a vital force, and we should be engaging them directly, as we engaged them in preventing crime, to do something about the problem in their communities. There must be an immense collaborative effort, and I should like to see a great deal more effort and money being put into stimulating measures for young people, in the community and by the community, to do something about the problem.
We have not said much about alcohol misuse, but that is clearly germane to the subject. That, drug misuse and football violence are not capable of solution by situational means. It is not a question of locks, bars, bolts or policemen at every corner. The problems can be resolved only by social intervention, by social change that brings about different attitudes in the minds of the young and the potential drug abuser and offender.
I am a trustee of the Broadway Foundation, which runs a treatment centre for those who are victims of drug and alcohol abuse. As such, it receives almost no funding from the health authorities or the Government. It receives a little, but remarkably little, and that is a lacuna in our provision. In 1986, the Social Services Committee examined not the criminal background to drug misuse but the medical impact of it. With that Select Committee I went to a number of hospitals and spoke to a number of experts. I found it extraordinarily moving that it is very easy to get off drugs. It is simply not the dreadful, appalling year-long experience of banging one's head against a padded wall in a cell that it is sometimes portrayed as being.
Detoxification, even after years of heroin abuse, can take weeks and sometimes days. However, if one simply

629
returns people to the same environment after taking the drugs from their bodies, to the same friends, pubs and life of inactivity, they will be abusing drugs again within days. One has done nothing for them other than perhaps giving them a temporary respite—prolonging their life but precious little else.
Clearly we need to invest more heavily in genuinely detoxifying abusers and making a permanent alteration in their lifestyle. There are some simple ways in which we can do that—for example, by providing housing, good social conditions, and finding them jobs. Those are all important, but high on the list must be a recognition of the importance of in-depth treatment centres, such as the Broadway Foundation. Then we can give people, regardless of income, therapy over a period of months, which will give them back their self-respect and make them realise that they can be individuals within the community and that they do not need the crutch of drugs. If we bear that in mind, we will do a great service in the community.
In his opening speech, my hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State said that he was willing to listen to almost any initiatives and that he acknowledged the scale and extent of the problem. It is impossible to underestimate the scale of the problem in society. I know that my hon. and learned Friend meant what he said, and I hope that he will bear in mind the importance of intensive therapy in the rehabilitation of drug abusers. Then we will be able to assist in the process of converting a whole section of the community away from a regard for drugs and towards a more healthy attitude to life.
1.32 pm
Ms. Diane Abbott: Few subjects are more frightening or more emotive than drug abuse. Those hon. Members who have had the opportunity to travel to America, and to talk to community leaders, legislators and politicians there, know that drugs, and the social problems that they cause, have forced themselves to the top of the political agenda. In New York, Washington and other inner cities, drug abuse and the associated criminal problems are threatening a mini holocaust to those communities.
Earlier contributors to the debate have mentioned the problems of violence, crime and the particular threat that drugs pose to young people as consumers and mini entrepreneurs. The most upsetting and frightening feature of the current wave of drug abuse in the United States is the way that drugs are eating away at, and destroying, the family and the social structure. One lesson that we can learn from the American experience is that the Government and the politicians should not leave their actions too late. The clock is ticking away.
However, there is also a danger of arousing too much hysteria or of myth-making, and that stops people getting to grips with the real issue.
British cities will not face the same problems of guns and shootings in five or 10 years' time, as American cities do, simply because Britain has different gun controls and laws. However, the economic devastation wrought by drugs is a threat to Britain.
No group of people are more fearful about the problem, or more anxious to know what the Government intend to do, than those who live and work in the inner
630
cities. If drugs and drug abuse is a rifle pointed at society, it is pointed directly at inner-city communities. Such communities have a vested interest in effective Government action against this scourge. I think, therefore, that I speak for everybody in the community that I represent, and many others in inner cities elsewhere in the country, when I say that we need a war on drugs that enlists and involves the community, not one which leaves the community feeling that it is under threat and being alienated. It must be recognised that an effective war has to move away from the myths and deal with the often frightening realities.
We have had much sensational coverage in the newspapers during the past couple of years of yardies, the so-called black mafia who control the drug trade in Britain. There is no doubt that there are people of Jamaican origin who are involved, just as there are people of all other communities involved in the trade. I speak on behalf of the whole Jamaican community here and abroad when I say that we resent strongly the sensationalist and exaggerated reports which imply that there is a Jamaican mafia which provided the key actors in the drug trade. That is a slur on millions of law-abiding Jamaicans here and abroad. Most are law abiding and want to be involved in the fight against drugs. We resent the smears against our community.
In the debate on drug misuse, there is often a suggestion or inference that the problem is to do with race and involves black communities. Crack knows no colour. It and other drugs are equal opportunities scourges. They hit high and low, regardless of colour, gender or class.
My community wants an effective war on drugs. We have to put the issue in its social and economic context. If the American experience has shown only one thing, it is that a way against drugs should not be solely a matter of law enforcement. Law enforcement plays a key role, but any war on drugs that is perceived solely as a law enforcement exercise cannot succeed. Rather it will lead to escalation, money and men being poured in to solve the problem, but still families and communities being devastated.
There is no doubt that, if we are to have a serious war on drugs, we must attack it on several fronts. We must tackle money laundering, as the Select Committee on Home Affairs has done so ably in its report. I was in the United States a few months ago talking to bankers about many subjects, and money laundering by drug barons arose. The regulatory authorities there said that, when they were first asked to seek records and interfere with the workings of the banking system, they were reluctant. One said that, when he spent time living and working in Florida near Miami, which is one of the centres of the drug trade, and he saw the devastation being wrought by the drug trade, especially among young people, black and white, and he walked into banks where they could not close the safe doors because so much money which could not be accounted for was piled into them, he saw in moral and community terms that the banks had to involve themselves in regulation to stop laundering. If the drug traders cannot bank their profits or use them, that must be an important component of the war against drugs. I urge swift and effective action by the Government and regulatory bodies on money laundering.
We need also real research into patterns of drug abuse and the changes that take place. It is not enough to peddle myths or anecdotes. It is not sufficient to talk of where the

631
problems might be or where those involved might be found. Much more research is needed. I join those of my hon. Friends who have called for a considerable increase in the moneys that are devoted to research. We must obtain the necessary information if we are to move effectively against drug trafficking and drug misuse. At present, the information is incomplete, patchy and distorted. It does not provide the base for effective political and social action. We need better co-ordination and an end to the rivalry between the police and the Customs and Excise.
Above all, we must improve education. Education must not be confined to glossy and expensive poster campaigns. If we want effective education against drug abuse, we must consider who is best placed to provide it. There is no doubt that young people throughout the world in all strata of society are somewhat opposed to suggestions. Education from some quarters can be rather less acceptable to them than from others. If we are serious about producing information, educating our young people and thereby changing the opinion of young people towards drugs, we must be clear and creative when considering the way in which education programmes are organised and who we use to reach young people.
We must bear in mind the role of the youth service generally. There is the role of the Churches, and not only the Anglican and the Catholic Churches. Some of the smaller Churches, such as the Pentecostal Church, have tremendous force for good in the inner cities. If the Government are serious about dealing with drug abuse and providing education, they should be thinking of the education and information packages which can be made available beyond formal avenues to community organisations. These will include the Churches, local groups, tenants' associations, community groups, domino clubs and youth clubs. As I have said, an education programme needs to be more than an expensive poster campaign. It must begin at the grass roots and work upwards. People whom young people respect, must be used and they must give them the information that they need.
It is necessary to work with local authorities in the housing sector. There is no doubt that boarded-up flats and derelict accommodation in estates are being used by some of those who are involved in the drugs trade. Only if we have the closest co-operation with local authorities and housing associations can we make a co-ordinated attempt to root out some of the activity that is going on in estates.
There must be support for clinics and rehabilitation centres, and financial support for the clinics, voluntary groups and rehabilitation centres that are working with drug abusers to rehabilitate them and bring them back into the community. A strategy against drugs must not he restricted to law enforcement and detoxifying the individual. It must detoxify the community and take away the structures, attitudes and ignorance on which drug abuse feeds. A genuine war against drugs would not merely detoxify individuals.
The issue must be seen in the broadest possible context. No one pretends that poverty causes drug abuse. There are millions of poor people who do not touch drugs and who would not dream of doing so. Undoubtedly where there is drug abuse, poverty and despair, there is the recipe for a particular type of social and cultural holocaust. The importance of dealing with the wider issues of poverty and unemployment in our community cannot be overstressed if we are serious about fighting drugs.
632
We have read about sending arms and money into Colombia and other countries. If we are serious about stopping Third world countries such as Colombia in central America and the Caribbean from growing drugs as a cash crop, whether they be cocaine or marijuana, we must examine generally our relations with these countries and the terms of trade. How can we say to a Colombian peasant, when the price of coffee has dropped through the floor, that we intend to take his livelihood from him? If we are serious about discouraging such countries from trading illegally in drugs, we must study our terms of trade, commodity prices and how we can help to support their economic infrastructures. It is not enough to go in with arms and threats.
The inner cities want and would welcome a war against drugs. However, we also want a war against poverty and a war against hopelessness. Drugs, poverty arid hopelessness are the Three Horsemen of the Apocalypse. We want a war against drugs somewhat different from that suggested by Conservative Members, who merely talk about law enforcement and more police. We want a war against drugs in which the grandparents are the guerillas, the churchgoers the commandos and the whole community the ground troops. We want an effective war against drugs that enlists the help of the community in the interests of the community. We do not want a Government who engage in rhetoric and will not make available the necessary resources. We do not want a Government who isolate the law enforcement problem and refuse to consider the wider social problem.
Above all, the inner cities want a war against drugs because, by looking across the Atlantic to the United States, we recognise that the survival of our inner-city communities depends on an effective war being waged now. The time to start that war is not a minute too soon.
1.42 pm
Mr. Edward Leigh: I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak in this debate.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): Order. Has the hon. Gentleman read the motion before the House?
Mr. Leigh: Yes, indeed I have. I also listened with great care to the opening speech of my hon. and learned Friend the Minister. I attended the whole of our debate in June on the subject. They are important matters and all hon. Members should be prepared to take an interest in them and speak in our debates. As the previous Home Secretary said, we are facing an epidemic of drugs. The Government must be prepared to take urgent action. There is no more important threat to our society than that posed by drugs.
As I said during our debate in June—[Interruption.] If the hon. Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn) would just sit and listen rather than murmur from a sedentary position—and he has just come into the Chamber—he might hear something. I have taken an interest in these matters for some time. It is too important a matter for mere party politics. We should take these matters seriously.
As I said during our debate in June, we canot consider the problem from an isolated viewpoint. The drugs barons have wielded such power in the economies of south America that they are almost as powerful as the Government agencies. We are indebted to my hon. and

633
learned Friend for his work in alerting this House and the nation to the threat to western society posed by the enormous power wielded by the drugs barons. There is a message for us all. Why is that power wielded? Why is there an impetus towards drugs traffic? Is it because there is just an appalling imbalance in terms of poverty—
Ms. Abbott: I am very interested in what the hon. Gentleman has to say, but there is an interesting Adjournment debate to follow this debate. As we have already had a very good debate on this issue, we do not want to be unduly delayed in reaching the Adjournment debate.
Mr. Leigh: I am sure that the hon. Lady would like to speak on many issues, but our present debate is due to continue until 2.30 pm, and it is the right of every hon. Member to take part in it.
We must establish what resources we in the western democracies are prepared to give Latin-American Governments, for there is ample evidence that they have not the resources to deal with the problem unaided. As relatively wealthy nations, we must be prepared to make sacrifices to help them.
Mr. Sheerman: Early in my own speech, I said that it was the responsibility of western nations to provide concrete help for South American peasants who have no alternative to coca-growing, and my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms. Abbott) agreed. Dramatic action is needed, over and above what the Select Committee recommended. We put only £200,000 into the United Nations fund for international aid, and the entire overseas aid budget for South America consists of some £12 million for bilateral aid. Is it not about time that the Government took the matter seriously, and did something to help the South American peasants?
Mr. Leigh: The hon. Gentleman, who probably considers me to be on the Centre-Right of my party, may be surprised to learn that I have long been an enthusiast for overseas aid. I am prepared to accept that the Government could perhaps do more on that immensely important front, although I do not think that we should be ashamed of our record in any respect: Governments must always balance resources and priorities, and there are urgent priorities in our own country.
I do not believe that the problem of drug misuse can be dealt with simply by law and order methods. We must view it in two fundamental ways. First, we must ask ourselves what economic impetus has allowed this trade to grow up in relatively under-developed countries. Are we prepared to help those countries to meet the threat, as I believe we must—and as the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) recommended in what I considered a fair and worthwhile intervention? Secondly, we cannot bury the problem in our own minds, assuming that tougher deterrent sentences will deal with the relatively small minority who have been misled by drug pushers. Although tougher sentences may well play a part in solving the problem, I feel that it goes far deeper than that: it involves society as a whole.
I strongly believe that the way in which our welfare system has sometimes been constructed—with the best of
634
intentions—has sometimes given impetus to a mechanism that has broken down certain parts of society and created the conditions in which drugs can be introduced. The problem is much more serious in America, where the gearing of the social security system has destroyed society's ability to resist the appalling pressures exerted by the drug trade—which is itself based on the economic imbalance between the developed and the underdeveloped worlds.
We cannot think of this as a Government problem. It is a problem for all of us. Nor can we see it as a south American problem, for it is a world problem. Our approach must be three-pronged: we can consider both the possibility of tougher deterrent sentences and the help that we may be able to give south American countries, but we must also look to our social security system and ask ourselves whether, now and in the past, we have made the right decisions to ensure that society has the strength to resist such a major threat.
1.49 pm
Mr. Mellor rose—
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): Does the Minister have the leave of the House to speak again? Mr. Mellor.
Mr. Mellor: I am grateful to the House for giving me leave to respond to some of the points that have been made in the debate. I have sat through all but a few minutes of what I found to be a thoroughly enjoyable debate. Inevitably, and rightly, there has been some sharp criticism. Hon. Members have suggested that there is room for improvement in the Government's response to the problem. However, the interesting and significant factor in the debate has been the broad measure of agreement on how to tackle it.
There was nothing in the speech of the hon. Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms. Abbott) with which I could not wholeheartedly agree. I do not know whether that shocks and dismays the hon. Lady, but she was absolutely right about the threat that drug-taking poses for the inner cities and to say that there is no escape from the problem in the law and order route. There have to be strict law and order policies to deal with drugs, as the hon. Lady acknowledged, but if we are to beat the problem we have to educate people and build up people's resistance to the seductive appeal of the drug peddler. It is important to help people who, through no fault of their own, live in areas where the problem is particularly acute. I acknowledge that the taking of drugs affects all sections of society and all racial groups. It is no part of my case that any particular group is more greatly involved in drug taking than others.
The speech by the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) provides an important starting point for my reply. He suggested, perfectly properly, that we should question the need to prohibit all drug-taking. I would object, having considered the evidence, to making legal the taking of certain drugs that cannot be taken legally. People say that it is all right to smoke or to drink alcohol, but I wonder whether we would permit the use of those drugs if they had been invented yesterday. Most people can drink alcohol and not become dependent upon it, but we know that many hundreds of thousands of people depend on alcohol and that many crimes are

635
alcohol-related. The hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) said, quite properly, that the best way to put oneself at risk late on a Saturday night is to be outside a pub or other place of entertainment in which certain youngsters have drunk too much and have become violent.
We do not underestimate the impact of alcohol abuse. The hon. Member for Newham, North-West was absolutely right when he said that many more people die from smoking and drinking than from illicit drug-taking. However, this generation inherited drinking and smoking from previous generations. We are trying to do something about it by asking people to drink sensibly and to stop smoking. We must not wish on succeeding generations the problems caused by drug-taking, should we be foolish enough to legalise the taking of certain drugs.
Mr. Sheerman: An interesting parallel can be drawn between alcohol and drug-taking. Part of the law of the land for a very long time has been a legal minimum age for drinking. The Opposition have long been saying that it is high time that the Government enforced the law regarding the availability of alcohol to people under 18. Advertisements are directed at young people in which they are cajoled to drink well before the age of 18. They are drinking at 14, 15 and 16, which is well below the age at which they should be drinking alcohol. The law should be strictly enforced.
Mr. Mellor: I agree with all that. It is important that under-age drinking should be stamped out as far as possible. Whatever the protestations however, one cannot help thinking that there are far too many advertisements for alcohol and, whatever is said in their defence, they are aimed at a particular category of 17 to 24-year-old young drinkers. On either side of the legal age for drinking, there is a real problem group. It is worth pointing out that the strong beers available now did not exist 20 years ago. If we have a generation of lager louts, to a considerable extent we have wished that problem on ourselves. I am glad that there is agreement across the Floor of the House on the importance of those facts.
I turn now to the question of the legalislation of illicit drugs. Heroin and cocaine have a much higher basic addictability than any of the so-called "legitimate" drugs, and there is clear evidence that when cocaine is smoked in the form of crack, it is highly addictive. My hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) said that some American research has suggested that three out of every four people who have abused crack have become addicted to it. The hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz) has had to leave for a constituency engagement and I understand why he cannot be here. He, too, used his experience in the United States to portray the problems caused by crack. The hon. Member for Newham, North-West was wrong to say that they are caused only by pollutants—they are caused by the drug itself.
We have had a test of what happens if one turns a blind eye to cocaine abuse. As my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale said, an adviser to President Carter suggested that cocaine was a recreational drug of no particular significance, which allowed cocaine to become much more widespread without enforcement in the United States in the 1970s than it might otherwise have been. America has now reaped the whirlwind. With the greatest respect to the House. I must point out that there is no compromise with these substances, but that does not mean that a solution
636
can be found only by stamping out drug abuse oppressively. We need a range of policies across the spectrum, including law and order policies and prohibition, but also including a whole host of policies for demand reduction. I hope that the debate has established that the Government take that point seriously.
The hon. Members for Huddersfield and for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington, among others, mentioned help for specific inner-city areas and our drug prevention initiative. I want to make it absolutely clear that it is not rhetoric but a fundamental principle when I say that there is no point in having a drugs policy if one seeks to keep out of it those people who have a great deal to contribute. A drugs policy that is to work in society must embrace all, so I welcome the enthusiastic involvement of the local authorities and the local authority associations. In our new drugs prevention initiative, which will start in nine inner-city areas and spread to 30, we want the full-hearted co-operation of the local authorities. We shall shortly be consulting the local authority associations about how best our initiative can blend in with what is already happening.
The hon. Member for Leicester, East talked about local co-ordinating groups. As a result of action taken several years ago, every area should have multi-disciplinary groups, bringing together experts to talk about the particular problems of that locality. The aim of our initiative is that an additional three or four people will be engaged in each area to co-ordinate that area's response to its drug problem, having regard to the fact that there is no common base for the drugs problem. It has different manifestations in different areas. For those groups to be effective, a keen awareness of local circumstances will be required. I want the local authorities to be involved. It would be sad if every initiative did not have the full-hearted approval of local authorities. We want them to participate as the groups are not intended to be a substitute for local authority action, but part of the ongoing work.
We are committed to research. I assure the hon. Member for Huddersfield that there is no question of the Home office suppressing any research. As far as we are concerned, all research should be made available, but it is not always up to us to publish it. Publication often depends on the researchers. We have no interest in suppressing such research. Although no one would suggest that research alone, especially over a long period, is a substitute for action, it is an essential part of our policy. The Government have decided to commission a major prevalence study starting early next year to investigate and report on the extent of cocaine misuse, its pattern and its effect on individuals. It will be a three-year study which will generate a great deal of valuable information. The House will appreciate, however, that we cannot wait three years for the outcome before we start to make decisions about cocaine.
My hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (Mr. Rathbone) has been a constant assistance to me in all the years I have been involved in this matter. By his chairmanship of the all-party committee on drugs he has done a tremendous amount to promote the basic consensus approach that we have adopted. My hon. Friend and the hon. Member for Huddersfield mentioned south America. When I visited Pakistan in 1985 it was clear that we in the affluent West could not simply tell the subsistence farmers of the north-west frontier to stop growing opium, especially as that was the only crop for which anyone was prepared to

637
pay them and the only way in which they could try to maintain their families. It was clear that we had to help them find an alternative crop. We have put a lot of money into crop substitution schemes and, when coupled with enforcement, those schemes have been strikingly effective. The success was due to favourable economic circumstances as the differential between one cash crop and another made it possible to operate an effective crop substitution policy.
Alas and alack—would that it were otherwise—the scale of the problem in south America and the amount of money to be gained from growing coca compared with any alternative crop is such that it would be unrealistic to think that crop substitution schemes could be effective. I regret that, but it is just another sign of the magnitude of the cocaine problem. There is no easy alternative. I visited a United Nations fund for drug abuse control—UNFDAC—crop substitution scheme in Bolivia, and I should like to believe that such schemes are the answer. However, although we must continue to experiment, I doubt whether they are.
Mr. John Greenway: Those advocating crop substitution schemes should remember that the crop production element in the street price of drugs is small. Even if crop substitution schemes were operating it would be all too easy for the drug barons to up the price to the producer. That is the problem with attempting to introduce such schemes.
Mr. Mellor: A piece of information which has most troubled me since my return to the Home Office is that the opium poppy has now been grown in south America. One of President Carter's wiser advisers—not the chap who underestimated the addictive qualities of cocaine—said that the trouble was that the opium poppy could be grown almost anywhere. It is important to remember that demand generates supply. The fact that one can move cultivation from one part of the world to another shows how difficult it is to regard crop substitution as the answer, although I do not reject the suggestion.
My hon. Friend the Member for Lewes asked what we were doing with Colombia. I should make it clear that we are trying to give practical assistance by making use of what we know about policing, security and intelligence techniques because for a variety of reasons, we have as much expertise on those matters as any other country. The United Kingdom's package of assistance consists of training and equipment. Items include protective clothing for security forces, judiciary surveillance and computer equipment, inflatable boats to assist in access to some of the more remote areas, training in bomb disposal—in which, for our own tragic reasons, we have considerable expertise—scene of crime investigations and Customs techniques. I shall not repeat what we are doing in various other countries.
We try to be concerned with output and not just with input. In these debates, it is easy to say that we should double the money. We have doubled, trebled and quadrupled the money in a range of research projects on drugs, but I beg the House always to be concerned with output and not just input. We are concerned to ensure that the money we spend is useful and helpful, and that it deals with the important points.
638
This has been a useful debate. It might have been helpful if more hon. Members has been present because this is a major social issue, but those who have been present and who come to this debate with a range of experiences, have shown a spread across the political spectrum. I can think of some issues that we could have debated on which we should have had a fair old set-to. I am not being pious when I say that it is a valuable feature, which we lose at our peril, that whatever our disagreements, we can come together as a House and continue to talk in a civilised way, which is to the advantage of Parliament's reputation, about a fundamental social problem. Whatever our differences, they were as nothing compared with the consensus. I hope that we can continue to work together effectively on the problem. I assure the House that we shall develop our policies and carry them out with all the more vigour as a result of the quality of advice that we receive on occasions such as this.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Ordered,
That, at the sitting on Tuesday 12th December—

(1) the Motion in the name of Sir Bernard Braine relating to War Crimes may be proceeded with, though opposed, for three hours after it has been entered upon; and, if those proceedings have not been previously disposed of, Mr. Speaker shall, at the expiration of that period, put any Questions necessary to dispose of them;

(2) if proceedings on the above motion have not been completed before Seven o'clock, the Private Business set down by direction of the Chairman of Ways and Means for consideration at that hour shall stand over until the conclusion of such proceedings; and

(3) the Private Business may be proceeded with, though opposed, for three hours after it has been entered upon.

Ordered,
That, at the sitting on Wednesday 13th December, Standing Order No. 14 (Exempted business) shall apply to the Motion in the name of Mr. Secretary Brooke relating to Education Reform (Northern Ireland) as if in line 18 for the words 'one and a half hours' there were substituted the words 'three hours'.
Ordered,
That, at the sitting on Thursday 14th December, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Orders Nos. 14 (Exempted business) and 15 (Prayers against statutory instruments, &c. (negative procedure)),—

(1) the Motions in the names of the Prime Minister relating to Community Fisheries Arrangements for 1990 or Mr. Paddy Ashdown relating to Sea Fisheries may be proceeded with, though opposed, for three hours after the first of them has been entered upon; and, if proceedings on the first Motion have not been previously disposed of, Mr. Speaker shall, at the expiration of that period, put any Questions necessary to dispose of them; and no further such Motion shall then be made;

(2) the Motions in the names of Mr. Secretary Ridley and Mr. Neil Kinnock relating to Monopolies and Mergers may be proceeded with, though opposed, for one and a half hours after the first of them has been entered upon; and, if proceedings thereon have not been previously disposed of, Mr. Speaker shall, at the expiration of that period, put the Question already proposed from the Chair.—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]

SITTINGS OF THE HOUSE
Resolved,
That—

(1) this House do meet on Thursday 21st December, at half-past Nine o'clock;

(2) notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2) of Standing Order No. 17 (Questions to Members), no Questions shall be taken, provided that at Eleven o'clock Mr. Speaker may interrupt the proceedings in order to permit Questions to be asked which are in his opinion of an urgent character and relate either to matters of public importance or to the arrangement of business, statements to be made by Ministers, or personal explanations to be made by Members; and

(3) at half-past Three o'clock Mr. Speaker do adjourn the House without putting any Question, provided that this House shall not adjourn until Mr. Speaker shall have reported the Royal Assent to any Acts agreed upon by both Houses,—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]

Ordered,
That Mrs. Margaret Ewing be added to the Select Committee on European Legislation.—[Mr. Carel-Jones.]

PROCEDURE
Ordered,
That Mr. Stan Crowther be discharged from the Procedure Committee and Mr. Graham Allen be added to the Committee.—[Mr. Carel-Jones.]

Sapper Kirk Sancto
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]
2.7 pm
Mr. James Couchman: Sapper Kirk Sancto died in a boating accident in Port Stanley harbour in the early hours of 9 June 1985. He was 19 years of age. It is with great reluctance that I have sought to bring the facts of this sad case to the attention of the House this afternoon, but after nearly two years of correspondence and meetings with Ministers I have failed to resolve to the satisfaction of my constituents, Mr. and Mrs. Sancto, two matters that have exacerbated their sadness at the loss of their son Kirk.
The facts of the case are that Sapper Sancto was operating a kind of waterborne taxi service, on a voluntary basis, across Port Stanley harbour on a dark night, using a fairly fast motor launch called a dory. He was operating the boat throughout the evening with his friend Private Catherall and most of the trips across the water were between the coastels, the floating hotels where our garrison was then housed, and Navy point, where a party was being held in the diving section bar. During the middle part of the evening, Sapper Sancto and Fusilier Catherall attended the party for part of the time and there is conflicting evidence on what, if anything, they drank. When the party ended they resumed their voluntary taxi duties, which had been sanctioned by the bosun of the joint services water sports club who was responsible for the water launches and who had previously tested both soldiers to see that they were competent to carry out those duties.
Soon after midnight, on one of its journeys back to coastel 3 with five passengers the dory collided with a much larger vessel known as a Kiwi or K3 New Zealand class launch made of steel and weighing about 30 tonnes. After the impact, the passengers of the dory, which was being driven by Fusilier Catherall, discovered that Sancto had received severe head injuries. They returned quickly to coastel 2, from which Kirk Sancto was transferred to the British military hospital where, sadly, he was found to have died.
My constituents were visited later that day by the padre from sapper headquarters in my constituency and a major, also from headquarters, who informed them that their son had died from head injuries received in an accident at about I am that day but that they had no further details.
Then followed a period of months during which my constituents received no further information about the circumstances of their son's death. The administration of his affairs was carried out quite properly by those charged with such matters at the Ministry of Defence. That included the distribution of his modest estate and the return of his personal effects to the family. The Army properly held a board of inquiry into the circumstances of the accident but the family were asked neither to attend it nor to contribute any information. Nor were they told of the outcome. The information was forwarded with the report of the post-mortem carried out by the professor of military pathology, Lieutenant Colonel Menzies, to the Oxford coroner. Because the remains of service men are brought back to the United Kingdom and landed at Brize Norton or Lyneham, inquests on service men killed while overseas are carried out by coroners in Oxford and

641
Wiltshire. I shall refer later to that because it was a source of dissatisfaction in this case. The Army sent the information to the coroner in 1985, six months after the accident and the post-mortem and three months after the conclusion of the Army's inquiry.
After much prodding by Mr. and Mrs. Sancto and their solicitor, the coroner finally wrote to Mr. Sancto on 3 January 1986, almost a year after the accident, to say that he was convening the inquest for 16 July. The court duly sat on that date at 10 am. Evidence was taken from many of the relevant witnesses, but Fusilier Catherall failed to turn up until 2 pm, by which time the inquest had had to be adjourned sine die and the witnesses who had given evidence were discharged.
After the adjournment, Mr. Sancto requested from the Ministry of Defence the full report of the inquiry. On 4 August 1986, he received a letter from a section of the MOD telling him that
"during the inquest all the Army information concerned with the tragic death of your son will be available to you but, if you feel you still wish to know more about the circumstances involved I can, exceptionally, send you a full account based upon the Army Authorities' reports as soon as the inquest has been completed."
The inquest was reconvened on 10 September and Catherall was brought under escort and duly examined, although, of course, in isolation from the other witnesses. Because of the delayed inquest, Mr. and Mrs. Sancto were put through needless strain and a good deal of extra inconvenience and additional costs were incurred. The Sanctos had determined with their solicitor that, because the Army had been so unforthcoming with information, they needed the services of counsel, who had to be retained for the resumed hearing at additional expense. The outcome of the inquest was a verdict of accidental death.
After further prompting by the Sanctos, it was suggested in a letter from section AG Sec 2 that a mutually satisfactory offer to reimburse the Sanctos' costs involved in the inquest would be made and they were invited to send
"full details of your costs preferably covering both visits to Oxford"
so that suitable arrangements could be made to resolve the situation to the mutual satisfaction of the Sanctos and the Department. Mr. Sancto submitted a claim for almost £700, including the cost of counsel. The MOD offered £53·80 saying that the Sanctos' costs for the first day of the inquest and the cost of counsel were their affair and that only the costs incurred directly as a result of Catherall's non-appearance could be set against MOD.
Further prompting of the MOD by the Sanctos finally elicited on 31 December 1986 a three-page narrative summary of the Army's inquiry. It included a highly controversial piece of hearsay, which suggested that
"Kirk consumed a number of cans of beer and a couple of glasses of strong punch and … became very merry and boisterous and was obviously enjoying himself dancing with the girls."
Fusilier Catherall also admitted drinking four cans of lager. The paragraph finished:
"throughout the evening, Kirk and Fusilier Catherall were ferrying the Dory".
Lieutenant Colonel Menzies's post-mortem report is quite spoecific that there was no trace of alcohol in specimens of Kirk's blood and urine. He later confirmed that the specimens had been properly taken and maintained to ensure that no changes took place before the
642
samples were examined. That clear conflict between the narrative account and the distinguished pathologist's report has never been satisfactorily explained, despite repeated attempts by Mr. Sancto and latterly by me. There are other inconsistencies between the narrative report and the evidence at the inquest. Those unsatisfactory discrepancies have convinced Mr. and Mrs. Sancto that for its own reasons the Army, supported by the MOD, has been less than frank and has sought to cover up either negligence or misdemeanour by personnel acting in its name, and that that negligence or misdemeanour caused or contributed to the death of their son.
The MOD has consistently and directly refused to allow Mr. and Mrs. Sancto to see the full transcript and evidence of the Army board of inquiry and they have not allowed them to see it through Ministers or me, and that has maintained the Sanctos in their scepticism. The narrative account has in effect been amended by subsequent corespondence, and that only increases the Sanctos's suspicions.
The Under-Secretry of State for Health, my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr. Freeman), examined these matters minutely when he was an Under-Secretary at the Ministry of Defence. He eventually offered reimbursement of counsel's fees for the second day of the inquest, although the Sanctos still think that their modest claim of £700 should be met in full by the Ministry of Defence. The fact that section 10 of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 has been repealed in the intervening period but not retrospectively heightens the Sanctos's sense of injustice.
My hon. Friend the Member for Kettering also sought to defuse the issue of whether Kirk had been drinking and concluded that alcohol had not been a contributing factor to the accident. My hon. Friend, who behaved throughout with his customary courtesy and sympathy, did not feel able to let the Sanctos see the full Army report. His successors have maintained that stance to this day. I hope that when he responds to the debate my hon. Friend the Minister will be able to grant the two aspirations which may relieve my constituents of some of the agony of their loss.
Kirk Sancto died in a boating accident and there can be nothing classified about that because his duties that evening were voluntary and in no sense operational. His parents have seen photographs of his body, so that the Army is not protecting them from the realities of his severe head injuries. The pathologist makes it clear that Kirk Sancto was not the worse for drink. Who or what is the Army protecting by its refusal to release the full report?
The conduct of the inquiry and the passing of information to the coroner, the inordinate delay in convening the inquest and its adjournment because of Catherall's non-appearance, the manifest inconsistencies between the narrative report and the evidence at the inquest, the apparent agreement to pay the inquest costs of my constituents and then the decision not to and, perhaps most of all, the refusal to share the full facts of the inquiry are all unsatisfactory facets of the case. That makes me wonder whether those charged with resolving the facts of the tragic death of this young man while he was serving his country have been as diligent or as thoughtful as they might have been.
The loss of a son in such circumstances must necessarily be a terrible experience. It behoves those of us who may have a part to play in trying to heal the wounds to do

643
everything in our power to give the bereaved family every support. That has not happened in this case, and I ask my hon. Friend the Minister to try to remedy that.
2.18 pm
The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Mr. Alan Clark): My hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham (Mr. Couchman) has raised a matter of great concern to a family in his constituency whose son, Sapper Kirk Sancto, was killed when serving in the Royal Engineers four and a half years ago in a tragic accident in Port Stanley harbour. I add my sympathy to those of all hon. Members for the family that suffered such a grievous loss.
As is normal in such cases, the Army authorities convened a board of inquiry into the circumstances of the accident. The board took evidence from witnesses and others involved. Sapper Sancto's body was returned to the United Kingdom and it was also obligatory for an inquest to be held in this country. That was held in two stages in July and September 1986 and recorded a finding of accidental death. Mr. Sancto confirmed in November 1986, after the inquest was completed, that he would like a summary of its proceedings. That was sent to him at the end of the following month.
I must emphasise that my Department has at no stage wished to withhold any of the facts, or the nature of the board of inquiry's findings. I certainly have every sympathy for the frustration felt by Mr. Sancto that more than a year elapsed before he could receive the full account from the Ministry of Defence of its own inquiries into the accident. As the House will appreciate, the timing of inquests is a matter, not for my Department, but for independent judicial officers. Mr. Sancto did, however, have the opportunity, which he took, of hearing what witnesses and others involved said at the inquest. Indeed, as he is perfectly entitled to do, he employed legal representation so as to have the opportunity to put the questions that particularly concerned him directly to those witnesses.
It may help if I say a few words about the status and purpose of boards of inquiry reports. The Army derives its authority for holding boards of inquiry from the Army Act 1955, statutory rules made thereunder and Queen's regulations for the Army. Boards of inquiry may inquire into all manner of things. Generally, their primary purposes are to investigate and report on the facts about the matter referred to them by the convening authority, and to make recommendations aimed at preventing a recurrence of an accident.
It is of the greatest importance, particularly in cases of injury or death, to establish as quickly as possible the true facts. Lives may depend on that. It is essential, therefore, that witnesses appearing before a board of inquiry should give evidence in a full and frank manner. One must remember that some of the witnesses will be young or of very junior rank. They may be required to give their evidence in difficult circumstances. They may have to criticise the actions of fellow service men, their close comrades even, or of their senior officers. They may themselves have made mistakes which contributed to an incident, about which, for the good of the services, we would want them to be candid.
Board of inquiry procedures have, therefore, been designed to do everything possible to encourage witnesses to come forward and to be absolutely candid when giving
644
their evidence. To this end, boards of inquiry are conducted as internal investigations. They are not disciplinary courts. Unlike courts-martial, they are not held in public. The rules under which boards are conducted provide that evidence given by a witness may not be used against him in any subsequent disciplinary proceedings. The report of the board of inquiry is regarded as confidential to the service and the Department. Only those within the service and the Department with a strict need-to-know requirement will see it.
If the records of board of inquiry proceedings and evidence were to be made public, witnesses before future boards could not be sure that the confidence in which they were asked to give their evidence would be respected. Concern that their statements to the board might become general knowledge both within and outwith the service might make them more cautious and prevent the full facts from coming to light.
Board of inquiry reports may also contain classified material, evidence of a highly specialist, technical nature or material of a medical nature which next-of-kin might find distressing. For all those reasons, it is not our practice to allow access to service boards of inquiry reports.
Equally, I must emphasise that it is not the wish of the services to deny those with a genuine and valid interest their right to know what happened in a particular incident. My hon. Friend's constituent clearly has such a right in this case. It is, therefore, my Department's practice to make available on request a narrative summary of the Department's investigations, which contains all the material facts. As I have explained, this procedure was followed in Mr. Sancto's case following the completion of the coroner's inquest.
I appreciate that someone who has suffered a loss such as Mr. Sancto's will find it difficult to feel satisfied until he has seen all that has been written and said about the tragedy. I fully understand, too, why it is that they may feel that something is being kept from them. In this case, I must repeat the assurances given by the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces in his letters of 28 January and 19 July 1988 to my hon. Friend—that the facts relating to his son's death have not been concealed from Mr. Sancto. I hope that my hon. Friend will accept that assurance.
I am afraid that I am unable to accede to Mr. Sancto's request that he should be allowed to see the full report of the Army's board of inquiry. As my hon. Friend will know, we have acknowledged that the summary of the report that was sent to his constituent was not as clear or as precise as it should have been, particularly as regards the exact course of events in the succession of boat trips that preceded the final, fatal journey in the early hours of 9 June 1985. We have acknowledged, too, that the references made in the summary to the part that alcohol was thought, by some witnesses, to have played in the circumstances of the accident, did not take sufficient account of specialist medical evidence. This evidence, made available to the inquiry and to the inquest, showed that Mr. Sancto's son did not have alcohol in his body at the time of death.
The record has been set straight on these, and on other issues raised by Mr. Sancto, in correspondence with my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr. Freeman). I should like to take this opportunity to state quite clearly that, from my examination of the papers in preparing for

645
this debate, I have seen no evidence to suggest that the accident sprang from lack or care, or the consumption of alcohol, by Sapper Kirk Sancto.
It is not the practice of my Department to meet either personal expenses, or legal costs arising from attendance at inquest hearings. A decision to attend an inquest is a private decision on the part of the individual concerned. It is not the practice for the next of kin to be reimbursed for such costs. We would not expect to pay such costs except where these had been incurred either on the Department's behalf or as a result of negligence. The same considerations apply to the cost of legal representation. It is not unusual for a family to decide to be legally represented at an inquest; but the consequence of such a decision is that the family should bear the cost involved.
In this case, however, while the general timing of the inquest was a matter beyond our control, most regrettably the hearing had to be further adjourned because a key service witness failed to appear on 16 July 1986. I, and my colleagues with whom my hon. Friend has corresponded,
646
accept that the Ministry of Defence has some responsibility for this. I take this opportunity to apologise personally. Mr. Sancto has been offered, on an ex-gratia basis, reimbursement for all the costs that he incurred as a result of the holding of the second part of the hearing on 9 September 1986. This offer was extended both to his personal travel and incidental costs, and to the extra cost of employing legal representation for the additional period.
This subject is properly the concern of my noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces. I am replying on this occasion because my hon. Friend has raised the matter in this House, but I have examined the papers personally, with the greatest of care, and I have listened to the points made by my hon. Friend. I shall report back to my noble Friend and ask him to reconsider the case in the light of what has been said this afternoon. I feel sure that he will be writing further to my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham shortly.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at twenty-eight minutes past Two o'clock.

EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

  Student Loans
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has had about the effect acceptance of a top-up loan will have on students' further overdraft facilities.

  Mr. Jackson
  It will be for the lender to decide what account to take of a client's borrowing under the top-up loans scheme.

  Public Appointments
  Mrs. Roe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many persons above the age of(a) 60, (b) 65 and (c) 70 years he has appointed to public bodies in each of the last 10 years.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  The Department's policy is to make the best appointment possible for the task in hand, irrespective of age. No consolidated record of the age of members of public bodies is maintained.

  Head Teachers (Wakefield)
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many letters he has received since the beginning of the autumn school term from head teachers of schools within the Wakefield metropolitan district; what were the concerns expressed in these letters; and what action is being taken to respond to these concerns.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  My right hon. Friend receives a number of letters from head teachers about various aspects of education provision. All letters to this Department will continue to receive appropriate replies which I hope the recipients find helpful.

  Open University
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the contribution made by the Open university in environmental studies, research and education.

  Mr. Jackson
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave him on 16 May 1989 at column 124.

  Teacher Appraisal
  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science (1) if he intends to publish a consultative document on teacher appraisal dealing with the mechanism of the process;

  (2) when he intends to introduce a scheme of teacher appraisal in schools; and if he will make a statement;
  400
  (3) whether he intends all schools to take part in teacher appraisal; and whether there will be training for teachers to assist them in the process;

  (4) whether he intends to introduce some independent professionals into the teacher appraisal process; and if he will make a statement;

  (5) who will appraise head teachers when teacher appraisal is introduced.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  My right hon. Friend received in July this year the report of the national steering group (NSG) responsible for overseeing the school teacher appraisal pilot study which ended this summer. The report, which was published in October, sets out recommendations for a national framework within which teacher appraisal should be implemented across England and Wales.

  My right hon. Friend has now initiated consultation on the national steering group's recommendations, which cover head teachers and teachers, and deal with both the process of appraisal and the question of who should appraise whom. Consultation ends at Easter next year arid will be followed by the issue of guidance for local education authorities and schools. As part of this consultation, we have sought views on the appropriate date for bringing in, through regulations, a national framework which would require the appraisal of all members of the teaching profession.

  When regulations are introduced a date will be set by which time appraisal must be extended to all teachers and head teachers. Training to assist teachers and head teachers in the operation of appraisal is important; guidance about this will be given to local education authorities. We are ready to support expenditure on appraisal training of up to £15 million through the Local Education Authority Training Grants Scheme in 1990–91.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Health and Social Services (Appointments)
  Rev. Martin Smyth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list all the executive posts in the Department of Health and Social Services for Northern Ireland which have been recruited in the last four years for which figures are available, together with the salaries and grades; and if he will give the length of contract for each post.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  The recruitment of permanent staff to the Northern Ireland Civil Service is the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Civil Service Commission which allocates successful candidates to individual Departments in response to their needs. Details of executive recruits appointed to the Department of Health and Social Services over the last four years are as follows:

  Year

  Number

  Grade

  Salary on Appointment

  1986

  5

  Executive officer grade II

  £5,250–·8,730

  1987

  5

  Executive officer grade II

  £5,820–£9,330

  1

  Administrative trainee

  1£8,000–£10,150

  1988

  1

  Executive officer grade II

  £6,134–£9,935

  1

  Staff officer (administrative)

  1£11,600–£14,595

  1989

  3

  Executive officer grade II

  £6,715–£10,723 (current scale)

  1

  Chief executive for health and personal social services

  £37,600–£40,900 (current scale)

  401

  1 The current salary scales for the grades mentioned are as follows:

  Administrative trainee: £10,246–£12,074.

  Staff officer (administrative) £13,022–£16,336.

  Appointments to the grades of executive officer II and administrative trainee/staff officer (administrative) are permanent subject to the satisfactory completion of a probationary period. The chief executive appointment is for an initial period of five years with the possibility of renewal for a further period of conversion to a permanent post.

  Irish Prime Minister (Talks)
  Mr. Parry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he next expects to meet the Irish Prime Minister; and what matters he proposes to discuss.

  Mr. Brooke
  I have no current plans to meet the Taoiseach. I paid him a courtesy call in Dublin before the last intergovernmental conference on 30 November.

  Rivers and Lakes
  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the total amount of public expenditure by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries Division, on the stocking of rivers and lakes with fish, in each year since 1980; and if he will give details by district council area.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  [holding answer 7 December 1989]: Spending by the Department of Agriculture on the stocking of the Department's public angling waters since 1980 has been:

  Financial year

  Total expenditure on stocking £

  1980–81

  60,630

  1981–82

  50,490

  1982–83

  53,034

  1983–84

  69,093

  1984–85

  90,199

  1985–86

  149,711

  1986–87

  156,294

  1987–88

  107,243

  1988–89

  124,437

  It is not possible to allocate expenditure on stocking to individual district council areas as the information is not held in the form requested and it could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

TRANSPORT

  British Rail Maintenance Ltd.
  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with BR about the operation of British Rail Maintenance Ltd; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Portillo
  None. The operation of British Rail Maintenance Ltd. is a management matter for British Rail.

  Railways
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list those Welsh lines due to have a super sprinter train service by mid-1990.
  402
  Mr. Portillo
  Decisions on the allocation of rolling stock to specific railway lines are for the British Railways Board.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has on when British Rail plans to electrify the Crewe to Holyhead line.

  Mr. Portillo
  I am unaware of any plans by British Rail to electrify this line.

  Mr. Geraint Howells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what resources he intends to make available to British Rail to encourage the greater frequency of trains on the Cambrian coast line between Shrewsbury and Aberystwyth and Shrewsbury and Pwllheli.

  Mr. Portillo
  The Government have approved over £400 million (1989–90 prices) of investment in new rolling stock for the provincial sector since 1983. It is for British Rail to decide the detailed disposition of resources within the sector in the light of the public service obligation which requires the board to continue to provide a level of service generally comparable to that in April 1988. They are free to provide additional services where that does not lead to an increase in grant.

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with British Rail about its plans for direct passenger travel through the Channel tunnel from 1993(a) from Cardiff and (b) from Holyhead in terms of year of commencement and proposed frequency; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Portillo
  British Rail will be setting out its proposals in the plan which it will shortly be publishing, in compliance with section 40 of the Channel Tunnel Act 1987. I have discussed progress on this work with British Rail from time to time.

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with British Rail about running passenger through trains on the central Wales line from Manchester to Milford Haven.

  Mr. Portillo
  Decisions on the routing and timetabling of rail services are for the management of British Rail.

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has on when the Paddington to Swansea line will be electrified.

  Mr. Portillo
  It is for British Rail to come forward with any proposals.

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether British Rail has sought approval for investment in a Berne gauge freight line(a) from the Channel tunnel to south Wales and (b) from the Channel tunnel to north Wales.

  Mr. Portillo
  No.

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he has received a request from British Rail for funding of a main line rail link to Cardiff Wales (Rhoose) Airport.

  Mr. Portillo
  No.

  Roads
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he has any plans to place a consultancy with the Energy and Environment Research Unit of the Open university on environmental effects of future road planning.

  Mr. Atkins
  No.

  Mr. Terry Lewis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when the full roads report referred to in paragraph 32 of the White Paper "Roads for Prosperity" is to be published.

  Mr. Atkins
  In the new year.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Rented Farms
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information he has concerning the number of farms available for rent in the private sector for each of the last 10 years.

  Mr. Maclean
  None.

  Scrapie
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he proposes to take any action to prevent the sale of scrapie-infected sheep protein for use as feed for pigs.

  Mr. Maclean
  Scrapie is one of the oldest known animal diseases and has been the subject of extensive research. There is no scientific evidence to indicate that such action is necessary.

  Walnut Trees
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his Department has produced a planting, growing and husbandry manual for walnut trees.

  Mr. Maclean
  Guidance on growing walnut trees is given in Forestry Commission Bulletin 62, Silviculture of Broadleaved Woodland (ISBN 011 710 154 0), available in the Libary of the House.

  Agro-forestry Development
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proposals he has for innovative multi-culture agro-forestry development in the United Kingdom for commercial scale(a) flour, (b) dye and (c) biomass production.

  Mr. Maclean
  None. My Department is, however, separately funding research on both agro-forestry and novel crops.

  Soil Temperature
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to introduce technologies to increase the mean soil temperature in the United Kingdom by 2°C, and what would be the implications for crop yield of such an increase in soil temperature.
  404
  Mr. Maclean
  The Minister has no plans to introduce technologies to increase the mean soil temperatures in the United Kingdom by 2°C.

  The effect of increased soil temperature on crop yield would be dependent on the extent of seasonal fluctuations in that increase and the effect of other associated climatic changes, for example, in the level and pattern of rainfall. If it is assumed that the temperature increase remains constant throughout the year and is a direct result of increased radiation, and that water supply remains adequate, then yields of cereals and other field crops are likely to increase. In many spring crops such as cereals, potatoes, sugar beet, peas and beans increased yield potential would be a result of warmer spring temperatures allowing earlier planting-sowing so as to avoid the worst effects of mid-summer drought.

THE ARTS

  Libraries, Museums and Galleries
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Minister for the Arts in determining public expenditure plans for 1990–91 what provision was made for the cost of (i) libraries and (ii) museums and galleries.

  Mr. Luce
  In 1990–91 the central Government provision for libraries is £112 million and for museums and galleries £182 million. (These figures do not include local authority spending).

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Government Telephone Network
  Mr. Page
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the latest position in drawing up the specifications for the new Government telephone network; and whether public tenders will be sought from qualified suppliers.

  Mr. Ryder
  Decisions have not yet been made on whether, or how, to proceed with an integrated voice and data network for Government. The findings of the study announced by my right hon. Friend the then Paymaster General on 6 March 1989 are under consideration.

  Value Added Tax
  Miss Emma Nicholson
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his policy on the charging of value added tax on goods which facilitate mobility of disabled people.

  Mr. Ryder
  Most specialised equipment designed for use by disabled people and the charities that serve them is relieved of value added tax, but zero-rating does not extend to general purpose goods or services which can equally well be used by the able-bodied as by the disabled.

  European Monetary System
  Mr. Ralph Howell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will set out the rate of inflation in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland for each month since the Republic of Ireland became a full member of the European monetary system.

  Mr. Ryder
  [holding answer 7 December 1989]: The information requested is as follows:
  405

  12. month consumer price inflation

  United Kingdom

  Ireland

  1979

  January

  —

  —

  February

  —

  10·9

  March

  9·7

  —

  April

  10·2

  —

  May

  10·5

  12·6

  June

  11·4

  —

  July

  15·6

  —

  August

  15·9

  13·6

  September

  16·6

  —

  October

  17·1

  —

  November

  17·3

  16·0

  December

  17·2

  —

  1980

  January

  18·4

  —

  February

  19·1

  15·6

  March

  19·9

  —

  April

  21·8

  —

  May

  21·8

  20·0

  June

  21·1

  —

  July

  16·9

  —

  August

  16·2

  18·8

  September

  15·8

  —

  October

  15·5

  —

  November

  15·2

  18·2

  December

  15·1

  —

  1981

  January

  13·1

  —

  February

  12·4

  21·0

  March

  12·6

  —

  April

  12·0

  —

  May

  11·8

  17·1

  June

  11·4

  —

  July

  10·9

  —

  August

  11·5

  20·0

  September

  11·5

  —

  October

  11·7

  —

  November

  12·0

  23·4

  December

  12·1

  —

  1982

  January

  12·0

  —

  February

  11·1

  18·8

  March

  10·4

  —

  April

  9·5

  —

  May

  9·5

  21·0

  June

  9·1

  —

  July

  8·7

  —

  August

  8·0

  17·0

  September

  7·2

  —

  October

  6·9

  —

  November

  6·3

  12·3

  December

  5·4

  —

  1983

  January

  4·9

  —

  February

  5·3

  12·5

  March

  4·6

  —

  April

  4·0

  —

  May

  3·7

  9·3

  June

  3·7

  —

  July

  4·3

  —

  August

  4·6

  10·0

  September

  5·2

  —

  October

  4·9

  —

  November

  4·8

  10·3

  December

  5·4

  —

  1984

  January

  5·2

  —

  February

  5·1

  10·3

  March

  5·2

  —

  April

  5·2

  —

  May

  5·1

  9·7

  406

  United Kingdom

  Ireland

  June

  5·1

  —

  July

  4·4

  —

  August

  5·0

  7·9

  September

  4·7

  —

  October

  4·9

  —

  November

  4·9

  6·8

  December

  4·6

  —

  1985

  January

  5·0

  —

  February

  5·3

  6·2

  March

  6·1

  —

  April

  6·9

  —

  May

  6·9

  5·2

  June

  6·9

  —

  July

  6·8

  —

  August

  6·2

  5·5

  September

  5·8

  —

  October

  5·5

  —

  November

  5·5

  4·9

  December

  5·6

  —

  1986

  January

  5·5

  —

  February

  5·1

  4·6

  March

  4·2

  —

  April

  3·1

  —

  May

  2·8

  4·4

  June

  2·6

  —

  July

  2·5

  —

  August

  2·4

  3·1

  September

  3·1

  —

  October

  3·0

  —

  November

  3·6

  3·2

  December

  3·7

  —

  1987

  January

  3·9

  —

  February

  3·9

  3·4

  March

  4·0

  —

  April

  4·2

  —

  May

  4·2

  2·9

  June

  4·2

  —

  July

  4·4

  —

  August

  4·4

  3·3

  September

  4·2

  —

  October

  4·5

  —

  November

  4·1

  3·1

  December

  3·7

  —

  1988

  January

  3·3

  —

  February

  3·3

  2·0

  March

  3·5

  —

  April

  3·9

  —

  May

  4·2

  1·8

  June

  4·6

  —

  July

  4·8

  —

  August

  5·7

  2·0

  September

  5·9

  —

  October

  6·4

  —

  November

  6·4

  2·7

  December

  6·8

  —

  1989

  January

  7·5

  —

  February

  7·8

  3·3

  March

  7·9

  —

  April

  8·0

  —

  May

  8·3

  3·9

  June

  8·3

  —

  July

  8·2

  —

  August

  7·3

  4·5

  September

  7·6

  —

  October

  7·3

  —

  November

  —

  —

  407

  United

  Ireland Kingdom

  December

  —

  —

  Source: OECD.

  Notes: Irish data are available only quarterly.

  Ireland joined the european monetary system and exchange rate mechanism on 13 March 1979.

  Household Income
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list in rank order for each region in Britain(a) the average household income by region and ( b) social security benefits as a proportion of household income; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lilley
  [holding answer 7 December 1989]: The latest regional estimates for average household income and social security benefits relate to households covered in the family expenditure survey for the calendar years 1986 and 1987 and are given in table 31 of the report of the family expenditure survey 1987, a copy of which is in the Library.

  Relocation
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what relocations of his Department's staff, or agencies relating thereto, are currently being considered; and what are the numbers of staff affected.

  Mr Ryder
  A review of the location of the Treasury's activities is currently taking place under the policy that my right hon. Friend the then Paymaster General announced on 31 March 1988 at cols.610–11. No decisions have yet been taken.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Health Care Professions (Advertising)
  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether it is his intention to implement the recommendations of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission obliging health care professions to allow their members to use unsolicited mailshots as a means of promoting their services.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  When the MMC report on the supply of services of registered medical practitioners in relation to restrictions on advertising was published in March 1989, the Director General of Fair Trading was asked to seek undertakings that rules on advertising would be changed in accordance with the findings and recommendations of the MMC in a form to be agreed with him. A number of changes have already been made and the Director General of Fair Trading informs me that negotiations continue on the remaining restrictions, including that of unsolicited distribution of leaflets by general practitioners.

  Insider Dealing
  Mr. Arbuthnot
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the implementation of the insider dealing directive.
  408
  Mr. Redwood
  I am today publishing a consultative document on the Government's proposals for changes to the insider dealing law. The proposals reflect both our experience of the operation of our present law, and the insider dealing directive which was unanimously agreed by the Council of Ministers on 13 November.

  The directive sets minimum requirements for member states to follow in prohibiting insider dealing. We have in a number of areas gone beyond these requirements. We are also suggesting a substantial change by relating the offence to transactions done by or through authorised persons under the Financial Services Act rather than to the current complex structure of deals done on or off a recognised stock exchange.

  We are inviting comments by the end of February 1990. I am arranging for a copy of the paper to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Cars and Vans
  Mr. Denzil Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many cars and vans were produced in(a) the Federal Republic of Germany, (b) France, (c) Italy and (d) Spain in 1988.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 4 December 1989]: Figures for cars are:
  (a) 4·3 million, (b) 3·2 million (c) 1·9 million, (d) 1·5 million.

  Figures for vans are not readily available.

  Mr. Denzil Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many cars and vans were produced in the United Kingdom in 1988.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 4 December 1989]: 1·2 million.

  Mr. Denzil Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what information he has on the percentage of cars and vans which were produced in 1988 in(a) the Federal Republic of Germany, (b) France, (c) Italy and (d) Spain were exported.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 4 December 1989]: Figures for cars are:
  (a) 58 per cent., (b) 57 per cent., (c) 36 per cent., (d) 53 per cent.

  Figures for vans are not readily available.

  Mr. Denzil Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what percentage of the cars and vans which were produced in the United Kingdom in 1988 were exported.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 4 December 1989]: 18 per cent.

  BAT Factory (Liverpool)
  Mr. Parry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will estimate(a) the total loss in receipts to the Exchequer and (b) the extra cost to Government Departments arising from the closure of the British American Tobacco factory in Liverpool; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 6 December 1989]: No realistic estimates are practicable. As to the possible principal effects, no significant loss of tobacco duty or

  409
  VAT is expected since the factory manufactures for export. Corporation tax payable by BAT will depend upon the company's overall trading results. Unemployment benefits and social security costs depend upon the number of claimants, their individual circumstances and the time before they find other work. The Government's existing programmes to assist enterprise and creation of new jobs are of course available in this area but any such costs would be met from existing provisions.

  Mr. Parry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will assess the effect on the economy of Liverpool of the proposed closure of the British American Tobacco factory; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 6 December 1989]: No realistic assessment is practicable. British American Tobacco would no longer pay rates on the site but, in that it intends to offer the factory free to the Merseyside development corporation, it seems likely that the premises will again be beneficially occupied and thus rates will again become payable. Unemployment benefits and social security costs depend upon the number of claimants, their individual circumstances and the time before they find other work.

  Mr. Parry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will meet the hon. Member for Liverpool, Riverside and other Liverpool Members to discuss the implications of the proposed closure of the British American Tobacco factory in Liverpool.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 6 December 1989]: I would be happy to meet the hon. Members concerned.

  Non-oil Exports
  Mr. Butterfill
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the total non-oil export volume in the United Kingdom for each of the last five years.

  Mr. Norman Lamont
  I have been asked to reply.

  The information required is in the Monthly Review of External Trade Statistics, copies of which are available from the Library.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Crack
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much crack by weight and volume was confiscated in the United Kingdom or entering the United Kingdom in(a) 1987, (b) 1988 and (c) each month of 1989.

  Mr. Mellor
  Seizures of crack reported by the police to the National Drugs Intelligence Unit were:

  Year

  Seizures

  1987

  12

  1988

  27

  11989

  124

  1 January—November.

  Weights of crack seizures by the police analysed by the forensic science service were:
  410

  Grammes

  1987

  6·7

  1988

  113·7

  1989

  January

  2·3

  February

  85·1

  March

  26·3

  April

  6·4

  May

  22·3

  June

  2·8

  July

  8·9

  August

  41·8

  September

  9·6

  October

  12·2

  November

  21·6

  In addition Customs reported one seizure of I gm of crack in 1987, one of 0·9 gm in 1988 and two in March 1989 amounting to 138 gm.

  Courts (Expenditure)
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in determining public expenditure plans for 1990–91 what provision was made for the cost of (i) coroners' courts, (ii) probation and (iii) magistrates' courts.

  Mr. Waddington
  Under the new planning total, the Government no longer make expenditure plans or provision for local authority spending but only for central Government support towards that spending. Central Government provide specific grant at the rate of 80 per cent. towards the costs of the probation service and magistrates courts.

  The planned grant provision in 1990–91 for magistrates courts is £184·1 million for current expenditure and £40·6 million for capital expenditure, and for the probation service £198·8 million for current expenditure and £7·5 million for capital expenditure. In addition, credit approvals for capital expenditure will be made available totalling £10·5 million for magistrates' courts and £3·8 million for probation. Coroners courts are supported not through specific grant but through revenue support grant.

  Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
  Mr. Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has any plans to improve the working of the criminal injuries compensation scheme; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waddington
  The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board's annual report, for the year ended 31 March 1989 (Cm. 900, published on 6 December) shows that it received 43,385 applications—a record number—during the year. This year's intake is expected to show a further unprecedented rise to over 50,000 applications. The board has a backlog of some 96,000 cases, with consequent delays to all claims.

  My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and I have taken steps to meet these problems. We have increased staff from 220 in 1987 to 320. We have appointed more board members. Two thirds of the work is now dealt with by locally-recruited staff in a new office in Glasgow. A major computerisation programme will begin early next year. Despite the substantial increase in applications and the disruption

  411
  caused by relocation of work to Scotland, the board resolved 38,830 cases last year, compared with 29,965 in the best previous year. On past performance we can expect far more cases to be resolved when the changes in staffing, location, and procedures have been fully absorbed. Meanwhile we have discussed with the chairman of the board the need for further improvements.

  The Criminal Justice Act 1988 provides for the scheme to be placed on a statutory footing. The board says in its report that to make the scheme statutory now would disrupt work and add to arrears. We accept that judgment. In view of the urgent need to tackle the backlog and improve the board's service to present and future claimants I have decided, with the agreement of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, and the board, not to make the scheme statutory yet but to make changes in the present non-statutory scheme to streamline it.

  The revised scheme will come into effect on 1 February 1990. The principal changes to which I should call attention are the discretion given to the board to delegate decision-making in the first instance to staff, and revised provisions for oral hearings. Delegation will allow more flexibility and efficiency. Under revised hearings provisions all applicants will retain a right to have their cases reviewed by at least two members of the board, but applications for a hearing may be considered by two members of the board on the papers and a hearing will be held only if the case warrants.

  I should also draw attention to an increase in the lower limit for compensation awards. This was last increased on 7 November 1986 to £550. The purpose of the limit is to exclude relatively minor injuries from the scope of the scheme and to concentrate resources on cases most deserving of compensation. With the passage of time it is right to raise the limit to £750. The new limit will apply to new applications.

  While not bringing the scheme set down in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 into effect, I am taking this opportunity to incorporate Parliament's wishes on several points. The revised scheme will cover claims arising from offences of trespass on a railway; payment of compensation in fatal injury cases to the cohabitee of the deceased person; payment to victims of a set sum for a child born as a consequence of rape; a limit on compensation for loss of earnings of one and a half times gross average earnings and removal of compensation for damage or loss of clothing.

  The Government are determined that victims should receive proper recognition under the criminal justice system, including the timely payment of compensation for personal injuries resulting from crime. The revised scheme will allow for better use of resources to achieve that end and contribute towards an improvement in the quality of service to claimants.

  The revised scheme is as follows:

  Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme Administration

  1. The Compensation Scheme will be administered by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, which will be assisted by appropriate staff. Appointments to the Board will be made by the Secretary of State, after consultation with the Lord Chancellor and, where appropriate, the Lord Advocate. A person may only be appointed to be a member of the Board if he is a barrister practising in England and Wales, an advocate practising in Scotland, a solicitor practising in England and Wales or Scotland or a person who holds or has
  412
  held judicial office in England and Wales or Scotland. The Chairman and other members of the Board will be appointed to serve for up to five years in the first instance, and their appointments will be renewable for such periods as the Secretary of State considers appropriate. The Chairman and other members will not serve on the Board beyond the age of 72, or after ceasing to be qualified for appointment, whichever is the earlier except that, where the Secretary of State considers it to be in the interests of the Scheme to extend a particular appointment beyond the age of 72 or after retirement from legal practice, he may do so. The Secretary of State may, if he thinks fit terminate a member's appointment on the ground of incapacity or misbehaviour.

  2. The Board will be provided with money through a Grant-in-Aid out of which payments for compensation awarded in accordance with the principles set out below will be made. Their net expenditure will fall on the Votes of the Home Office and the Scottish Home and Health Department.

  3. The Board, or such members of the Board's staff as the Board may designate, will be entirely responsible for deciding what compensation should be paid in individual cases and their decisions will not be subject to appeal or to Ministerial review. The general working of the Scheme will, however, be kept under review by the Government, and the Board will submit annually to the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Scotland a full report on the operation of the Scheme, together with their accounts. The report and accounts will he open to debate in Parliament.

  Scope of the Scheme

  4. The board will entertain applications for ex gratin payments of compensation in any case where the applicant or, in the case of an application by a spouse or dependant (see paragraphs 15 and 16 below), the deceased, sustained in Great Britain, or on a British vessel, aircraft or hovercraft or on, under or above an installation in a designated area within the meaning of section I subsection (7) of the Continental Shelf Act 1964 or any waters within 500 metres of such an installation, or in a lighthouse off the coast of the United Kingdom, personal injury directly attributable—

  (a) to a crime of violence (including arson or poisoning); or

  (b) to the apprehension or attempted apprehension of an offender or a suspected offender or to the prevention or attempted prevention of an offence or to the giving of help to any constable who is engaged in any such activity; or

  (c) to an offence of trespass on a railway.

  Applications for compensation will be entertained only if made within three years of the incident giving rise to the injury, except that the Board may in exceptional cases waive this requirement. A decision by the Chairman not to waive the time limit will be final. In considering for the purposes of this paragraph whether any act is a criminal act a person's conduct will be treated as constituting an offence notwithstanding that he may not be convicted of the offence by reason of age, insanity or diplomatic immunity.

  5. Compensation will not be payable unless the Board are satisfied that the injury was one for which the total amount of compensation payable after deduction of social security benefits, but before any other deductions under the Scheme, would not be less than the minimum amount of compensation. This shall be £750. The application of the minimum level shall not, however, affect the payment of funeral expenses under paragraph 15 below or, where the victim has died otherwise than in consequence of an injury for which compensation would have been payable to him under the terms of the Scheme, any sum payable to a dependant or relative of his under paragraph 16.

  6. The Board may withold or reduce compensation if they consider that—

  (a) the applicant has not taken, without delay, all reasonable steps to inform the police, or any other authority considered by the Board to be appropriate for the purpose, of the circumstances of the injury and to co-operate with the police or other authority in bringing the offender to justice; or

  413

  (b) the applicant has failed to give all reasonable assistance to the Board or other authority in connection with the application; or

  (c) having regard to the conduct of the applicant before, during or after the events giving rise to the claim or to his character as shown by his criminal convictions or unlawful conduct—and, in applications under paragraphs 15 and 16 below, to the conduct, or character as shown by the criminal convictions or unlawful conduct, of the deceased and of the applicant—it is inappropriate that a full award, or any award at all, be granted.

  Further, compensation will not be payable—

  (d) in the case of an application under paragraph 4(b) above where the injury was sustained accidentally, unless the Board are satisfied that the applicant was at the time taking an exceptional risk which was justified in all the circumstances.

  7. Compensation will not be payable unless the Board are satisfied that there is no possibility that a person responsible for causing the injury will benefit from an award.

  8. Where the victim and any person responsible for the injuries which are the subject of the application (whether that person actually inflicted them or not) were living in the same household at the time of the injuries as members of the same family, compensation will be paid only where—

  (a) the person responsible has been prosecuted in connection with the offence, except where the Board consider that there are practical, technical or other good reasons why a prosecution has not been brought; and

  (b) in the case of violence between adults in the family, the Board are satisfied that the person responsible and the applicant stopped living in the same household before the application was made and seem unlikely to live together again; and

  (c) in the case of an application under this paragraph by or on behalf of a minor, ie a person under 18 years of age, the Board are satisfied that it would not be against the minor's interests to make a full or reduced award.

  For the purposes of this paragraph, a man and a woman living together as husband and wife shall be treated as members of the same family.

  9. If in the opinion of the Board it is in the interests of the applicant (whether or not a minor or a person under an incapacity) so to do, the Board may pay the amount of any award to any trustee or trustees to hold on such trusts for the benefit of all or any of the following persons, namely the applicant and any spouse, widow or widower, relatives and dependants of the applicant and with such provisions for their respective maintenance, education and benefit and with such powers and provisions for the investment and management of the fund and for the remuneration of the trustee or trustees as the Board shall think fit. Subject to this the Board will have a general discretion in any case in which they have awarded compensation to make special arrangements for its administration. In this paragraph "relatives" means all persons claiming descent from the applicant's grandparents and "dependants" means all persons who in the opinion of the Board are dependent on him wholly or partially for the provision of the ordinary necessities of life.

  10. The Board will consider applications for compensation arising out of acts of rape and other sexual offences both in respect of pain, suffering and shock and in respect of loss of earnings due to consequent pregnancy, and, where the victim is ineligible for a maternity grant under the National Insurance Scheme, in respect of the expenses of childbirth. Compensation will not be payable for the maintenance of any child born as a result of a sexual offence, except that where a woman is awarded compensation for rape the Board shall award the additional sum of £5,000 in respect of each child born alive having been conceived as a result of the rape which the applicant intends to keep.

  11. Applications for compensation for personal injury attributable to traffic offences will be excluded from the Scheme, except where such injury is due to a deliberate attempt to run the victim down.
  414
  Basis of compensation

  12. Subject to the other provisions of this Scheme, compensation will be assessed on the basis of common law damages and will normally take the form of a lump sum payment, although the Board may make alternative arrangements in accordance with paragraph 9 above. More than one payment may be made where an applicant's eligibility for compensation has been established but a final award cannot be calculated in the first instance—for example where only a provisional medical assessment can be given. In a case in which an interim award has been made, the Board may decide to make a reduced award, increase any reduction already made or refuse to make any further payment at any stage before receiving notification of acceptance of a final award.

  13. Although the Board's decisions in a case will normally be final, they will have discretion to reconsider a case after a final award of compensation has been accepted where there has been such a serious change in the applicant's medical condition that injustice would occur if the original assessment of compensation were allowed to stand, or where the victim has since died as a result of his injuries. A case will not be re-opened more than three years after the date of the final award unless the Board are satisfied, on the basis of evidence presented with the application for re-opening the case, that the renewed application can be considered without a need for extensive enquiries. A decision by the Chairman that a case may not be re-opened will be final.

  14. Compensation will be limited as follows—

  (a) the rate of net loss of earnings or earning capacity to be taken into account shall not exceed one and a half times the gross average industrial earnings at the date of assessment (as published in the Department of Employment Gazette and adjusted as considered appropriate by the Board);

  (b) there shall be no element comparable to exemplary or punitive damages.

  Where an applicant has lost earnings or earning capacity as a result of the injury, he may be required by the Board to produce evidence thereof in such manner and form as the Board may specify.

  15. Where the victim has died in consequence of the injury, no compensation other than funeral expenses will be payable for the benefit of his estate, but the Board will be able to entertain applications from any person who is a dependant of the victim within the meaning of section 1(3) of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 or who is a relative of the victim within the meaning of the Schedule 1 to the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976. Compensation will be payable in accordance with the other provisions of this Scheme to any such dependant or relative. Funeral expenses to an amount considered reasonable by the Board will be paid in appropriate cases, even where the person bearing the cost of the funeral is otherwise ineligible to claim under this Scheme. Applications may be made under this paragraph where the victim has died from his injuries even if an award has been made to the victim in his lifetime. Such cases will be subject to conditions set out in paragraph 13 for the re-opening of cases and compensation payable to the applicant will be reduced by the amount paid to the victim.

  16. Where the victim has died otherwise than in consequence of the injury, the Board may make an award to such dependant or relative as is mentioned in paragraph 15 in respect of loss of wages, expenses and liabilities incurred by the victim before death as a result of the injury whether or not the application for compensation in respect of the injury has been made before the death.

  17. Compensation will not be payable for the loss of or damage to clothing or any property whatsoever arising from the injury unless the Board are satisfied that the property was relied upon by the victim as a physical aid.

  18. The cost of private medical treatment will be payable by the Board only if the Board consider that, in all the circumstances, both the private treatment and the cost of it are reasonable.
  415
  19. Compensation will be reduced by the full value of any present or future entitlement to—

  (a) United Kingdom social security benefits;

  (b) any criminal injury compensation awards made under or pursuant to statutory arrangements in force at the relevant time in Northern Ireland;

  (c) social security benefits, compensation awards or similar payments whatsoever from the funds of other countries; or

  (d) payments under insurance arrangements except as excluded below which may accrue, as a result of the injury or death, to the benefit of the person to whom the award is made.

  In assessing this entitlement, account will be taken of any income tax liability likely to reduce the value of such benefits and, in the case of an application under paragraph 15, the value of such benefits will not be reduced to take account of prospects of remarriage. If, in the opinion of the Board, an applicant may be eligible for any such benefits the Board may refuse to make an award until the applicant has taken such steps as the Board consider reasonable to claim them. Subject to paragraph 18 above, the Board will disregard monies paid or payable to the victim or his dependants as a result of or in consequence of insurance personally effected, paid for an maintained by the personal income of the victim or, in the case of a person under the age of 18, by his parent.

  20. Where the victim is alive compensation will be reduced to take account of any pension accruing as a result of the injury. Where the victim has died in consequence of the injury, and any pension is payable for the benefit of the person to whom the award is made as a result of the death of the victim, the compensation will similarly be reduced to take account of the value of that pension. Where such pensions are taxable, one-half of their value will be deducted; where they are not taxable, eg where a lump sum payment not subject to income tax is made, they will be deducted in full. For the purposes of this paragraph, "pension" means any payment payable as a result of the injury or death, in pursuance of pension or other rights whatsoever connected with the victim's employment, and includes any gratuity of that kind and similar benefits payable under insurance policies paid for by employers. Pension rights accruing solely as a result of payments by the victim or a dependant will be disregarded.

  21. When a civil court has given judgment providing for payment of damages or a claim for damages has been settled on terms providing for payment of money, or when payment of compensation has been ordered by a criminal court, in respect of personal injuries, compensation by the Board in respect of the same injuries will be reduced by the amount of any payment received under such an order or settlement. When a civil court has assessed damages, as opposed to giving judgment for damages agreed by the parties, but the person entitled to such damages has not yet received the full sum awarded, he will not be precluded from applying to the Board, but the Board's assessment of compensation will not exceed the sum assessed by the court. Furthermore, a person who is compensated by the Board will be required to undertake to repay them from any damages, settlement or compensation he may subsequently obtain in respect of his injuries. In arriving at their assessment of compensation the Board will not be bound by any finding of contributory negligence by any court, but will be entirely bound by the terms of the Scheme.

  Procedure for determining applications

  22. Every application will be made to the Board in writing as soon as possible after the event on a form obtainable from the Board's offices. The initial decision on an application will be taken by a single member of the Board, or by any member of the Board's staff to whom the Board has given authority to determine applications on the Board's behalf. Where an award is made the applicant will be given a breakdown of the assessment of compensation, exept where the Board consider this inappropriate, and where an award is refused or reduced, reasons for the decision will be given. If the applicant is not satisfied with the decision he may apply for an oral hearing which, if granted, will be held before at least two members of the Board excluding any member who made the original decision. The application for a hearing must be made within three months of notification of the initial decision; however the Board may waive this time limit where an extension is
  416
  requested with good reason within the three month period, or where it is otherwise in the interests of justice to do so. A decision by the Chairman not to waive the time limit will be final. It will also be open to a member of the Board, or a designated member of the Board's staff, where he considers that he cannot make a just and proper decision himself to refer the application for a hearing before at least two members of the Board, one of whom may be the member who, in such a case, decided to refer the application to a hearing. An applicant will have no title to an award offered until the Board have received notification in writing that he accepts it.

  23. Applications for hearings must be made in writing on a form supplied by the Board and should be supported by reasons together with any additional evidence which may assist the Board to decide whether a hearing should be granted. If the reasons in support of the application suggest that the initial decision was based on information obtained by or submitted to the Board which was incomplete or erroneous, the application may be remitted for reconsideration by the member of the Board who made the initial decision or, where this is not practicable or where the initial decision was made by a member of the Board's staff, by any member of the Board. In such cases it will still be open for the applicant to apply in writing for a hearing if he remains dissatisfied after his case has been reconsidered and the three-month limitation period in paragraph 22 will start from the date of notification of the reconsidered decision.

  24. An applicant will be entitled to an oral hearing only if—

  (a) no award was made on the ground that any award would be less than the sum specified in paragraph 5 of the Scheme and it appears that applying the principles set out in paragraph 26 below, the Board might make an award; or

  (b) an award was made and it appears that, applying the principles set out in paragraph 26 below, the Board might make a larger award; or

  (c) no award or a reduced award was made and there is a dispute as to the material facts or conclusions upon which the initial or reconsidered decision was based or it appears that the decision may have been wrong in law or principle.

  An application for a hearing which appears likely to fail the foregoing criteria may be reviewed by not less than two members of the Board other than any member who made the initial or reconsidered decision. If it is considered on review that if any facts or conclusions which are disputed were resolved in the applicant's favour it would have made no difference to the initial or reconsidered decision, or that for any other reason an oral hearing would serve no useful purpose, the application for a hearing will be refused. A decision to refuse an application for a hearing will be final.

  25. It will be for the applicant to make out his case at the hearing, and where appropriate this will extend to satisfying the Board that compensation should not be withheld or reduced under the terms of paragraph 6 or paragraph 8. The applicant and a member of the Board's staff will be able to call, examine and cross-examine witnesses. The Board will be entitled to take into account any relevant hearsay, opinion or written evidence, whether or not the author gives oral evidence at the hearing. The Board will reach their decision solely in the light of evidence brought out at the hearing, and all the information and evidence made available to the Board members at the hearing will be made available to the applicant at, if not before, the hearing. The Board may adjourn a hearing for a reason, and where the only issue remaining is the assessment of compensation may remit the application to a Single Member of the Board for determination in the absence of the applicant but subject to the applicant's right to apply under paragraph 22 above for a further hearing if he is not satisfied with the final assessment of compensation. While it will be open to the applicant to bring a friend or legal adviser to assist him in putting his case, the Board will not pay the: cost of legal representation. They will, however, have discretion to pay the expenses of the applicant and witnesses at a hearing. If an applicant fails to attend a hearing and has offered no reasonable excuse for his non attendance the Board at the hearing may dismiss his application. A person whose application has been dismissed by the Board for failure to attend a hearing may apply in writing to the Chairman of the

  417
  Board for his application to be reinstated. A decision by the Chairman that an application should not be reinstated will be final.

  26. At the hearing the amount of compensation assessed by a single member of the Board or a designated member of the Board's staff will not be altered except upon the same principles as the Court of Appeal in England or the Court of Session in Scotland would alter an assessment of damages made by a trial judge.

  27. Procedure at hearings will be as informal as is consistent with the proper determination of applications, and hearings will in general be in private. The Board will have discretion to permit observers, such as representatives of the press, radio and television, to attend hearings provided that written undertakings are given that the anonymity of the applicant and other parties will not in any way be infringed by subsequent reporting. The Board will have power to publish information about its decisions in individual cases; this power will be limited only by the need to preserve the anonymity of applicants and other parties.

  Implementation

  28. The provisions of this Scheme will take effect from 1 February 1990. All applications for compensation received by the Board on or after 1 February 1990 will be dealt with under the terms of this Scheme except that in relation to applications in respect of injuries incurred before that date the following provisions of the 1990 scheme shall apply:

  (a) Paragraph 4(c);

  (b) Paragraph 8, but only in respect of injuries incurred before 1 October 1979 where paragraph 7 of the 1969 Scheme will continue to apply;

  (c) Paragraph 10 but only insofar as it requires the Board to award an additional sum of £5,000 in the circumstances therein prescribed;

  (d) Paragraphs 15 and 16 but only insofar as they enable the Board to entertain applications from a person who is a dependant within the meaning of section 1(3)(b) of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 or who is a relative within the meaning of paragraph 1(aa) of Schedule 1 to the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976 other than such a person who is applying only for funeral expenses.

  29. Applications for compensation received by the Board before 1 February 1990 will continue to be dealt with in accordance with paragraph 25 of the Scheme which came into operation on 1 October 1979 ("the 1979 Scheme") or the Scheme which came into operation on 21 May 1969 ("the 1969 Scheme") except that the following paragraphs of this Scheme will apply in addition to or in substitution for provisions of these schemes as specified below:

  (a) Paragraph 3 of this Scheme will apply in substitution for paragraph 4 of the 1969 Scheme and paragraph 3 of the 1979 Scheme;

  (b) Paragraph 6(c) of this Scheme will apply in substitution for paragraph 17 of the 1969 Scheme and paragraph 6(c) of the 1979 Scheme;

  (c) Paragraph 14 of this Scheme will apply additionally to applications otherwise falling to be considered under the 1969 or 1979 Schemes but only insofar as it allows the Board to require an applicant to produce evidence of loss of earnings or earning capacity;

  (d) Paragraphs 22, 23 and 25 of this Scheme will apply in substitution for paragraphs 21 and 22 of the 1969 Scheme and paragraphs 22 and 23 of the 1979 Scheme;

  (e) Paragraph 26 of this Scheme will apply additionally to applications otherwise falling to be considered under the 1969 or 1979 Schemes:

  (f) Paragraph 27 of this Scheme will apply in substitution for paragraph 23 of the 1969 Scheme and paragraph 24 of the 1979 Scheme;

  30. Applications to re-open cases received before 1 February 1990 will continue to be dealt with under the terms of paragraph 25 of the 1979 Scheme. Applications to re-open cases received on or after 1 February 1990 will be considered and determined under the terms of this Scheme.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Lebanon
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many officials in his Department are detailed to handle the monitoring of, and plans to seek the release of, British hostages in the Lebanon.

  Mr. Maude
  A considerable number of officials both in London and in missions overseas are concerned with the hostage issue. The number involved at any one time depends upon the circumstances.

  Nuclear Tests
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list those states which are party to the partial test ban treaty but at the present time oppose its amendment to constitute a comprehensive ban on nuclear testing; and what are the declared reasons for each state's opposition.

  Mr. Maude
  It would not be appropriate for us to speculate on the views of other parties to the Treaty, or to reveal what has been said to us privately on this subject. However, 23 countries abstained or voted against the UN General assembly L25 resolution calling for the PTBT to be converted into a comprehensive test ban treaty. Those countries were the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Federal Republic of Germany, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Israel, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Turkey.

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action the United Kingdom Government have taken since May 1979 to achieve the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons.

  Mr. Maude
  The United Kingdom participated in the unsuccessful trilateral negotiations on this subject, which took place from 1977 to 1980. But, for the foreseeable future, our security will depend on deterrence, based in part on the possession of nuclear weapons. That means a continuing need to test these weapons to ensure they remain effective and up to date. A comprehensive test ban therefore remains a long term goal.

  Eastern Europe
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he has consulted with academic experts at the School of Slavonic and East Europe Studies at the University of London in formulating his policies in response to changing socio-political developments in eastern Europe in the past six months.

  Mr. Maude
  No, but Ministers and officials of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office have frequent contacts with experts from the school, as they have with other academics, during which such matters are discussed.

  India
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects to have the opportunity to discuss with the new Foreign Minister of India the possibility of India joining the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

  Mr. Maude
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has no plans yet to meet the new Foreign Minister of India.

  Montserrat
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if the chief Minister and other Ministers in Montserrat have been consulted about the adequacy of British aid to the island following the devastation caused by hurricane Hugo; and if he is satisfied that the aid given is adequate in terms of the island's medical and rehousing needs.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  There has been, and continues to be, close consultation with the Government of Montserrat, particularly through our development division in Barbados. I have visited Montserrat twice since hurricane Hugo for discussion with the chief Minister and others. I am satisfied with the aid provided so far. Much remains to be done and we are urgently considering the longer term needs. The chief Minister is meeting ODA officials today, 8 December.

  Scientific Culture
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the achievements of the programme for progress in scientific culture, run by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation advanced studies unit at Erice, Italy.

  Mr. Maude
  NATO runs an advanced study institutes programme which makes grants to individuals who apply to organise summer schools at post graduate level. Some of these have taken place at the Ettore Majorama centre for scientific culture which is an Italian institution and not organised or directly funded by NATO. This programme is of benefit to scientists from both the United Kingdom and other NATO countries.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what benefits accrue to the United Kingdom Exchequer from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation advanced study unit at the Ettore Majorama centre for scientific culture in Erice, Italy; and what is the annual upkeep grant made available to this centre.

  Mr. Maude
  NATO's advanced study institutes programme makes grants to individuals who apply to organise summer schools at post-graduate level. The programme is of benefit to the scientific community in the United Kingdom and in other Alliance countries. An analysis of the precise financial benefit is not available. Some of the summer schools have taken place at the Ettore Majorama centre for scientific culture. However, this is an Italian institution and is not organised or directly funded by NATO.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Market Research
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many market research and sample surveys were carried our by or for his Department in the last 12 months; what was the cost of each; what was the total cost; how many were carried out in house; how many were carried out for his Department by outside organisations; and what, percentage of the total expenditure was paid to outside organisations.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  The latest period for which information is available is from 1 April 1988 to 31 March 1989. During this period, 35 market research, sample surveys and similar studies were carried out on behalf of the Department. None was carried out in-house. The costs involved were:

  Number

  Under £5,000

  6

  £5,000 to £10,000

  6

  £10,000 to £20,000

  13

  £20,000 to £30,000

  4

  Over £30,000

  6

  Total cost = £1,257,896.

  Note: These studies were at differing stages of development—riot all involved client interface during 1988–89.

  The Department also sponsors part of the social policy research unit at York university. They were involved in seven studies during 1988–89 at a total cost of £184,363·50.

  AIDS
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will update the figures given in the reply to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe, on 23 June,Official Report, column 276, for the cost of diets for people with AIDS or HIV infection; if he will also give figures for the income support available to people under 25 years of age who are unemployed but still capable of work; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  Based upon the food component of the September 1988 retail prices index, the diet costed at £14·19 would now cost £15·43 and that of £9·46 would now cost £10·29. The income support available to people under the age of 25 years is £27·40 a week for all 18 to 24 year olds, and certain 16 to 17 year olds who, of necessity, have to live away from home; 16 to 17-year-olds who live in someone else's household may qualify for £20·80 a week.

  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what recent consultations he has had concerning the financial needs of people with AIDS/ARC and HIV; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what representations he has received concerning the financial needs of people with AIDS/ARC/HIV; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  I have received various representations from organisations, including the Terrence Higgins trust, and from individuals. Officials have also had recent consultations with the Department of Health.

  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he expects to be able to send a
  421
  substantive reply to the letter of 12 July from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe, on income support for people with AIDS/ARC/HIV; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  I hope to be able to reply to the right hon. Gentleman today.

  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will specify any difference in treatment in regard to means-tested benefits between payments under the Vaccine Damage Payments Act 1979 and the £20,000 payments from the Macfarlane trust in respect of(a) children and (b) adults.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  All payments from the Macfarlane trust are disregarded for benefit purposes. Lump sump payments made under the Vaccine Damage Payments Act 1979 are normally taken into account as capital, unless they are placed in trust for the recipient. They are then disregarded.

  (a) if the payment is for a child, until he or she is no longer a dependant;

  (b) if the payment is for an adult, for 2 years, or longer in certain circumstances.

  Any payments from a trust will be taken into account as income or capital in the normal way.

ENVIRONMENT

  Dogs
  Mr McAllion
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he intends to introduce legislation for the establishment of a national registration and licence system for dogs.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  We do not agree that the main problems caused by dogs would be solved by a national dog registration scheme, though consideration is being given to alternative schemes to deal with straying and fouling. Our proposed solutions are set out in the consultation paper "Action on Dogs" issued in August. Controls on dangerous dogs have already been significantly strengthened by the Dangerous Dogs Act 1989.

  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he intends to introduce legislation relating to dog registration; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion).

  European Environmental Agency
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if data deposited with the proposed European Environmental Agency will be subject to the provisions of the Official Secrets Act.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Under the terms of the draft regulation on the proposed European Environment Agency, data supplied or or emanating from the agency may be published and shall be made accessible to the public, subject to compliance with the rules of the Commission and the member states on the dissemination of information.

  CFCs
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the outcome of the meeting of the states parties to the Montreal protocol on chlorofluorocarbon control held in Geneva in November; and how the decisions taken at this meeting will affect Her Majesty's Government's policies to combat the greenhouse effect.

  Mr. Trippier
  The meeting was one of a series of preparatory meetings for the second meeting of the parties to the Montreal protocol in London next summer. Its purpose was to identify the amendments and adjustments to the protocol which will be proposed at that meeting. This was achieved. The United Kingdom, acting in concert with the European Community, has taken a leading position on the timetable for phasing out CFCs which are greenhouse gases as well as ozone depleting substances.

  "Inside Sellafield"
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek to obtain for his Department's library from Channel Four television or Pip Limited a copy of(a) the transcript and (b) the videotape of the programme "Inside Sellafield" broadcast on 9 November.

  Mr. Trippier
  The programme has been seen and studied by several of the Department's scientific and administrative staff. There are no plans to buy a transcript or videotape for the library.

  Nature Conservancy Council
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from the trade unions representing the Nature Conservancy Council work force in Scotland concerning his proposed reorganisation of the National Conservancy Council; and if he will make a statement as to the nature of these representations.

  Mr. Trippier
  None.

  Transport Planning
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has received any recent communication from the Open university's energy and environment research unit on the matter of environmental aspects of transport planning.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  No.

  Acid Rain
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of acid rain deposition, and contamination of groundwater by acidity is caused by monocultural foresty development in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Trippier
  The Department's acid waters review group in their second report, copies of which have been placed in the Library of the House, concluded that the primary cause of acidification in sensitive areas of the United Kingdom was acid deposition from the atmosphere. Afforestation might increase the deposition of
  423
  pollutants by 30 per cent. in a mature stand. The effect of the contamination of groundwater is difficult to quantify. Research by the Forestry Commission and within the Department's air pollution research programme on quantifying the effect of afforestation, including mono-cultural forestry, on acid deposition is continuing.

  Hazardous Waste
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has as to the number of large facilities which can handle low and intermediate level radioactive wastes for treatment and volume reduction in(a) the European Community, excluding the United Kingdom, and (b) the rest of the world.

  Mr. Trippier
  The Department does not maintain a comprehensive list of large overseas facilities which can handle low and intermediate-level radioactive wastes for treatment and volume reduction.

  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) how many large chemical incinerators there are in Britain that can handle special wastes;

  (2) if he will give details of the amounts found by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution of polychlorinated biphenyls and dioxin in the flue gases from the Rechem international incinerator plant at Ponteg, Pontypool; and what information he has on comparable figures of large chemical incinerators in the mainland of Europe;

  (3) if he will provide an estimate of the total amount of special wastes dumped at the Leigh environmental waste disposal site at Walsall;

  (4) if he will summarise the results found by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution of tests for polychlorinated biphenyls and dioxin in herbage and soil samples around the Rechem incinerator plant at Ponteg, Pontypool;

  (5) what amounts of chemical waste were incinerated at the Rechem plant in Pontypool in each year from 1985 to the present time; and what quantities of polychlorinated biphenyls contaminated waste were handled each year;

  (6) what estimate he has of the cumulative total amount of polychlorinated biphenyls manufactured over the last 30 years in (a) the Monsanto chemical works in Newport, Gwent, (b) Britain, (c) western Europe and (d) worldwide;

  (7) what information he has as to the amount of special waste incinerated on board ships during 1988 (a) in the North sea, and (b) in European waters;

  (8) what information he has as to the number of large chemical incinerators which can handle special wastes in (a) the European Community, excluding the United Kingdom, and (b) the rest of the world;

  (9) what information he has as to the number of large chemical incinerators for toxic wastes worldwide having (a) a double door with an air-lock, and (b) a single door;

  (10) what information he has of alternative methods to incineration now being developed or considered for the destruction of polychlorinated biphenyls;

  (11) what is the total amount of special wastes that have been subjected to the Leigh environmental sealofsafe solidification process; and what proportion of this is in a non-solid form;
  424
  (12) what quantities of flyash have been imported through Swansea docks for every year from 1979 to the present time; and what are the results of analyses carried out for dioxin in such flyash;

  (13) what quantities of special wastes were imported into Britain for incineration for every year from 1979 to the present time;

  (14) whether Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution will consider the installation of continuous monitoring equipment to measure the amounts of polychlorinated biphenyls dioxin in the flue gas from the Rechem plant in Pontypool.

  Mr. Trippier
  : I wrote to the hon. Member on 5 December.

  Public Expenditure
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment in determining public expenditure plans for 1990–91 what provision was made for the cost of (i) refuse disposal, (ii) land drainage, (iii) cemeteries and cremation, (iv) environmental and port health, (v) planning control and implementation, (vi) recreation, (vii) refuse collection and (viii) community charge collection.

  Mr. Patten
  Information is not available in the form requested.

  An assessment of local authorities' revenue needs for these services and others was made in the standard spending assessment (SSA) for the other services block. The total SSA for other services for 1990–91 is £4,491 million. Within this total, £160 million was identified for land drainage.

  The public expenditure planning total includes the credit approvals issued to local authorities and central Government grants towards local authority capital expenditure but does not include local authority self-financed capital expenditure. The provision for 1990–91 includes credit approvals and capital grants of £9 million for land drainage. There is also provision of £193 million for credit approvals for local environmental services, which include the services mentioned in the question. Of this, £33 million will be issued to authorities needing to carry out remedial works on the build up of landfill gas at waste disposal sites and £39 million will be issued to the authorities responsible for waste disposal expenditure in Greater London and the metropolitan counties.

  The public expenditure planning total also includes provision for expenditure of £44 million by the Sports Council and £24 million by the Countryside Commission.

  Environmental Audits
  Mr. Jack
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will encourage British companies to conduct environmental audits.

  Mr. Trippier
  I welcome the growing practice of environmental auditing which has been adopted by industrial corporations. Such audits help to safeguard the environment by ensuring a more judicious use of resources and energy and minimising waste.

  Housing (Repossession)
  Mr. Brandon-Bravo
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to publish the University of Bristol research report on possession action cases by local authorities.

  Mr. Chope
  I welcome this report by researchers at the university of Bristol which underlines the need for early action by housing managers when local authority rent arrears arise. Court proceedings can too easily substitute for effective housing management practice.

  The report, published today, was based on a study of 1,200 possession action cases brought by local authorities most of which were actions to recover rent arrears. It showed that there were considerable variations in the level of rent arrears before local authorities took action in the courts. Delays meant that rent arrears often increased substantially before cases were heard in court.

  The Lord Chancellor's civil justice review recommended several improvements to the current procedures for possession actions and suggested a new streamlined rent action to speed debt recovery and avoid some possession cases coming to court.

  Highway Maintenance
  Sir Michael Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will review the data used in calculating the highway maintenance element of the standard spending assessment relating to the treatment of winter maintenance.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Following representations from my hon. Friend and others, I have concluded that the formula for the highway maintenance component of standard spending assessments (SSAs) does not reflect my right hon. Friend's desired treatment of winter maintenance. We have therefore today notified the local authority associations and informed all local authorities of a revised formula. After allowing for some other data changes, this will increase the standard spending assessments component for this service for a number of non-metropolitan counties which have a high incidence of snow. I have put details in the Library. As a result the standard spending assessment for north Yorkshire will increase by £3·1 million, which is equivalent to a £6 per head reduction in the community charge bill.

  Carnwath Report
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he proposes to issue a consultative paper on the recommendations of the Carnwath report.

  Increases in weekly earnings, April 1979 to April 1989 and estimates of employees in employment, March 1979 and 1989

  Average earnings

  Median earnings

  Employees in employment Thousands

  Cash

  Per cent.

  Cash

  Per cent.

  £

  £

  1979

  1989

  Males

  Manufacturing

  162·8

  160

  142·4

  149

  na

  3,518·8

  Non-manufacturing

  173·6

  176

  145·3

  161

  na

  7,257·5

  Females

  Manufacturing

  99·1

  165

  86·0

  149

  1,603·1

  1,226·9

  Non-manufacturing

  123·6

  191

  107·2

  180

  3,902·5

  4,635·5

  426
  Mr. Moynihan
  [holding answer 7 December 1989]: My right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State announced the publication of the report and his intention to consult widely about it on 5 April.

  Civil Servants
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many civil servants in his Department work(a) full time and (b) part time on (i) heritage, (ii) archaeology and (iii) the royal parks.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  [holding answer 7 December 1989]: The complement of headquarters civil servants dealing with heritage and archaeology is 392·5 full time equivalents. Within this complement there are about 17 part-time workers—most employed at the new Historic Palaces Agency. Ten officers work full-time in the Department on archaeological casework to do with the scheduling of monuments and sites. However, responsibility for advising Government on archaeological matters and for grant-aiding particular projects lies with English Heritage. Its ancient monuments division has 45 staff and a further 22 are engaged on monuments scheduling work.

  The royal parks have a complement of 599 full-time equivalent staff. Within this complement there are three part-time workers.

  Nature Conservancy Council
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those representations he has received(a) welcoming and (b) opposing his plans to dismember the Nature Conservancy Council.

  Mr. Trippier
  [holding answer 7 December 1989]: My Department has received a large number of representations, about the proposals to reorganise the Nature Conservancy Council. It is not possible to allocate these in a meaningful way to the precise categories envisaged by the hon. Member. A number of representations contained elements both of support and of criticism.

EMPLOYMENT

  Earnings
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will provide for both full-time adult males and females figures corresponding to those given in his answer of I November Official Report, column 240, in cash and in percentages for the period 1979 to 1989, together with the number of employees represented by each category at each of the dates.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The available information is provided in the table:
  427
  Notes:

  1. Earnings data relates to full-time adult employees in Great Britain whose earnings were not affected by absence.

  2. Estimates of employees in employment in Great Britain are taken from the regularly published employment series.

  3. na denotes not available.

  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will publish in the Official Report a table showing the increase in output per head and the corresponding averages and medians for manual and non-manuals in each case with a further breakdown for each of the principal manufacturing industry groups for the last 10 years to April.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Information is not available on output per head in the form requested. Output per head for the principal manufacturing industry groups is given in table 7·2 of the Monthly Digest of Statistics.

  Ambulance and Nursing Services
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether men in the ambulance and nursing services are regarded as manual or non-manual workers.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Ambulance men are regarded as manuals and nurses as non-manuals in the classification of occupations used for statistical purposes by my Department.

  Training Schemes
  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what training schemes were referred to in the published decisions of the adjudication officers in the period between April and June 1989 that 300 claims for unemployment benefit were disallowed because of refusal or premature termination of training.

  Mr. Eggar
  A person can be disqualified from receiving unemployment benefit only in cases of refusal or premature termination of training, if it is a training scheme approved by the Secretary of State for the purposes of section 20(1)8(e)-(g) of the 1975 Social Security Act.

  The only training scheme approved by the Secretary of State is the youth training scheme.

  Mr. Cummings
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many employment trainees have secured permanent employment in the Seaham and Peterlee areas following completion of their training.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Information about the destinations of people leaving employment training in the Seaham and Peterlee areas is not available.

  Mr. Cummings
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many employment trainees there are in the Seaham and Peterlee areas.

  Mr. Nicholls
  On 1 December 1989, the latest date for which information is available, there were 705 trainees on employment training in Seaham and Peterlee.

  Older Workers
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will monitor the demand for older people to return to the work force due to the decreasing numbers of young skilled workers and ensure that returning older workers are not exploited.
  428
  Mr. Nicholls
  The changing patterns of older workers' participation in the labour market are monitored through the labour force survey.

  The onus is on employers to offer terms and conditions which encourage older workers to remain in or return to the labour force. The Government have emphasised the impact on employers of the declining number of young people and will continue to stress to employers the importance of making the best use of the abilities and skills of all people in the labour force, particularly under-utilised groups such as older workers.

  Lead
  Mr. George Howarth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what level of lead in the bloodstream is considered to be medically safe for industrial workers working on processes which bring them into regular contact with lead; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The Control of Lead at Work Regulations 1980 and the accompanying approved code of practice specify that where the level of lead in the blood is greater than 70 microgrammes per 100 millilitres (or 40 microgrammes per 100 millilitres for a women of reproductive capacity), the worker should be removed from further exposure to lead until the blood-lead levels have fallen below these concentrations.

  Working Mothers
  Ms. Armstrong
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is the proportion of mothers of children aged five years to 11 years who are in(a) part-time, arid (b) full-time work for the latest year that figures are available.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Among women in Great Britain whose youngest dependent child was aged at least five years but under 11 it is estimated, using information from the labour force survey, that in spring 1988 just over 45 per cent. were in part-time employment and about 18½ per cent. were in full-time employment.

  Disabled Persons
  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what are the reasons for his decision not to hold centrally information about the numbers of firms adhering to the Disabled Persons (Employment) Act 1944; and whether these compliance levels will be analysed centrally before any recommendation concerning the future of the quota system is made by him.

  Mr. Eggar
  Information about the number of firms adhering to the Disabled Persons (Employment) Act 1944 is held centrally. However, this does not include the more detailed information about specific industries requested in the hon. Gentleman's question on 6 November 1989 at column 478. To assemble and hold such information centrally would be disproportionately costly.

  Information on quota compliance levels is being considered in the internal review of services to people with disabilities which this Department is currently undertaking.

SCOTLAND

  Health Boards
  Mr. Galbraith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give for each health board the amount spent on advertising for each of the last three years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The information available from health boards' annual accounts about advertising costs is shown in the table:

  Health board

  1986–87

  1987–88

  1988–89

  Argyll and Clyde

  69,071

  102,687

  90,722

  Ayrshire and Arran

  63,175

  71,459

  98,574

  Borders

  26,753

  36,331

  49,516

  Dumfries and Galloway

  27,639

  25,950

  24,141

  Fife

  72,329

  99,243

  65,989

  Forth Valley

  39,570

  50,248

  48,293

  Grampian

  76,441

  88,909

  126,015

  Greater Glasgow

  81,158

  153,086

  227,574

  Highland

  39,160

  49,565

  45,111

  Lanarkshire

  56,500

  55,872

  68,742

  Lothian

  119,062

  140,231

  160,636

  Orkney

  2,847

  1,848

  3,559

  Shetland

  6,985

  7,102

  12,065

  Tayside

  74,563

  79,968

  83,774

  Western Isles

  17,852

  21,956

  18,282

  Total

  773,105

  984,455

  1,122,993

  Public Appointments
  Mrs. Roe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many persons above the age of(a) 60, (b) 65 and (c) 70 years he has appointed to public bodies in each of the last 10 years.

  Mr. Rifkind
  I do not have comprehensive information of this kind. If the hon. Lady has any particular point in mind, I should be glad if she would write to me about it.

  Enterprise Companies
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much he expects to be spent in the present financial year to assist the development of local enterprise companies in Scotland.

  Mr. Lang
  It is not possible to identify separately the administrative costs incurred by the Scottish Office, Scottish Development Agency, Highlands and Islands Development Board and Training Agency in 1989–90 in relation to the development of local enterprise companies. The provision of development funding to local enterprise companies—in the lowlands to be made jointly by the Scottish Development Agency and Training Agency, and in the highlands and islands to be made jointly by the Highlands and Islands Development Board and Training Agency—is not likely to exceed £0·2 million in 1989–90.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland under which class of the Scottish Office vote moneys are to be paid out for the development of local enterprise companies.

  Mr. Lang
  The provision of development funding to local enterprise companies in the lowlands will be made jointly by the Scottish Development Agency and Training 430
  Agency and in the Highlands and Islands by the Highlands and Islands Development Board and Training Agency. My right hon. and learned Friend funds the Scottish Development Agency and the Highlands and Islands Development Board from subheads A 1 and B1 respectively of class XVI, vote 3. Resources for the Training Agency's activities in Scotland are provided under class XVI, vote 4, subhead A1.

  Tourism
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much was spent by(a) Scottish Development Agency and (b) the Highlands and Islands Development Board in promoting tourism and the tourist industry in each of the last five financial years.

  Mr. Lang
  The most recent figures available are as follows:

  (a) Scottish Development Agency

  Financial year

  Expenditure£ million

  1984–85

  0·3

  1985–86

  0·3

  1986–87

  3·7

  1987–88

  0·1

  1988–89

  Nil

  (b) Highlands and Islands Development Board

  Financial year

  Expenditure£ million

  1984–85

  8·2

  1985–86

  9·0

  1986–87

  8·7

  1987–88

  8·2

  1988–89

  8·8

  Notes:

  1. The Scottish Development Agency figures cover loan and equity finance for tourism projects which meet its normal investment criteria and tourist projects under schemes for urban and rural development. In addition, a number of feasibility studies, land engineering and property development projects funded by the agency may have tourism benefits.

  2. Provision by the Highlands and Islands Development board is through its marketing and projects programmes and under its section 8 assistance scheme. The above figures do not include expenditure on salaries and administration.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he anticipates roles for the tourist industry and those involved in promoting tourism within the proposed local enterprise companies, Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  I expect local enterprise companies to reflect the importance of tourism in their areas. Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise will be able to draw upon tourism expertise in the same way as the Highlands and Islands Development Board, the Scottish Development Agency and the Training Agency.

  Voluntary Organisations
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about his Department's decision to withdraw funding from the East Lothian Council for Voluntary Service; and if he has any proposals for alternative support for voluntary organisations in East Lothian.
  431
  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 30 November 1989]: I shall write to the hon. Member.

DEFENCE

  Nuclear Submarines (India)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment his Department has made of the security implications for the United Kingdom of the acquisition of nuclear powered submarines by India.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  There are no apparent security implications for the United Kingdom arising from the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines by India.

  Nuclear Tests
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what is the United Kingdom Government's current approach to the seismic verification of treaties constraining nuclear testing;

  (2) if he will outline the important verification difficulties that remain to be resolved before an agreement can be reached by the United Kingdom Government on a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Putney (Mr. Mellor) on 27 June 1988 at column 61, and to the working paper on seismic monitoring tabled in the conference on disarmament in 1985 (CD 610), a copy of which is in the Library of the House.

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many scientific personnel are currently employed by

  Intake

  Outflow

  January to September

  January to September

  1988

  1989

  1988

  1989

  All Services

  Total

  26,154

  27,155

  28,578

  31,672

  Male officers

  1,949

  1,907

  2,486

  2,638

  Service men

  22,229

  22,451

  23,976

  26,759

  Female officers

  264

  286

  266

  260

  Service women

  1,712

  2,511

  1,850

  2,015

  Royal Navy

  Total

  4,082

  4,082

  4,513

  4,779

  Male officers

  424

  445

  507

  516

  Service men

  3,230

  3,065

  3,595

  3,760

  Female officers

  22

  36

  36

  39

  Service women

  406

  536

  375

  464

  Royal Marines

  Total

  755

  716

  886

  819

  Male officers

  40

  40

  40

  41

  Service men

  735

  676

  846

  778

  Army

  Total

  16,496

  17,419

  17,542

  18,808

  Male officers

  936

  969

  1,131

  1,251

  Service men

  14,669

  15,215

  15,382

  16,594

  Female officers

  96

  124

  117

  127

  Service women

  795

  1,111

  912

  836

  Royal Air Force

  Total

  4,801

  4,938

  5,637

  7,266

  Male officers

  549

  453

  808

  830

  Service men

  3,595

  3,495

  4,153

  5,627

  Female officers

  146

  126

  113

  94

  Service women

  511

  864

  563

  715

  432
  the United Kingdom Government or by Government-sponsored enterprises working on verification of a global comprehensive test ban treaty.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The Ministry of Defence's research establishment at Blacknest, near Aldermaston, employs 27 scientific personnel, including a number of contract staff, who undertake seismological research which could be used in establishing the requirements of a verification regime for further constraints on nuclear testing.

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the United Kingdom Government's annual expenditure, for each year since May 1979, on verification of a global comprehensive test ban treaty.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Information on the costs of seismological research undertaken at Blacknest, near Aldermaston, dating back to 1979 could be provided only at disproportionate cost. I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him on 19 October 1989 at column 251 concerning the costs of this work for the financial year 1988–89.

  Officers and Other Ranks
  Mr. Wilkinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what were the levels of recruitment and outflow for officers and other ranks in all three services in the periods January to September 1988 and January to September in the current year.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Numbers for intake to the services from civil life and outflow from the services are as follows:

  RAF Cadets (Exchange)
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the implication for national security of the proposed exchange of Royal Air Force flying cadets from Bracknell and Cranwell colleges with Soviet flying cadets from the Gagarin Air Academy in Moscow.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  A successful exchange of visits has taken place this year between the directing staff of the Royal Air Force Staff College Bracknell and the Gagarin Academy. Further exchanges are being considered but there are no plans for an exchange of air force cadets. Care has been taken to ensure that defence contacts with the Soviet Union meet security requirements.

  Long-range Air-launched Missiles
  Mr. Macdonald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether approval has been sought from the United States Government for the Anglo-French co-production of a long range air-launched missile.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  It is not clear what long-range air-launched missile the hon. Member has in mind, but in no case has such approval been sought.

  Mr. Macdonald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions have taken place with(a) British Aerospace, (b) Thomson-CSF and (c) the French Government about the co-production of a long-range, air-launched missile.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  None.

  Mr. Macdonald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what specifications have been provided to British Aerospace in respect of the production of a new long-range, air-launched missile.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  None.

  BAe and Thomson-CSF
  Mr. Macdonald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions the Government have had with the joint venture company recently formed by British Aerospace and Thomson-CSF.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  The MOD has been informed by BAe and Thomson-CSF of the companies' proposal to form a joint venture defence weapon system company to be known as Eurodynamics. Subject to consideration of national security and competition implications in the light of the detailed proposals by the companies, the MOD would welcome the proposition.

  Number of ambulance vehicles 1979–891—England—By Region

  Region

  1979–80

  1980–81

  1981–82

  1982–83

  1983–84

  1984–85

  1985–86

  1986–87

  1987–88

  Northern

  548

  549

  566

  546

  546

  470

  458

  477

  479

  Yorkshire

  615

  590

  590

  660

  597

  636

  638

  647

  680

  Trent

  590

  687

  668

  651

  644

  648

  678

  688

  698

  East Anglian

  194

  202

  218

  221

  218

  219

  225

  231

  235

  North West Thames

  194

  194

  197

  199

  196

  193

  200

  202

  200

  North East Thames

  173

  175

  172

  168

  149

  148

  137

  133

  150

  South East Thames

  343

  346

  344

  311

  317

  300

  300

  300

  300

  South West Thames

  1,230

  1,270

  1,227

  1,281

  1,179

  1,184

  1,170

  1,127

  1,121

  Wessex

  295

  295

  302

  328

  308

  297

  293

  280

  247

  Oxford

  286

  282

  289

  289

  285

  284

  283

  279

  283

  Royal Navy (Defence Missile System)
  Mr. Lee
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the Royal Navy's requirement for a support defence missile system.

  Mr. Neubert
  I can announce today that we intend, subject to the satisfactory conclusion of negotiations with the other participating nations, to join a 24-month project definition phase for the local area missile system (LAMS) variant of the family of anti-air missile systems next year. We have therefore decided, after very careful consideration, not to participate in the next phase of the NATO anti-air warfare system (NAAWS) project.

  The choice between these two collaborative programmes has been an extremely difficult one because both projects offer the prospect of a highly capable ship defence system. Many complex factors have had to be assessed; particular consideration has been given to the balance between technical performance and programme cost and risk. The United Kingdom's requirement for a SDMS is linked to the MOD's plans to procure an anti-air warfare (AAW) escort ship to come into service at the turn of the century to replace the type 42 destroyers. On balance, it has been concluded that, of the two projects, FAMS offers the better prospect of providing an affordable and capable system within that time scale.

  Running Costs Limit
  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he proposes to make any change to the 1989–90 running costs limit for his Department.

  Mr. Tom King
  The running costs limit for the Ministry of Defence will be reduced by £12,907,000 from £5,162,254,000 to £5,149,347,000. It reflects a decrease of £28,907,000 to compensate for an overspend in 1988–89 offset by a £16,000,000 increase for additional security measures. This follows the normal practice of reducing the limit for one financial year by the amount of any overspend in the previous year.

HEALTH

  Ambulance Service
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list, for each year since 1979, the total number of ambulance vehicles, staff and costs, at 1989 prices by region.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The information requested is shown in the tables:
  435

  Region

  1979–80

  1980–81

  1981–82

  1982–83

  1983–84

  1984–85

  1985–86

  1986–87

  1987–88

  South Western

  472

  479

  479

  490

  484

  480

  447

  457

  438

  West Midlands

  691

  704

  749

  749

  728

  713

  690

  713

  702

  Mersey

  310

  302

  302

  306

  338

  351

  387

  393

  393

  North Western

  601

  595

  614

  608

  616

  568

  534

  532

  556

  Total

  6,542

  6,670

  6,717

  6,807

  6,605

  6,491

  6,440

  6,459

  6,482

  Notes:

  1 The total number of vehicles used to transport patients.

  2 The figures for the south west Thames region include those for the London ambulance service.

  National Health Service Ambulance Staff in post by region At 30 September each year

  whole-time equivalent

  Region

  1979

  1980

  1981

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  England

  17,129

  17,768

  18,221

  18,324

  18,397

  18,103

  18,188

  18,966

  19,010

  18,761

  Northern

  1,415

  1,446

  1,473

  1,474

  1,482

  1,424

  1,396

  1,401

  1,390

  1,357

  Yorkshire

  1,404

  1,548

  1,606

  1,622

  1,630

  1,604

  1,596

  1,640

  1,666

  1,573

  Trent

  1,780

  1,798

  1,842

  1,890

  1,904

  1,905

  1,934

  1,968

  1,979

  1,961

  East Anglia

  581

  597

  599

  626

  638

  646

  675

  770

  772

  773

  North West Thames

  475

  465

  492

  484

  467

  456

  456

  488

  541

  525

  North East Thames

  510

  534

  566

  584

  565

  537

  542

  591

  593

  594

  South East Thames

  870

  908

  938

  942

  943

  950

  949

  957

  951

  920

  South West Thames

  592

  641

  638

  637

  633

  596

  629

  667

  663

  675

  Wessex

  906

  907

  947

  954

  943

  952

  946

  990

  978

  952

  Oxford

  727

  730

  753

  762

  750

  750

  757

  815

  837

  835

  South Western

  1,375

  1,401

  1,408

  1,424

  1,438

  1,430

  1,441

  1,470

  1,482

  1,455

  West Midlands

  1,764

  1,809

  1,873

  1,849

  1,889

  1,849

  1,880

  1,936

  1,914

  1,917

  Mersey

  799

  826

  852

  870

  894

  910

  893

  947

  955

  932

  North Western

  1,605

  1,653

  1,649

  1,688

  1,703

  1,584

  1,605

  1,668

  1,701

  1,687

  London Ambulance Service

  2,325

  2,506

  2,587

  2,519

  2,518

  2,505

  2,491

  2,659

  2,587

  2,605

  Source: Department of Health (SM13) Annual Census of National Health Service non-Medical manpower.

  Note: All figures are independently rounded to nearest whole-time equivalent.

  Total revenue expenditure on ambulance services (at 1988–89 prices)

  £'000s

  Regions

  1979–80

  1980–81

  1981–82

  1982–83

  1983–84

  1984–85

  1985–86

  1986–87

  1987–88

  1988–891

  Northern

  23,226

  24,625

  24,527

  24,141

  23,503

  22,857

  22,661

  23,297

  22,820

  22,207

  Yorkshire

  23,015

  24,920

  25,036

  24,515

  25,129

  24,883

  24,964

  25,921

  25,651

  24,687

  Trent

  28,119

  29,958

  29,388

  29,311

  29,175

  29,409

  29,074

  30,958

  30,957

  30,009

  East Anglian

  11,673

  12,324

  12,328

  12,207

  12,761

  12,632

  12,614

  13,562

  13,370

  13,073

  North West Thames

  19,779

  21,725

  22,126

  21,282

  20,381

  20,110

  20,334

  22,389

  8,759

  8,696

  North East Thames

  21,583

  23,616

  24,020

  23,265

  22,717

  22,072

  22,303

  24,643

  9,389

  9,149

  South East Thames

  23,792

  25,759

  25,852

  25,409

  25,066

  24,336

  24,039

  25,916

  15,673

  15,252

  South West Thames

  17,976

  19,603

  19,813

  19,301

  18,866

  18,495

  18,453

  19,816

  58,143

  57,622

  Wessex

  16,095

  16,944

  17,019

  17,035

  17,363

  17,476

  17,439

  18,384

  18,025

  16,975

  Oxford

  12,960

  13,225

  13,176

  12,973

  12,669

  12,411

  12,183

  13,402

  13,507

  13,462

  South Western

  22,524

  23,162

  22,857

  22,813

  22,962

  22,821

  22,539

  24,989

  25,049

  24,150

  West Midlands

  29,746

  30,973

  30,608

  29,979

  29,668

  30,106

  29,696

  31,684

  32,052

  30,886

  Mersey

  12,857

  14,115

  14,207

  13,824

  13,773

  13,930

  13,846

  15,122

  15,095

  14,619

  North Western

  26,307

  28,185

  27,489

  27,235

  27,571

  26,416

  26,153

  27,259

  26,700

  25,439

  ENGLAND TOTAL

  289,651

  309,134

  308,445

  303,290

  301,606

  297,951

  296,298

  317,344

  315,189

  306,283

  1 1988–89-Provisional cash figures (as yet subject to audit).

  Sources: Annual accounts of regional and district health authorities in England (those of their predecessor authorities for the years prior to 1982–83).

  Notes to the table:

  1. The figures have been expressed at 1988–89 prices by the use of the Gross Domestic Product Deflator.

  2. From 1987–88 the South West Thames regional health authority accounts for the expenditure of the London Ambulance Service. In earlier years the costs were shared by the four Thames regional health authorities.

  AIDS
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he will be taking to prevent double counting in anonymous AIDS testing.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  In any anonymous survey there is a possibility of double counting. However, this problem is taken into account in the survey design and can also be minimised by appropriate statistical methods.

  Funding (Leicestershire District Health Authority)
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on representations he has received for additional funding for the Leicestershire district health authority.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  My right hon. and learned Friend has received no recent representations for additional funding for Leicestershire health authority.

  Doctors and Dentists Review Body
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if he will indicate how much additional money he has recommended to the doctors and dentists review body as the sum needed to take into account the extra work for general practices arising from the new contract;

  (2) if he will publish his Department's evidence to the doctors and dentists review body.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  No. There is a long-standing agreement between the parties concerned that evidence to the doctors and dentists review body is not published until after the Government have announced their decisions on the recommendations made by the review body.

  Child Migrants
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action his Department is taking on grants to assist child migrants; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The Department is considering a grant application from the Child Migrants trust. Officials have met and are in contact with representatives of the Child Migrants trust to discuss how the Department might assist. We are unable to make a decision about the trust's grant application until extra information requested is provided and considered.

  Phoenix House, Liverpool
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many drug addicts used services provided by Phoenix house, Liverpool during the past 12 months; and if he will make a statement on the future of Phoenix house.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  This information is not held centrally. Phoenix house is a major non-statutory organisation providing a variety of services for drug misusers to which the Government have allocated over £1 million under the central funding initiative to develop drug misuse services.

WALES

  Health Service
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many and which community health councils in Wales have made representations to him opposing the National Health Service White Paper "Working for Patients".

  Mr. Grist
  The White Paper includes a wide range of measures to improve the organisation and management of the NHS so as to maximise patient care. Community health councils are in frequent correspondence with the Department about many issues. In recent months many such representations have concerned one or more aspects of individual White Paper proposals, and have included views supporting or expressing concern about them. It would be possible only at disproportionate expense to analyse these in the manner requested by the hon. Gentleman.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the number of National Health Service beds available for the elderly in each Welsh health authority area from 1985 to 1988 inclusive.
  438
  Mr. Grist
  The number of beds in specialities designated as geriatric, psychogeriatric and elderly mentally infirm is shown in the following table. Elderly patients can, however, be treated in beds allocated to other specialities.

  Average daily available beds

  Health authority

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  Clwyd

  585·1

  590·6

  562·9

  534·0

  East Dyfed

  417·6

  419·5

  409·9

  404·9

  Gwent

  981·2

  973·2

  966·9

  958·9

  Gwynedd

  438·5

  446·3

  443·4

  451·1

  Mid Glamorgan

  920·8

  923·2

  938·1

  805·9

  Pembrokeshire

  134·4

  134·5

  126·4

  126·6

  Powys

  238·0

  220·3

  206·2

  220·5

  South Glamorgan

  460·6

  463·9

  455·9

  455·8

  West Glamorgan

  503·9

  461·6

  481·5

  470·5

  Mr. Geraint Howells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many general practitioner practices in Wales have more than 11,000 patients; and where they are situated.

  Mr. Grist
  At June 1989 there were 39 practices in Wales with more than 11,000 patients. The location of the main surgery of these practices is shown in the table:

  Location

  Number of practices

  Rhyl, Clwyd

  1

  Wrexham, Clwyd

  3

  Prestatyn, Clwyd

  1

  Mold, Clwyd

  1

  Buckley, Clwyd

  1

  Gresford, Clwyd

  1

  Abergele, Clwyd

  1

  Carmarthen, Dyfed

  1

  Haverfordwest, Dyfed

  1

  Caldicot, Gwent

  1

  Monmouth, Gwent

  1

  Newport, Gwent

  3

  Amlwch, Gwynedd

  1

  Llandudno, Gwynedd

  1

  Bedwas, Mid Glamorgan

  1

  Bridgend, Mid Glamorgan

  2

  Church Village, Mid Glamorgan

  1

  Pontypridd, Mid Glamorgan

  2

  Dowlais, Mid Glamorgan

  1

  Merthyr Tydfil, Mid Glamorgan

  1

  Porthcawl, Mid Glamorgan

  1

  Caerphilly, Mid Glamorgan

  1

  Ystradmynach, Mid Glamorgn

  1

  Ystradgynlais, Powys

  1

  Brecon, Powys

  1

  Newtown, Powys

  1

  Cardiff, South Glamorgan

  4

  Barry, South Glamorgan

  1

  Gowerton, West Glamorgan

  1

  Swansea, West Glamorgan

  1

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many long-term patients have been discharged from psychiatric hospitals in Wales in every year since 1985 in each area health authority in Wales.

  Mr. Grist
  The number of patient discharges following a stay of one year or more, is shown in the following table:

  Patient discharges from mental illness hospitals or units

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  Clwyd

  65

  44

  47

  63

  East Dyfed

  30

  42

  46

  43

  Pembrokeshire

  —

  —

  —

  —

  439

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  Gwent

  46

  42

  56

  53

  Gwynedd

  —

  4

  4

  2

  Mid Glamorgan

  33

  55

  41

  51

  Powys

  6

  6

  17

  12

  South Glamorgan

  39

  26

  35

  43

  West Glamorgan

  31

  31

  47

  44

  Patient discharges from mental handicap hospitals or units

  Clwyd

  1

  3

  5

  8

  East Dyfed

  3

  1

  —

  —

  Pembrokeshire

  4

  5

  3

  10

  Gwent

  7

  10

  33

  12

  Mental illness1

  Mental handicap

  Number of beds

  Changes in number

  Number of beds

  Changes in number

  1985

  1988

  1985–88

  1985

  1988

  1985–88

  Clwyd

  657·3

  558·0

  - 99·3

  92·0

  62·7

  -29·3

  East Dyfed

  577·3

  492·3

  - 85·0

  71·0

  32·0

  -39·0

  Gwent

  931·0

  883·0

  - 48·0

  421·7

  374·7

  -47·0

  Gwynedd

  46·5

  92·2

  + 45·7

  333·2

  325·7

  - 7·5

  Mid Glamorgan

  1,197·0

  1,031·3

  -165·7

  488·2

  420·0

  -68·2

  Pembrokeshire

  —

  —

  —

  32·0

  32·0

  —

  Powys

  335·0

  323·0

  12·0

  209·5

  196·1

  -13·4

  South Glamorgan

  687·8

  654·6

  - 33·2

  411·1

  384·3

  -26·8

  West Glamorgan

  406·6

  371·2

  - 35·4

  142·5

  80·0

  -62·5

  1 Includes mental illness, mental illness (children), adolescent psychiatry, psychogeriatric and elderly mentally infirm.

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many representations he has received from general practitioners in Wales(a) opposing and (b) supporting the National Health Service White Paper "Working for Patients".

  Mr. Grist
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to my reply of 6 December to the hon. Member for Ynys Mon (Mr. Jones).

  Aged 75–84 inclusive

  Aged 85 and over

  1988 population county

  In thousands

  Per cent.1

  In thousands

  Per cent.1

  Clwyd

  24·3

  6·0

  6·5

  1·6

  Dyfed

  20·6

  5·9

  5·1

  1·5

  Gwent

  22·5

  5·0

  5·7

  1·3

  Gwynedd

  15·9

  6·7

  4·5

  1·9

  Mid Glamorgan

  26·5

  4·9

  6·0

  1·1

  Powys

  7·1

  6·1

  1·7

  1·5

  South Glamorgan

  20·5

  5·1

  5·9

  1·5

  West Glamorgan

  20·9

  5·7

  5·3

  1·5

  1As a percentage of total population of each county.

  Source: OPCS mid year estimates of population.

  Rural Transport
  Mr. Geraint Howells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has for co-ordinating bus and coach timetables in rural Wales.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  None. It is for bus operators to issue their own timetables. County councils have powers to promote bus and coach services in conjunction with commercial operators if they so wish.

  Mr. Geraint Howells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has to provide a subsidy to Dyfed county council to assist in providing a bus-rail link from Lampeter to Llandovery.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  None. The county council have powers to subsidise a service from their own resources.
  440

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  Gwynedd

  9

  10

  9

  16

  Mid Glamorgan

  22

  7

  18

  19

  Powys

  5

  12

  7

  6

  South Glamorgan

  5

  14

  11

  13

  West Glamorgan

  31

  7

  14

  8

  Mr. Livsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many psychiatric hospital beds in Wales have been closed down since 1985 in each area health authority.

  Mr. Grist
  Information on the numbers of average daily available beds is shown in the following table:

  Pensioners
  Mr. Geraint Howells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the number of pensioners aged(a) 75 to 85 years and (b) 85 years and over in each Welsh county in numbers, and as a percentage of the total population in the areas concerned.

  Mr. Grist
  The estimated populations aged 75 to 85 and aged 85 and over of each county in numerical and percentage terms are shown in the following table:

  Mentally Handicapped People
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has to visit the St. Augustinusstichting village al Gemep, Holland, to investigate the pioneering work undertaken to create a village community for the mentally handicapped.

  Mr. Grist
  The principles underlying the provision of mental handicap services in Wales are set out in the Government's all Wales mental handicap strategy. There are no proposals to alter these principles.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether he is considering alternative futures for Llanfrechfa Grange hospital on the lines of the village community for the mentally handicapped at St. Augustinusstichting, Gemep, Holland.
  441
  Mr. Grist
  Proposals for any substantial variation in the service provided in a district are a matter in the first instance for the health authority.

  Drug Addicts
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what centres exist for the treatment of drug addicts residing in each of the counties of Wales; and whether he has any proposals for increasing the provision.

  Mr. Grist
  The provision of services and facilities for drug misusers in their area is essentially a matter for individual health and local authorities to determine. Existing and planned local services will suffice for the needs of the majority of problem drug misusers but there remains a small number of cases where more specialist help is needed. Two in-patient units exist with special interest in such cases. These are the Adfer unit in South Glamorgan and a unit at the North Wales hospital, Denbigh. In addition, we are aware of two voluntary sector projects which can provide residential rehabilitation facilities for drug misusers. These are the Rhoserchan project near Aberystwyth, and Teen Challenge at Llanelli.

  To supplement and support those local services the Government established in 1986 the central initiative to combat drug misuse. That initiative provides additional increasing resources for statutory and voluntary services. The current annual provision is around £1·5 million, details of which I announced in April of this year. Copies of that announcement are available in the Library of the House. Future provision will be announced in the new year.

  Water
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales for which sites in Wales he has exercised his power under section 42 of Part II of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 to issue certificates exempting discharges from the public register held by the water authority; what was the name of the plant operator; and on what dates the certificates were issued.

  Mr. Grist
  None.

  Welsh Language Teaching
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he expects to announce his decisions in respect of the secondary schools which have applied for exemption from the provision in the national curriculum to teach Welsh to pupils in years one to three.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  I am currently considering responses to the consultation on my proposals for Welsh in the national curriculum and aim to publish draft orders for attainment targets and programmes of study around the end of the year.

  I shall reach decisions about the case for exempting individual schools in good time for the beginning of implementation in Autumn 1990. Before doing so I shall want to consult the local education authorities for their views.

  Correspondence
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many letters his Department has received during the 1988–89 parliamentary Session from hon. Members 442
  representing Welsh constituencies; and what was the average length of time between the receipt of the correspondence and the sending of a reply.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  [holding answer 5 December 1989]: My Department received 2,997 letters from hon. Members representing Welsh constituencies during the 1988–89 parliamentary Session. Replies were sent, on average, 17 working days after receipt.

ENERGY

  Market Research
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy how many market research and sample surveys were carried out by or for his Department in the last 12 months; what was the cost of each; what was the total cost; how many were carried out in-house; how many were carried out for his Department by outside organisations; and what percentage of the total expenditure was paid to outside organisations.

  Mr. Wakeham
  All 46 surveys carried out for my Department in the last year were placed with outside organisations at a total cost of £705,000. Individual amounts are commercially confidential.

  "Inside Sellafield"
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will seek to obtain for his Department's library from Channel Four television or Pip Limited a copy of(a) the transcript and (b) the videotape of the programme "Inside Sellafield" broadcast on 9 November.

  Mr. Wakeham
  No.

  Retired Miners
  Mr. Cummings
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy how many(a) retired miners, (b) miners retired early through ill health and (c) miners made redundant, are in receipt of fuel or cash in lieu of allowances; and how many widows are in receipt of fuel or cash in lieu of allowances.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  Concessionary fuel is a matter for the British Coal Corporation. I have asked the chairman to write to the hon. Member.

  Greenhouse Effect
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a year-by-year projection for the period of 1990 to 2010 on the likely introduction of gas-fired power plants for electricity production, by mine output; and what contribution this will make to mitigation of the greenhouse global warming effect.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  It is for the electricity industry to determine the type and amount of plant needed to meet expected demand. Gas-fired generating plant will have a contribution to make to reduction in emission of carbon dioxide, one of the greenhouse gases.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy, pursuant to paragraph 1.6 of Her Majesty's Government's response, HC611, to the Energy Committee's fourth
  443
  special report on energy policy implications of the greenhouse effect, if he will specify what is meant by bottom-up pressure of sensible ideas; and how he defines sensible ideas in this context.

  Mr. Peter Morrison
  In the context of research relating to the greenhouse effect, it is appropriate that objectives should be specified clearly, in advance, before projects are funded. The scientific and engineering community continues to put forward a variety of suggestions for research, which can be appraised against appropriate objectives. These suggestions represent a bottom-up pressure of ideas. Those proposals which can make a contribution to our scientific understanding, or to possible ways of dealing with the consequences of the greenhouse effect, are examples of sensible ideas.

  Research
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if his Department, or the energy technology support unit at Harwell, is currently conducting any collaborative research with the Swedish National Energy Administration; and whether there are any plans for future collaboration.

  Mr. Peter Morrison
  The primary vehicle for collaborative research with Sweden is under the auspices of International Energy Agency. Both the United Kingdom and Sweden are very active within the Agency and there is collaboration on a large number of topics, including, coal combustion, solar heating and cooling and wind energy. In addition, separated agreements exist between the Swedish national energy administration and the energy technology support unit on research, development and demonstration of bioenergy and with my Department on the energy database. My Department is always receptive to opportunities for appropriate research and development collaboration.

  Collaboration on geothermal hot dry rocks took place in 1986 when my Department funded and participated in a viscous stimulation of a 500m hole drilled in Sweden.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what publications produced by(a) the energy research group and (b) the energy and environment research unit of the Open university are in his departmental library; and if he will make a statement on the utility of Open university energy research publications in informing his policies.

  Mr. Wakeham
  The Department of Energy's library holds the following publications of the Open university energy research group:Combined heat and power: a discussion of Energy paper 20—R. Armson. 1977.
  A critique of the electricity industry. 1976.
  A dynamic physical energy model of the United Kingdom—M. A. Barrett. 1982.
  DYPHEMO applications: simulation of UK energy systems with a dynamic physical energy model—M. Barrett. 1982
  Energy analysis of the Report on the Census of Production —D. A. Cooper, P. F. Chapman and N. D. Mortimer. 1975.
  The energy consumer's handbook—G. Hammond and C. Russell. 1980.
  Energy costs of delivered energy, UK 1968—P. F. Chapman. 1973.
  The energy costs of producing copper and aluminium from primary sources—P. F. Chapman. 1973.
  Energy costs of road and rail freight transport, UK 1968—N. D. Mortimer. 1974.
  444
  Energy in the home. 1978.
  Energy in the home: guide to the course: unit 1, Fuel for thought; unit 2, The balance of power. 1978.
  Energy in the home: unit 3, A matter of degree; unit 4, The burning question. 1978.
  Energy in the home: unit 5, Baths and draughts; unit 6, Windows and walls. 1978.
  Energy in the home: unit 7, Roofs and floors; unit 8, Look before you leap. 1978.
  Energy requirements for the conversion of coal into liquid fuel—D. F. Hemming 1977.
  Energy requirements of North Sea oil production—D. F. Hemming. 1975.
  Future transport fuels—P. Chapman, G. Charlseworth and M. Baker. 1976.
  Future transport fuels: discussion of SR 251: proceedings of a conference held at the Open University on 22nd March 1977—Edited by T. Baker and G. Charlesworth. 1977
  Gross energy requirements for air transport—N. D. Mortimer. 1975.
  Gross energy requirements of marine transport—N. D. Mortimer. 1974.
  Linford low energy houses—R. Everett, A. Horton and J. Doggart. 1985. Work performed under contract for the Energy Technology Support Unit on behalf of the Department of Energy. (ETSU-S-1025).
  Milton Keynes Energy Park: wind study: a report to Milton Keynes Development Corporation—T. Oreszczyn and B. Jones. 1984
  The Pennyland project—R. Lowe, J. Chapman and R. Everett. 1985. Report for the Milton Keynes Development Corporation under contract to the Energy Technology Support Unit.
  Primary energy requirements for the production of iron and steel in the UK— R. F. Waller. 1976.
  Reflections on Britain's nuclear history: a conversation with Lord Hinton—D. Lowry. 1984

  The library holds no publications by the Open university energy and environment research unit.

  The library purchases or borrows publications when so requested by officers of the Department or when their contents seem relevant to current departmental work and to the Department's policy-making.

  Electricity
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what is the total amount per annum of dry weight biomass available for combustion to produce electricity; and how much of this fuel source is currently used in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Peter Morrison
  The extent to which biomass can be made available for electricity generation depends on the arrangements made for its collection and combustion and their economics. Energy Paper 55, published by my Department estimated that biomass could contribute between 4 million and 15 million tonnes of coal equivalent per year to United Kingdom energy supplies by 2025. In principle all this could be used for electricity generation. Current utilisation is estimated to be about 0·8 million tonnes of coal equivalent per year.

  Non-proliferation Treaty
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what recent suggestions his Department has received from non-governmental organisations in regard to policy proposals for Her Majesty's Government's delegation to the fourth review conference of the non-proliferation treaty in Geneva in August 1990.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  None.
  445
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy (1) what specific assistance in energy conversion and electricity production technologies, including pollution abatement controls, have been made available to each Comecon member state in eastern Europe in each year since 1979; and what plans there are to increase assistance in the future;

  (2) what technologies designated to improve energy efficiency in the domestic, commercial and industrial sectors have been made available to eastern European member states of Comecon since 1979.

  Mr. Peter Morrison
  My Department has a cooperation agreement with the Soviet Union covering:

  (a) oil and gas

  (b) energy efficiency

  (c) coal, and

  (d) electricity production.

  A number of Comecon countries also have access to the results of the Department's passive solar design R & D programme through the United Kingdom's participation in the UN Economic Commission for Europe's energy efficiency programme.

  The Department participates in a scientific collaboration agreement with Hungary. Other assistance to Comecon countries in the energy field is given through trade, within Comecom rules: energy efficiency technology, for example, has been supplied to a number of Comecon countries. As I said in my speech to energy technologists at Cambridge recently, developments in eastern Europe underline this area as an important market for the future and I believe there are real commercial opportunities for the United Kingdom.

  Plutonium
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy when he expects to publish the civil plutonium production figures for 1988–89; and what it has cost him to prepare this data.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  The figures were published on 5 December and copies placed in the Library of the House. My Department's role is to co-ordinate the information for publication. The bulk of the work has been done by the Central Electricity Generating Board, the South of Scotland Electricity Board, British Nuclear Fuels plc and the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority.

  Efficiency
  Mr. Rost
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy how many companies are currently involved in their best efficiency practice scheme in the sectors of steel, ceramics, chemicals, food and drink, motors and drivers, and textiles.

  Mr. Peter Morrison
  The direct involvement of companies in these sectors in the Best Practice programme which started in April 1989 is currently as tabulated. In addition many more companies have been involved by way of participation in consultations leading to future participation in projects or to future development of the programme.

  Sector

  Companies involved in projects

  Companies involved in supply of quantative information.

  Steel

  5

  23

  Ceramics

  0

  55

  Chemicals

  8

  31

  Food and drinks

  4

  30

  Motors and drives

  5

  0

  Textiles

  0

  0

  Oil Price
  Mr. Rost
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what change in the demand for energy he anticipates occurring in 30 years if the real price of oil rises(a) to $43 a barrel, and (b) to $23 a barrel.

  Mr. Peter Morrison
  Future energy demand will depend —amongst other things—on the rate of economic growth, the price of fuels and technological progress.

  The Department of Energy produced a set of scenarios for energy demand—based on IEA price assumptions—in a report entitled:
  "`An Evaluation of Energy Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Measures to Ameliorate Them— October 1989."
  The figures reported are baseline scenarios against which various technical options could be set. The report forms part of the United Kingdom contribution to the work of the intergovernmental panel on climate change and a copy has been lodged in the House of Commons Library.