Sitting of 21 December 1989

Preamble
The House met a half-past Nine o'clock>
PRAYERS
[MR. SPEAKER in the Chair]
BILL PRESENTED
  ENTERPRISE AND NEW TOWNS (SCOTLAND)
  Mr. Secretary Rifkind, supported by Mr. Secretary Fowler, Mr. Secretary Patten, Mr. Ian Lang, Lord James Douglas-Hamilton, Mr. Michael Forsyth and Mr. Peter Lilley, presented a Bill to establish public bodies to be known as Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise and to make provision as to their functions; to dissolve the Scottish Development Agency and the Highlands and Islands Development Board; to make further provision as regards new towns in Scotland; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Monday 8 January and to be printed. [Bill 36.]

Statutory Instruments, &c
Mr. Speaker: With the leave of the House, I shall put together the Questions on the nine motions on statutory instruments.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.)

Statutory Instruments, &c

  RATING AND VALUATION
  That the draft Electricity Supply Industry (Rateable Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft British Waterways Board (Rateable Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft Railways (Rateable Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft Water Undertakers (Rateble Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft Docks and Harbours (Rateable Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft Electricity Generators (Rateable Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft Telecommunications Industry (Rateable Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft British Gas plc (Rateable Values) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.
  That the draft Non-Domestic Rating (Transitional Period) (Appropriate Fraction) Order 1989, which was laid before this House on 7th December, be approved.—[Mr. John M. Taylor.]
  Question agreed to.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn—[Mr. John M. Taylor.]

Fire Safety (Castle Point)
9.35 am
Sir Bernard Braine: Traditionally, the House provides opportunities to draw attention to the need to redress grievances, to right wrongs and to expose administrative blunders. Today, I wish to raise a matter of the utmost importance to the safety of my constituents. I refer to the recent proposal of Essex county council's fire and public protection committee to reduce to one the number of whole-time fire engines in Hadleigh in my constituency of Castle Point, and to relocate the hose-laying lorry to Billericay, more than 10 miles away.
There was no consultation with the district council or with me before this ill-considered proposal was made. Its significance can be grasped at once if I tell the House that in 1933 the Hadleigh fire station had two fire engines to cover 13,000 people. It now has the same number to protect 51,000 people and provides support for surrounding areas with 90,000 people. It is against that background that we must consider the proposal to reduce fire cover for my constituents.
In a report on the subject presented to the county fire and public protection committee in November, it was stated that the average annual number of calls received at Hadleigh in the years 1984 to 1988 was 337. In 1988 the station in fact responded to 796 calls, of which 367 were for the Hadleigh area itself and the rest for surrounding areas. I want to consider that figure of 796 calls last year. Significantly, the total number of calls received up to 17 December this year was 913, and we are not yet at the end of the year. That means that in the last year alone there has been an increase in calls of about 15 per cent. It is not, therefore, as though the number of calls, and, therefore, the scale of the risk, is declining.
Nor are we concerned with risks solely to residential and business property. Hadleigh fire station covers what is described as a "C" risk area, which is mainly residential with some shops. In addition, however, it is responsible for the "C" risk area of Canvey Island, which includes a major liquefied gas installation and other industrial plant classified as major industrial hazards. I should add that Hadleigh is central to an area from Leigh-on-Sea in the east, Benfleet, Thundersley and Basildon in the west, Rayleigh in the north and Canvey Island in the south. It is therefore very well placed to give support to surrounding districts.
You will know, Mr. Speaker how necessary it has become over the past 20 years for me to raise not once, but many times, the serious threat that is posed to my constituents by an excessive concentration on Canvey and in neighbouring Thurrock of stores of liquefied gas, oil and chemicals. That has led to warning after warning of the risks involved to human life and property, and to the holding of numerous and lengthy public inquiries.
One example of the problem is the huge methane gas storage plant holding tens of thousands of tonnes of liquefied gas which, if released by accident, could produce a lethal gas cloud. As the prevailing winds are south-westerly, one can see from the map that such a cloud would blow over a densely populated area where there are tens of thousands of adventitious sources of ignition. Every house has a gas pilot light, people light cigarettes
604
and there are little fires all over the place. One can imagine what would happen if a gas cloud blew across a residential area.
Some hon. Members may recall—and my constituents certainly recall—that the matter became so serious that it drew repeated attention and comment not only in this country, but overseas. It even led to the publication of books by scientists in France and the United States. Some may even recall that in July 1974 I was obliged to raise the matter here in a speech which, I was told later, was the longest made from the Back Benches in this place for almost 150 years. So it was that at last the Government of the day took the matter seriously. Thanks to the vigilance of the newly established Health and Safety Executive and as a result of the recommendations of several lengthy public inquiries, there has been a marked improvement in safety standards and some reduction in the totality of risk.
However, risk remains, and the district council and I are determined that our defences should not be reduced. Against that background, I want to make it plain that any reduction in the fire and rescue cover for Canvey, let alone the rest of the area served by the Hadleigh fire station, is wholly unacceptable to me and to my constituents.
There are several crucial factors that the Essex fire and public protection committee appears to have ignored. Since the second world war, south-east Essex has grown faster than almost any other region. The population of Castle Point alone has leapt from 30,520 in 1950, to 79,300 in 1974, to 85,900 by 1987 and to about 87,000 now. The most vulnerable area in the district is Canvey which had a population of 10,800 in 1950, when I was first elected for the constituency, and now has a population of 36,000. The figures themselves tell the story. One reason for this growth has been the expansion of home ownership in the area. Castle Point can proudly claim to have more home owners as a proportion of its total population than any other district in Britain. Rochford, our next door district which used to be part of my constituency, comes a close second. Such phenomenal growth does not argue for a reduction in fire cover, but rather the reverse.
Any reduction in the number of fire engines at Hadleigh must inevitably mean running the risk of not being able to respond to calls as quickly as is necessary. I understand that the fire research establishment at Boreham Wood has test chambers which demonstrate how fires develop. As we know, there are many ways in which a fire can be started, can develop, and can then engulf and destroy a building if unchecked. In some cases, fumes alone can kill or disable people within a few minutes. In others the fire can be brought quickly under control provided—and only provided—that firemen receive adequate warning. What firemen can never know is just how serious a fire is until they reach it. The earliest possible warning must be given, therefore, combined with the earliest possible response. That means having available the right number of men with the right equipment. Flexibility is the key to effective action. To play around with a cost-cutting exercise against that background is irresponsible and that exercise must not be allowed to prevail.
The last word in the matter rests not with the county fire and public protection committee but with the Home Office. In this connection I draw my hon. Friend's attention to two special considerations which underline the short-sightedness of the proposal to reduce fire cover for my constituency. First, the fire service consists not only of full-time professional officers of high calibre, who are

605
available for emergencies at all times of the day or night, but of dedicated retained personnel who are, in essence, part-time volunteers. I am told that it is increasingly difficult to secure the services of such people.
I hope that my hon. Friend has read the report of the chief fire officer, who makes the point clearly in the conclusion to his recent review of the standards of fire cover. The chief fire officer says:
"Essex is one of the largest and fastest growing counties in the country and any reduction in fire cover should be considered with extreme caution. Regrettably the reliability of Retained personnel has become increasingly unpredictable due to the dormitory nature of the County and a greater reluctance on the part of employers to release their workers for retained duties. This latter situation is due in no small part to the on-going emphasis in the industrial and commercial sectors on productivity and value for money."
No one can read that passage without realising that the chief fire officer is giving a clear warning to the fire authority.
Elsewhere in the report, the chief fire officer says:
"Financially it may seem attractive to reduce the number of appliances to the absolute minimum recommended standards, but there are occasions where peaks of operational workload occur, such as flooding, prolonged dry periods, gales, etc. which are additional to normal fire calls. At these times, the Service's resources are obviously overstretched to an extent that normal response times cannot be met. If pumps are reduced, this will decrease the resources available to deal with the extremely high demands placed on the service at these times."
Those two statements in the chief fire officer's report were ignored by the fire and public protection committee. I must ask whether the Home Office is aware of the situation regarding retained personnel. If that is the position in Essex, surely it is likely to obtain elsewhere in the country. It is a factor that surely must be taken into account before any approval is given to reducing fire cover, in the words of the chief fire officer,
"to the absolute minimum standards",
which would be involved if the proposed reduction in my constituency were ever to be implemented. I seek a firm assurance from my hon. Friend—if not today, later, and certainly before any decision is taken—that such idiocy will not be tolerated in Castle Point or elsewhere.
Secondly, Essex county council should be aware—certainly we in Castle Point are aware—of the growing congestion of our roads. With the best will in the world, that problem is unlikely to improve for some time to come. For the present and for the next two years, major roadworks at the Rayleigh Weir and on the heavily congested A 127 will create acute difficulties, especially in regard to the cover that Hadleigh is required to give to neighbouring Rayleigh, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Rochford (Dr. Clark), which I once had the honour to represent. The repercussions for Rayleigh of any decision to halve the fire and rescue cover at present provided by Hadleigh are serious. My hon. Friend the Member for Rochford told me yesterday that he shares my anxiety and that he will seek to reinforce my plea early in the new year, if common sense does not prevail. The matter is serious for Rayleigh because, among the proposals, is one to close the Rochford fire station—in my hon. Friend's constituency—which also provides cover for Rayleigh.
Rayleigh, however, is covered by the Hadleigh station at all times but has only one retained fire engine. Reduce the cover, and Rayleigh is left exposed. In any emergency, it would have to await the arrival of a fire engine from
606
Hawkwell, Leigh, Southend or Basildon but Rayleigh too, like Castle Point, has a fast-growing population. It is madness to contemplate reducing the cover that Hadleigh currently provides. I repeat, and I am measuring my words carefully, that an unnecessary delay of minutes in the arrival of a fire engine can mean the difference between getting a fire under control and a complete disaster, including loss of lives.
As for the road situation, which is crucial to effective and rapid deployment of fire fighters, I readily admit that plans are afoot for road improvement, but until they are implemented it would be foolhardy in the extreme to reduce existing fire cover and the flexibility that it provides. Canvey Island is particularly vulnerable, not only because of the hazardous installations but because it has only limited road access to the mainland. For years, the islanders have clamoured for an additional access, but we do not yet have it. As the chief fire officer has said, the fire service exists not merely to protect property from fire and to save lives but to help with other emergencies, such as serious accidents on roads, flooding and other sudden and unpredictable disasters.
My constituents remember the 1953 flood disaster, when Canvey Island was inundated and we lost more lives than any other district down the east coast and into the Thames estuary. They remember, too, the repeated warnings at public inquiries of the dangers of fire arid explosion posed by the industrial hazards with which they have to live. Essex county council may think again, but in the meantime I wish to serve warning that any reduction in the fire cover for Canvey and for Castle Point as a whole is unacceptable. Therefore, I hope that when my hon. Friend replies he will say that he and his Department are sensitive to the situation and he will be able to give me an assurance that no such reduction in cover will be approved. It is possible that Essex county council will change its mind. I hope that it will, but the ultimate responsibility rests squarely on my hon. Friend's Department. One final point: I hope that he will concede that, if the population growth in Castle Point and in Essex as a whole has warranted the recent and welcome increase in police strength, the same sensible approach should be taken towards the provision of our fire and rescue services.
9.53 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peter Lloyd): I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine) both on securing the debate and on raising an important issue of crucial concern to him and his constituents—the provision of an effective fire service. I assure him that I do not underestimate the seriousness with which he speaks. I noted what he said and I am sure that his local fire authority will as well.
It may be helpful if I begin by describing where responsibilities lie in this matter. Under the relevant legislation—the Fire Services Acts 1947 and 1959—it is the duty of the fire authority for the area to secure the services of such a fire bridgade and such equipment as may be necessary to meet efficiently all normal requirements. In this case, the fire authority is the Essex county council. Therefore, it is the responsibility of Essex county council to determine the appropriate number of fire stations, fire appliances and fire fighters for its area, all of which go to make up the fire cover.

607
Under the legislation, the fire authority is required to make an establishment scheme, which sets out its arrangements to provide fire cover. It has to send the establishment scheme to the Home Office, but the Home Secretary's approval to the scheme is not required. The fire authority is free to increase the fire cover in its area—it does not need the Secretary of State's approval to do that—but it must seek the Secretary of State's approval if it wishes to reduce fire cover in its area. That includes varying the establishment scheme by closing a fire station or reducing the number of appliances, or full or part-time fire fighters.
In determining the fire cover for its area, the county council will, like other fire authorities, have regard to the nationally recommended standards of fire cover which have been in existence since 1936. They contain recommendations about the number of fire appliances that should be sent to fires in particular kinds of areas, and how quickly those appliances should arrive.
There are four main categories of risk. At one end of the scale, for the kind of risk to be found in many of our major city centres, known as 'A' risk, the standards recommend that two appliances should arrive within five minutes and a third within eight minutes. At the other end of the scale, known as 'D' risk and covering much of our rural areas, the standards recommend that one appliance should arrive in no more than 20 minutes.
These standards have been reviewed comparatively recently. They were reviewed by a joint committee of the Central Fire Brigades Advisory Councils for England and Wales and for Scotland, called the joint committee on standards of fire cover. This joint committee included representatives from the Home Departments, the local authority associations, the Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers and the Fire Brigades Union, as well as other interested parties. In its report to the Central Fire Brigades Advisory Council, the joint committee on standards of fire cover recommended that fire authorities should review fire risk categorisation in their area, having regard to nationally recommended standards of fire cover. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary accepted the committee's recommendation and its proposals on appropriate standards of fire cover. In a circular to fire authorities issued in May 1985, the Home Office asked fire authorities to put in hand reviews of fire risk categorisation in their areas.
I understand that the chief fire officer of Essex county fire and rescue service presented his review of standards of fire cover to the fire and public protection committee of his county council in November of this year. I also understand that the report contains some 15 recommendations. The great majority of these recommendations relate to the need to keep under review the status of existing fire stations, particularly where population growth is taking place in the area, or for the relocation of existing stations. One recommendation is to the effect that the possibility of a change in manning the system should be investigated at the station concerned. Further recommendations are that a site in the Stansted area should be purchased for a fire station and that the number of pumps at the station at Dunmow should be increased from one to two. In only two cases is there a recommendation that fire cover should be
608
reduced, but I immediately appreciate that both the stations concerned are in my right hon. Friend's constituency.
Four of the recommendations relate to stations in my right hon. Friend's constituency, at Corringham, Hadleigh, Rochford and Canvey Island—all of which he mentioned. I understand that the chief fire officer has recommended that there should not be any change in standards of fire cover at Corringham, but that its status should be reviewed regularly.
I understand that the chief fire officer has recommended closure of the part-time station at Rochford, whose area can be covered within nationally recommended standards by Southend's whole-time station or by the part-time station at Hawkwell. As to Hadleigh, I believe that the report recommends the removal of one fire appliance and the relocation of a hose-laying lorry to Billericay.
The chief fire officer's report does not propose any change in relation to fire cover in Canvey Island. It does, however, draw attention to the fact that if special risks and other industries on Canvey Island continue to decline, a move from full shift manning to day manning by one of the appliances should be considered. The second appliance is part time and no change is envisaged in the report.
I understand that the fire and public protection committee of Essex county council considered the chief fire officer's report on 16 November, when it accepted all his recommendations subject to local consultations, and he wrote to Her Majesty's inspector of fire services to advise him of that on 20 November.
It will then be a matter for the county council, as the fire authority, to consider the views of its fire and public protection committee and to decide whether to proceed with proposals to close fire stations or to reduce the number of firefighters or fire appliances.
Should the county council decide to propose the closure of fire stations, reductions in operational firefighters, or removal of fire appliances, it must first obtain the approval of my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary. Such approval would be given only where my right hon. and learned Friend was satisfied, on the professional advice of Her Majesty's inspectorate of fire services, that the county council would continue to discharge its statutory obligations to provide an effective fire service and to meet nationally recommended standards of fire cover.
For the moment, this remains a matter for the county council. It is responsible for providing fire cover in the county and it is considering the result of the recent review of fire cover. It must, for the moment, be for the county council to consider its chief fire officer's report, and it would be undesirable for me to comment more fully now on what might come before my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary as an application for his determination. But I can give my hon. Friend the assurance that should the county council seek my right hon. and learned Friend's approval to reduce fire cover in the area he will take careful note of my right hon. Friend's comments this morning.
The Government are committed to maintaining the nationally recommended standards of fire cover and to the maintenance of an effective fire service in all parts of the United Kingdom. The fire service is an organisation of which all who serve in it, at whatever level, can be justifiably proud and my right hon. and learned Friend the

609
Home Secretary is determined to keep it so. I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving me the opportunity of saying that this morning.
Sir Bernard Braine rose—
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): Order. I take it that the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine) has the leave of the House to speak again.
Sir Bernard Braine: With the leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I should like to speak again. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his carefully considered answer. Reading between the lines, I think that I have the assurance that at the end, if all else fails, the Home Office will pay particular attention to what I have said this morning, which reflects the view of many of my constituents.
My hon. Friend said that initial responsibility rests with Essex county council. I know that that is the case and it is most unfortuate that, because of the failure of the fire and public protection committee to appreciate all the factors that obtain in my part of the county, let alone the rest of the county, it has come up with preposterous proposals which cannot stand.
I ask my hon. Friend and his advisers to look again carefully at the chief fire officer's report. I have great confidence, as, I think, all in Essex have, in our chief fire officer. One can see clearly from the report that he is issuing warning after warning to the local government committee which has the responsibility to which my hon. Friend refers. For example, in his introduction he says:
"Essex continues to develop"—
that is a reference to the rapid increase in population that we have sustained over many years—
"and this review aims to provide a long-term strategy designed to enable the Service to achieve and maintain maximum cost-effectiveness."
With respect, the first requirement that the public expect is maximum effectiveness in fire protection. The report goes on:
"The recommendations contained with this Report are subject to consultations with the Home Office and, in the case of any reductions of fire cover, to the approval of the Home Secretary."
610
That is where the buck stops. Ultimately, the Home Secretary must look at the matter and decide. Will my hon. Friend convey to the Home Secretary the fact that the proposals to which I have referred this morning are simply not acceptable on any criteria that anyone cares to advance?
I do not know what consultations have already taken place between Essex county council and the Home Office. I imagine that there have been none because the Home Office knows the overall picture. It has had to listen many times in the past to hon. Members talking in the House about the dangers to which we are exposed in south-east Essex. Successive Prime Ministers have taken a personal interest in the Canvey situation. There is no escape for the Home Secretary in regard to the decision. The sooner consultations take place and the ridiculous, damaging and irresponsible proposal is withdrawn, the better.
I take comfort from my hon. Friend's measured response. In passing, I congratulate him on his appointment. We have great faith and trust in him. I am sure that, as a result of today's debate, he will have managed to get a grip on the situation my constituency now faces. I beg him to let me know as soon as possible what steps are being taken in his Department to bring some sense into this situation.
Mr. Peter Lloyd rose—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I take it that the Minister has the leave of the House to speak again.
Mr. Lloyd: With the leave of the House, I shall respond briefly to my right hon. Friend. I understand and have noted the strength of feeling with which he speaks. My right hon. Friend mentioned the buck being passed, but it is definitely with Essex county council at the moment. Therefore, until it makes its proposals my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary has no role in the matter. But when proposals are made that he has to consider, I assure my right hon. Friend that he will consider them most carefully along with any comments that have been made.
Sitting suspended at 10.7 am.
On resuming—

Puppy Farming
10.15 am
Mr. Alan Williams: It is difficult to convince people that something as soft-sounding as puppy farming could be a screen behind which there is so much cruelty. Most members of the public associate puppy farming with the little bundle of fluff that they see in a pet shop window. They do not realise that all too often the pet shop window is the end of a callous, cruel, greed-ridden and deliberately dishonest trail that can frequently be traced back to farms in my own part of the country, Wales. However, similar problems arise in Scotland, Cornwall and other parts of the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, the examples to which I shall refer are in south-west Wales.
This is an appropriate time of the year to discuss the matter, although it might have been better to discuss it a week or two earlier. However, parliamentary time did not permit such a debate to take place then. Christmas is the time of peak sales of puppies, although it is becoming increasingly an all-year-round business. Even more important, it is becoming very big business. There are many caring and well-intentioned breeders and dealers, but far too many of them are neither caring nor genuine. They are out purely for maximum financial gain.
The popular myth is that most puppies are given to children, particularly at Christmas. Subsequently, however, many of them are abandoned as the children lose interest in them. The Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals and others have discovered, however, that a very large proportion of the puppy trade is dominated by people in their thirties and forties who buy puppies not for children but for elderly parents, in the hope that the puppies will provide them with comfort and even security. They do not seem to realise that the minimum part of the cost of a dog is its purchase price, even though that sometimes can be high. The RSPCA and others calculate that it costs about £4,000 to keep a dog over its average 11-year life. When one gives such a gift to a pensioner or a child, one is imposing on the family or pensioner an £8 a week cost for keeping the dog during the next decade. People ought, therefore, to consider that aspect when deciding whether to give puppies as presents.
That is not, however, the subject of the debate. I want to talk about a trade that is often sordid and cruel and, above all, is epitomised by sheer greed. I have already referred to the fact that most of my examples will come from south-west Wales. Most of them are to be found some distance to the west of my constituency, in a belt between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen.
I became involved in the issue two months ago—I must admit, by accident. While I was stuck in one of London's traffic jams on 12 October, I was listening to "Face the Facts" on my car radio when I heard a John Waite report that horrified me and convinced me that if the House were aware of all the circumstances action would be taken. The programme introduced what was described as a new cash crop. I should like to read some excerpts because I do not want colleagues to think that this is just one Member's view of what this trade represents. I want them to realise when they look at the Official Report that these are the views of outsiders who had no preconceptions. On the "Face the Facts" programme, the dogs were described as
612
"a new and lucrative cash crop for local farmers and smallholders many of whom would rather you did not know about some of the conditions in which those thousands of cuddly little Christmas presents are being bred."
That is certainly true. Those people would far prefer that no one knew about those conditions.
Mr. Alan Coxon, who with his wife and friends set up an organisation called Puppy Watch Wales to monitor what was happening and draw attention to the scandal, said:
"when you walk round the back of what could be a pleasant farm, you find a long shed with bitches three or four to a pen in darkness all the time, horrrendous noise, horrendous stench and the poor animals know no other way of life. Once they have been used for breeding for six or seven years, twice a year producing litters and making pots and pots of money for their owners, they are simply discarded because they are no use any more and they are either shot or dumped."
The lucky ones are shot. I visited one animal sanctuary where the lady who had taken over the premises found dogs and pups in the septic tank that were surplus to needs. They had not been killed in any decent manner but had simply been dumped. Mr. Coxon and his friends presented me with a petition containing more than 5,000 signatures of people, most of whom came fom the Carmarthen area, who were protesting about the horrors on the puppy farming "industry", for it has indeed become an industry.
If anything, Mr. Coxon's description was a serious understatment of the magnitude of the problem. The "Face the Facts" team was soon shown the reality, when Inspector Anderson of the RSPCA took the team to several farms. Referring to one farm, a reporter said:
"The smallholder led us around to the back of the building where we discovered breeding was carried out in a disused and dilapidated railway goods wagon. Inside dogs shivering with cold"—
this was during one of the mildest Octobers on record, so one can imagine the conditions during the past couple of weeks—
"were living on a sparse bed of straw heavily matted with excrement and sodden with urine and rain water. Though we saw five bitches, a Shih Tzu, a poodle, and three Yorkshire Terriers and then later a heavily pregnant King Charles spaniel, the owner insisted only two were kept for breeding."
As the team went around the farm, the situation deteriorated rapidly. The team came across a terrier, and Inspector Anderson said:
"It's got a broken jaw."
The bones were sticking out, and there are more gruesome details which I will not go into. The smallholder said:
"You might be right, but she's old, isn't she?"
Inspector Anderson prevailed on the owner to allow the team to take the poor creature to a vet. The reporter said:
"We set off for Carmarthen and the vet. The forlorn creature that shared the journey huddled whimpering in the back, her useless lower jaw hanging limp. On closer inspection we saw dried food caked around and in her eyes. Evidently the bitch's only method of feeding had been to push her face in whatever food was available in the hope that some would go down her throat."
The vet put that poor creature down, which was perhaps the kindest thing that could happen. One of the anomalies of the cases which I am describing is shown by the fact that, despite the dog's condition, Inspector Anderson could take it away only with the owner's permission. He could not have done so if the owner had objected.
I know that the Minister and his officials have looked at the transcript and that some of them have listened to a tape of the programme. After hearing the programme, I immediately contacted John Waite and his producer, Guy Smith. They kindly came to the House of Commons and

613
gave me a lot of background information. They told me that, 10 months earlier, HTV had produced two programmes which went out late in the evening on the same subject. I visited them in Cardiff and they kindly provided videos of the programmes. They were still angry—so angry that, a year later, they were preparing a third programme. They were so committed that HTV had gladly said that it would waive all copyright conditions on the stills from the videos because it wanted to publicise what was happening.
I have a couple of photographs with me. They are horrible and horrifying. On several farms, I saw abandoned cars and vans that were used as pens for these poor creatures. The animals were locked in and left for long periods. The vans and cars were full of weeks of excrement in which the animals were living. There is a photograph of a Doberman that had been living in its excrement for so long that its hindquarters were so ulcerated that it could neither sit nor stand properly—it had to be put down. Up until the time of its death, it had been used for breeding.
One of the most horrible photographs was of three King Charles spaniels which had virtually no fur. The other pens were occupied and they had been left without food for so long that they had lost their coats and were sleeping on concrete. They died of hypothermia. These are the sort of conditions that exist in this kind and cuddly trade.
Most people would find it beyond belief that some people could be so stupid as well as so cruel. After all, as the pups sell for so much money, one would think that at least the owners would see the bitches as assets and take care of them, but it is cheaper for these people to replace the bitch than incur the costs of providing proper food and shelter and veterinary care. It is a measure of the inadequacy of our protection for these animals that the owner of the farm on which the Doberman and three dead animals were found was taken to court, fined and banned from breeding dogs for 10 years but on appeal had the ban lifted. She laughed all the way to Cumbria because she needed to sell only a couple of pups to cover the cost of the fine. She set up business again in Cumbria, where the RSPCA again traced her.
The reason why this problem is so widespread in this area is a quirk of economic history which, in fairness, is not within the control of the people who live there. They were the victims of the EEC change in the milk quota system. Many small farmers found that their incomes had gone. The Agricultural Development and Advisory Service told them that they should consider diversifying into such occupations as dog breeding. I have seen a letter from ADAS about a farm that I visited saying that the premises were suitable for adaptation. In fairness to ADAS, they may have been suitable for adaptation, but the farmer had no intention of paying for it. So it became a puppy farm. When I was there, dozens of the animals were in the house itself and some were in outhouses sleeping on the bare concrete. No attempt has been made to do anything to protect the animals.
As the problem is so widespread over that belt of Wales, why is it allowed to continue? After all, the RSPCA inspector, Mr. Peter Anderson, and the radio team from "Face the Facts" have investigated the matter. However, Mr. Anderson is hampered by the very law that the House introduced to protect animals—the Breeding of Dogs Act 1973. Under that well-intentioned Act, anyone with more
614
than two bitches for breeding had to register and be licensed and could be subject to inspection. The same law means that anyone not registered or licensed is free from inspection. Therefore, the environmental health departments and the RSPCA are in a Catch-22. If the farm owner says that he has only one or two dogs, they have no right of access and it is impossible to collect the information and evidence on which to prove that the farm owner is in breach of the law. Therefore, the standard reaction from the breeders is to say, "We have only one animal."
The "Face the Facts" team watched pups being loaded into the back of a van belonging to a local dealer, Mr. Yeoman. They approached eight or nine of the people producing the pups and selling them to Mr. Yeoman. Each one came up with the standard answer, "We have only one animal that we use for breeding." That ensured that they were immune from Mr. Anderson's inspection and attention.
I visited a couple of unlicensed farms in the area and saw 30, 40 or 50 bitches penned up in inadequate accommodation, sometimes even in the house. There are a range of people involved, some with just one dog and others with over 50. As one can imagine, that means that they are deriving an enormous income.
Because of my concern and because of what the programme said, I asked to see the Home Secretary. In fairness, I was seen rapidly by the previous Home Secretary—the present Foreign Secretary—and the Under-Secretary of State on 23 October. I took with me the videos and a tape. I told them on what I was basing my representations. To his credit, the Home Secretary was able to point to a transcript similar to the one that I have been using this morning. In anticipation of my visit, he had already taken the trouble to establish the nature of the case. I had a positive reception not just at that meeting but at the subsequent meeting that I had with the Under-Secretary after I had made a series of fact-finding visits to south west Wales. I want to place on record that the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary of State recognised the genuineness of the problem.
It is clear that there is a crucial loophole in the existing law—the limitation on the right to inspect. However, one has to be realistic and recognise the problem. I am sure that the hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley) has come across similar problems and is aware or what I am describing. Even with an increase in the right to inspect, the councils would still be hamstrung by the limitations on the manpower available to cover the whole range of activities that come within the remit of the environmental health department.
The problem is so widespread now that it is difficult to see how inspection alone will meet the need. In the belt of Wales to which I am referring, there are about 200 licensed breeders but there are probably at least as many—and possibly more—unlicensed. Increasingly, those who previously took the trouble to be licensed are no longer doing so, partly because they resent others getting away with being unlicensed, partly because they want to save costs but more importantly because they have discovered that it is a way to evade the rules.
I am convinced that the key to the problem is the dealer. The dealer is the only link between the local small distant farm and the real markets. Those markets are not just in the cities of Swansea and Cardiff—that is minimal—but in London, Birmingham, Manchester and even abroad in Common Market countries. The local markets are

615
saturated. One cannot sell many pups there as everyone already has an ample supply and they are trying to find ways of getting rid of them. Some dealers even farm out the bitches within the area so that other people incur the cost of feeding and raising them. The dealers then collect the litters and reap the profits.
Those dealers deal not in tens or hundreds but in thousands of young pups, some of which are barely six weeks old and should not even be parted from their mother. HTV estimated that one dealer had a probable turnover of about £500,000 a year. We are talking about a substantial, highly lucrative and profitable business. How much goes through ledgers? The VAT inspectors would probably have a wonderful time in south-west Wales and they might find it a highly profitable area for investigation, as would the Revenue and the Department of Social Security.
To illustrate the international nature of the market, "Face the Facts" found that 30 crates of animals were being offloaded at Heathrow on their way to Milan. It is a big business in which the public are being ripped off by dealers who have no fear of the fines because they are derisory in relation to the profits. Their only fear would be if they were to be banned from buying from unlicensed breeders, because their livelihoods would then be at risk. They would then become self-policing and might do the things that the environmental health department is unable to do in severing the unlicensed breeders from the marketplace.
We now find that the market is becoming larger and more sophisticated. It is not just the old pet shops. Pet supermarkets are emerging and are buying thousands of pups a year. One sees advertisements, repetitive addresses and telephone numbers in magazines such as Loot—a free advertising magazine—Exchange & Mart and in the local press. Dog agencies are now emerging also and the RSPCA told me yesterday that it was looking into a case where, in response to an advertisement, a gentleman paid£175 for a Yorkshire terrier of dubious origin and another couple paid the same person £270 for two pups of equally dubious origin. The so-called pedigree would be meaningless.
"Pebble Mill" saw the dealer in the marketplace. People were rushing from their cars with pups plucked from their car boots and handing them over to him. He was stuffing bits of paper—the so-called certificates of pedigree—in his pocket. Heaven knows how he ever related them to the individual pups because when the people from "Pebble Mill" loked into the van, they estimated that there were between 70 and 80 pups already there. When they went back to the dealer's house as he was returning, the cars were lined up waiting to deliver more pups to him.
The pedigrees are virtually meaningless. A pedigree cannot be meaningful until it is registered for that pup with the Kennel Club. Most people do not realise that or do not register the pedigree for some other reason. Only people who intend to breed or show bother to register. Dealers rip off the public by charging top prices for "pedigree" pups which have no genuine pedigree.
The position has become so bad that there have been complaints not just in Britain but from overseas about the trade from south-west Wales. The Swiss received so many complaints about ill and deformed pups that they
616
investigated the matter. In the process they found that not only were they faced with the problem of the callous dealers, but some dealers supplied dogs to the continent with false rabies certificates, with all the potential horrific repercussions of that.
There are many genuine and good breeders and dealers in the trade but far too many who deal callously and cruelly. They are utterly motivated by profit without regard for the animals. The greed is generating more and more uncaring breeders. I submit that, while the dog may be man's best friend, sadly, man is certainly not the dog's best friend.
10.41 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peter Lloyd): I am particularly pleased to respond to the concerns of the right hon. Member for Swansea, West (Mr. Williams) about puppy farming. They are concerns which I share with him. As he told the House, we have had a number of meetings in which he expressed these concerns persuasively and we discussed how they might be tackled.
The right hon. Member and I stand largely on common ground. There can be no dispute that some unlicensed dog breeding establishments are horrific and a shameful example of animal neglect and selfish exploitation for, as the right hon. Gentleman referred to it, a lucrative cash crop.
From the evidence that the House has heard today, it is clear that the conditions in some of these establishments are utterly deplorable. Dogs are kept in old cars, old sheds and old vans. They often have inadequate water, light and heat. It is a miserable existence and a shameful way to treat animals. It cast a shadow over the large majority of dog breeders who, as he said, care deeply for the welfare of their animals.
The breeding of dogs is controlled by the Breeding of Dogs Act 1973. In many respects, this is an effective piece of legislation. It empowers local authorities to license establishments where dogs are bred and to inspect these thoroughly to ensure that they comply and conform to a good and reasonable standard of care. It is a detailed Act, setting out at some length the considerations which should apply to the properly run breeding kennel. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with that part of the legislation. Nor are we aware of any general problems in its application by local authorities, although one recognises that in remote country districts enforcement is often more difficult and there is greater scope for evasion.
However, I accept that it may well be highly desirable for local authority inspectors to be able to gain access to establishments that they have reasonable grounds for feeling were breeding dogs but had not sought a licence and so had not brought themselves under the controls of the Act. There are precedents either way for this. It is often unnecessary for such powers to exist; if, for instance, the public has a general right of access, there is no need to grant special rights to officials of one kind or another.
But, in the case of some dog breeding establishments, I accept that that can no longer be said to be the case and, providing that there are proper safeguards on the privacy of individuals and constraints on the exercise of the powers that local authority officials may have, there can be no objection to such a right of access being granted in order properly to enforce licensing requirements.

617
Perhaps it is worth spelling that point out a little further. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 sets out the strict conditions under which, for instance, the police can gain access in the investigation of crime. Broadly, access cannot be granted to private premises unless they are investigating a serious arrestable offence which might attract a sentence of five years or more. It is an important part of the safeguards that the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 provides that right of access is not granted in the pursuit of less serious offences. But that is a wholly different matter from considering a right of access in order to enforce licensing requirements. Such a right is given in a number of cases and in some instances it may make nonsense of licensing requirements if they can be evaded, as the right hon. Gentleman said, simply by refusing access to enforcement officials, People may simply say that they have only one dog. That is why I have no difficulty in going along with the right hon. Gentleman. I agree that an extension of the powers currently available to local authority officials would not merely make a lot of sense, but has become a necessity.
The right hon. Gentleman went on to discuss the problems of indiscriminate breeding and controlling the sale of puppies and whether one might be able to confine such sales to registered breeders or pet shops. He has kindly raised these matters with me before and we have considered them with some care.
Again, I have no difficulty in agreeing that the idea of controlling outlets for puppies is fundamentally sensible. In particular, it would be highly desirable to be able not only to outlaw breeders who are trying to evade the controls and requirements of the law, but to close the outlets through which they trade. But I have to tell the House that I can see no way in which this could be done without wholly unacceptable side effects. It would clearly not be right to restrict the freedom of individuals to sell the offspring of their pets. It would clearly be unacceptable to require such people to be licensed by the local authority; and, possibly most persuasive of all, to seek to go down this route might divert our energies towards a system which was wholly impossible to enforce.
I regret to tell the rigth hon. Gentleman that I have, therefore, concluded that there is no future in trying to bring this about.
Mr. Alan Williams: I am sorry to interrupt the Minister. I am grateful for the remarks that he made in the first part of his reply. They were positive and helpful. I ask him at least to consider the second point although I know that he cannot say more today. The additional cost of licensing for anyone who wants to sell pups is relatively small, if one wishes to introduce proper controls. The advantage is that what the Minister posed as the disadvantage would be overcome. Dealers would be so restricted that they would be in a straitjacket which did not allow them to buy from people who were not licensed. They would police myriad individual breeders. They would buy only from licensed breeders and either squeeze the others out of the market or force them to come within the scope of the system and become licensed.
Mr. Lloyd: I sympathise with what the right hon. Gentleman wishes to do. He will recognise that the law must treat everyone equally. To apply the licensing provisions only to those who breed regularly for gain and
618
distinguish them from those who have one dog that occasionally has a litter of pups which they wish to sell to a friend would be extremely difficult. Yet if one could not distinguish effectively one could not outlaw the unlicensed regular commercial breeder.
Mr. Williams: That is precisely my point. One must recognise that the price of achieving the sort of controls and safeguards that we want is for everyone to be treated the same. If one wants to sell pedigree pups at the premium prices which go with a pedigree, one should have to be licensed.
Mr. Lloyd: If the right hon. Gentleman will set out in detail how that would work, as he has done with previous arguments that he has brought to me, I shall look at it carefully. We have thought hard about how to construct an effective law. The right hon. Gentleman is saying that a law would be effective only if applied to everyone, including private individuals whose dog produces a litter, one of which is sold to an acquaintance or friend—
Mr. Williams: To dealers.
Mr. Lloyd: To dealers. These things move along. .An individual may sell a puppy to a puppy farm. I am willing to consider what the right hon. Gentleman is saying, but we must ensure that any change in the law results in good, effective law that can be applied.
If one could ensure by granting increased rights of access by local authority officials that all establishments breeding dogs on a commercial scale were properly regulated and controlled, it would go a long way towards controlling the evil that the right hon. Gentleman has described today. We should be able to have confidence that that was sufficient in itself and that additional constraints on the onward sale of puppies were superfluous and unnecessary. I am willing to hear the right hon. Gentleman's detailed programme on how a law may be constructed to deal with that additional point.
I remind the House that the Breeding of Dogs Act 1973 is underpinned by the Protection of Animals Act 1911. It is a major piece of legislation which has served us well and continues to do so. Anyone who is convicted of an offence under the 1911 Act can be banned from keeping animals in future. That is the greatest safeguard that animals can have. The licensing provisions of the Breeding of Dogs Act ensure that acceptable, clean and proper standards are observed in all kennels that are registered. The Protection of Animals Act ensures that, when animals are maltreated, effective sanctions are available to punish the offenders and prevent them from being able to take charge of animals again.
I welcome the opportunity that the right hon. Gentleman has given the House to discuss these issues today. I welcome the passionate restraint with which he has debated the thoroughly disgraceful conditions in which some dogs are bred and kept. I am glad to have this opportunity to confirm that we are happy to help the right hon. Gentleman a long way down the track to remedy this evil.
Sitting suspended at 10.52 am.
On resuming—
It being Eleven o'clock, MR. SPEAKER interrupted proceedings pursuant to Standing Order No. 11 (Friday sittings).

Student Loans
The Secretary of State for Education and Science (Mr. John MacGregor): With permission, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the administration of student loans.
I reported to the House yesterday—at the earliest opportunity—the background to the decision of the participating financial institutions to withdraw from the Student Loans Company. I indicated then that I would be happy to make a statement today. The main points are as follows.
The objectives, principles and framework of the scheme as outlined in the Education (Student Loans) Bill remain completely unchanged. I regret the banks' withdrawal, but it affects neither the policy nor the Bill.
As I announced yesterday, arrangements are now being made for the Student Loans Company to pass into Government ownership. This will ensure that the preparations for the scheme can continue smoothly. A great deal of the preparatory work already undertaken is relevant to the new approach. The banks have agreed to contribute £0·5 million to these preparatory costs.
The new approach may even be a cheaper option. It has always been the case that the Government would fund the administration of the scheme as well as the loans. We were prepared to pay a fee to the financial institutions to secure the benefits of their branch networks for students.
The main result of the institutions' decision will be less easy access to loans for students. I would have preferred them to have that convenience, but the essential point is that nothing in the decision of the institutions alters either the Bill or the analysis behind it. The Bill will continue on course.
Mr. Jack Straw: The Secretary of State says that he regrets the banks' withdrawal. So do all those who are faced with backruptcy. The Secretary of State mocks himself as well as the House if he thinks that anyone will believe his ludicrous claim that the banks' withdrawal "alters nothing". Does he not understand that the banks' administration of the scheme was absolutely central to its operation, to Government policy and to their commendation of the scheme to the House on 20 October and again on 5 December 1989? Why else did he say:
"I believe that it was right that … the administration should be handled by the financial sector"—[Official Report, 20 October 1989; Vol. 158, c. 381.]
Can the Secretary of State point to any time or occasion when he has hinted or suggested that, in place of a scheme run by the banks, there should be a scheme operated by a nationalised corporation, as it now will be?
Given the total change in the nature of the scheme since Second Reading, the Secretary of State shows contemptible disregard for the House and for the democratic process in his determination to use the wide arbitrary powers in the Bill to railroad through an entirely new scheme without proper scrutiny by Parliament and without its authority.
Will the Secretary of State say when he, the Under-Secretary and the officials in his Department first got wind that the banks might pull out of the administration of the scheme? That is absolutely critical. Was it prior knowledge that the scheme might well collapse that lay behind the Secretary of State's refusal to serve on the Standing Committee and instead to leave the
620
Under-Secretary hanging in the wind? Can the Secretary of State explain why the Standing Committee has been left pursuing the charade of debating a scheme for a week and a half when, at some stage in the past 10 days, he certainly knew that it would not go ahead?
Will the people employed by the Student Loans Company be civil servants? What will happen to the chief executive of that company? That job was advertised at £55,000 with a car—twice the salary of a Nobel prize-winning professor at a British university.
Will the Secretary of State say categorically that the scheme will be fully in operation by September 1990?
Is the Secretary of State aware that answers to my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford, East (Mr. Smith) on Monday of this week showed that, even before the latest debacle, the cost of this ludicrous scheme had risen to £2·17 billion over the next 20 years, over and above the cost of grants? Why will the Secretary of State not use that sum—more than £2,000 million—to improve the grant system, and really help those students who are most in need?
The student loan scheme, like the poll tax, was the invention of the right hon. Member for Mole Valley (Mr. Baker), who is now chairman of the Conservative party—a man with an unrivalled record for leaving messes for others to clear up. There will be little sympathy for the Secretary of State if he does not admit in public what we all know that he concedes in private—that this loan scheme is fundamentally flawed and has now been utterly torpedoed by the banks.
Yesterday's decision was a victory for the Labour party and the student movement. The Secretary of State should recognise defeat and withdraw the Bill now.
Mr. MacGregor: I shall endeavour to answer as many of the hon. Gentleman's questions as possible. He has been way off the mark on every score. He has completely misunderstood the role of the banks in relation to the Bill, and has grossly exaggerated that role. I think that I can demolish every point he has made. I apologise, Mr. Speaker, for the length of time that I may take, but I have been asked a lot of questions.
The hon. Gentleman's first point was that the banks were central to the scheme, and that I had said so in my speech on 20 October. My speech covered many columns of Hansard, and the reference to the banks took a very few lines. That shows that it was not central to the argument, and I did not say that it was. I challenge him to find that anywhere. I said that I believed that it was right that administration should be handled by the financial sector, and I gave the reasons:
"They can provide a quicker and more personal service. They have skill in handling personal loans. They have experience in advising individuals on financial matters and they have nationwide branch networks."—[Official Report, 20 October 1989; Vol. 158, c. 381.]
That is what I have said throughout the debate. To say that that is central to the scheme is utterly ludicrous.
The hon. Gentleman then said that the Student Loans Company would now become a national corporation. As he well knows, throughout the discussions on student loans it has been made absolutely clear that the Government—that is, the taxpayer—will fund the loans and the administration of the scheme. The Government were to fund the whole cost of student loans and were to pay an extra fee to the banks for the convenience of using their branch networks. That has not changed. There is no

621
change in the funding, so it is ludicrous to describe this as a major change. [Interruption.] I wish that the hon. Gentleman would allow me to answer his questions in sequence. His argument does not run. The whole scheme is being funded by the Government. We were prepared to pay extra to the banks for the convenience of using their branch network, which was designed to be for the convenience of students to enable them to get easy acces to loans.
The hon. Gentleman said that I had shown disregard for Parliament, but I have made two major speeches in the past two months and I reported to the House yesterday the moment I knew of the banks' decision.
The hon. Gentleman knows from debates on the Bill that the powers it provides are not arbitrary. The Bill follows precisely the way in which the original student grants scheme was drawn up and legislated for. He knows that the advantage of not having all the precise details and mechanics of the scheme spelt out is that we then have the flexibility necessary to change them by secondary legislation. Nor is it true that the Bill is in any sense affected because it allows the Government to own the Student Loans Company, as is clear from paragraph 3(1) of schedule 2.
The hon. Gentleman talked of proper scrutiny of the Bill in the House. He knows that it has a lengthy schedule that covers many of the details of the scheme, the criteria and eligibility. The fact that the Opposition have tabled a rather large number of amendments, which they are perfectly entitled to do, shows that this is not a short, arbitrary Bill. Rather it shows that there is enormous scope for discussion of all the details.
The hon. Gentleman asked when I was informed that the banks had come to the view that, if Lloyds did not participate in the scheme, they would pull out. I was informed of that at lunch time on Monday and I saw the relevant people as quickly as I could. I was informed on Wednesday that that decision would be made because it was not until Wednesday that I was able to see the chairman of Lloyds. There has not been any wasting of the Committee's time. As this aspect of the scheme is not crucial to the Bill in any sense, it does not in any way affect the Committee's discussions about the Bill on Tuesday.
The hon. Gentleman talked about my refusal to serve on the Standing Committee. He must know that that is the most utter nonsense. No Labour Education Secretary served on any Standing Committee throughout the time of the last Labour Government. He knows that that was the rule throughout the 1970s and the 1980s. His is the most trivial point and shows his general approach to the Bill.
As for staff—
Mr. Dennis Skinner: Come on!
Mr. MacGreggor: I was asked a great many questions and I am doing the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) the courtesy of answering them. It is obvious that the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) does not want to hear the answers because he knows that they are knocking the points made by the hon. Member for Blackburn out of the window.
It is obviously intended that the Government should operate the staff of the Students Loans Company. The position of the chief executive has still to be discussed. There are a number of details here, and I suggest that we
622
make a statement to the Standing Committe the moment they are resolved. It remains our intention for one scheme to be fully operational in the autumn of 1990.
The hon. Gentleman knows very well from debates that we have already had in the House about costs that the choice is between a mix of grants and loans during the 1990s and into the 21st century, and grants alone. The hon. Gentleman says that he will rely on grants alone. He knows that that would be a much more expensive operation for parents and taxpayers and that the loans system is a much better deal for them. It is entirely reasonable that, as happens in most other countries, students should be asked to make a modest contribution to their maintenance—only their maintenance—while they are at university because taxpayers with a lower income than students will have for most of their working lives would otherwise be asked to bear an increasing burden in the form of the cost of students maintenance. It is entirely reasonable to ask students to make a contribution. The crucial point is that the Bill has 177 lines, a lot of amendments are being tabled in Committee, but not one line is altered by the banks' decision.
Mr. Giles Radice: In view of the scandal over the student loans scheme, would it not be the right and honourable course for the Minster with responsibility for higher education, who has been responsible for the Bill throughout, to resign?
Mr. McGreggor: The hon. Gentleman has clearly not listened to a word I have said. This is a very small administrative part of the total scheme. The crucial point is that we asked the banks to operate the scheme because that was better for students. Using the banks' branch network would give them immediate access on campuses. That is the only change. That is why I regret what the banks have done. It is not in the interests of students. We shall now have to consider how, operating the scheme in a somewhat different way, we can get as good access as possible, but it will not be as good as using the banks' branch network.
Sir Peter Emery: Will my right hon. Friend make it absolutely clear again that the highly irresponsible action of the joint clearing banks—not co-operating with Government policy and the Government's scheme and giving way to pressure from the National Union of Students—will not be allowed to undermine Government policy? Will he also make it clear that the clearing banks' decision to give way when just one of them would not co-operate with the scheme makes them seem like a lot of lemmings running over a cliff? Will he therefore consider the possibility of ensuring that student grants should be encashable only at banks which co-operate with the Government's scheme and at which students have bank accounts? Then the lemmings might dash back up the cliff to try to co-operate with the Government.
Mr. MacGregor: I made it clear at column 189 of the Official Report of the Second Reading debate that we never asked the banks to express an opinion for or against the loans scheme because that was a decision for Government and Parliament. I said that I thought it right to ask the banks to assist in the administration on a contractual basis because they have a branch network and that that was for the convenience of students. It is on that basis that they came in. It is for the banks to say what made them change

623
their minds. I regret that they have withdrawn because I do not believe that withdrawal is for the benefit of students. I can assure my hon. Friend that this decision will in no way change the policy or the Government's position on it.
Mr. Harry Greenway: Is my right hon. Friend aware that I am a reluctant supporter of student top-up loans, agreeing with Polonius who said:
"Neither a borrower, nor a lender be"?
I have, however, to take account of a letter and a telephone call I received this morning from constituents, and other comments I have received during half term, that they have still not received their maintenance grant from Ealing council, which is Labour controlled—
Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman is going a little wide of this statement.
Mr. Greenway: They are therefore forced to borrow at high interest rates. Loans are essential for them. I therefore support my right hon. Friend's scheme. Will he seek the early privatisation of the Government loans facility that he is setting up?
Mr. MacGregor: I have already expressed in the House my regret that Ealing has been so slow at providing grants for students. I regret that the loan scheme will not now have the banks' branch network, which would have provided immediate access to the loans scheme. I shall devise as good an alternative as I can to ensure that what happens in Ealing does not happen with the loans scheme.
Mr. Simon Hughes: Will the Secretary of State be a bit more generous and congratulate the banks, particularly Lloyds, Clydesdale bank and the Bank of Scotland, on refusing to take part in what they have called a political act and their integrity in so doing? Will he join his Under-Secretary of State in congratulating the students on fighting an excellent campaign, using the Government's own tactics—consumer power?
Will the Secretary of State answer the question that he has not yet answered—how much taxpayers' money has so far been wasted on this futile venture? Will he now explain how a nationalised state-run loans system is compatible with Tory philosophy, how it will secure the adequate delivery of hundreds of thousands of student loans and whether it has the support of anyone but some of his Back Benchers? Will he take the advice of the chairman of the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals this morning—that the Government should have a radical rethink—and, during Christmas, reflect carefully, throw away the poisoned chalice left to him by his predecessor and announce that the Bill is dead when we come back in the new year?
Mr. MacGregor: Of course not. The hon. Gentleman has clearly not been listening. I have made it absolutely clear that this does not affect the Bill at all. I believe it is clear from responses that I have received—
Mr. Jeremy Corbyn: From whom?
Mr. MacGregor: —and opinion polls I have seen that there is strong support for the Bill among many parents
624
and a lot of taxpayers. As people realise the significance of it, I believe that there will be many more supporters of it. Clearly the hon. Gentleman was not listening to me.
I answered the point about the costs, which so far amount to about £1 million. A good deal of that relates to work that is valuable and necessary for the continuation of the scheme and therefore that money is not aborted. Some of the money has been involved in the preparatory arrangements for the bank branch networks and that is why the banks have said that they will make a contribution of £500,000 which is 50 per cent. of the total cost. There has been no loss to the scheme or to the taxpayer as a result of those arrangements.
I am surprised that the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey has completely misunderstood the scheme because he is a member of the Standing Committee. He should understand that the scheme has always been a national scheme effectively controlled by the state. The intention has always been that it should be financed in total by the taxpayer. The only aspect in which it was operating through the private sector was in the sense that we have asked the banks to assist us in the administration because of the benefits that were evident from their branch networks. We asked the banks to act as agents for one part of the administration of the scheme, and that is all. Apart from that, we are talking about a Government-financed scheme. That was always the case and will continue to be so.
Dr. Keith Hampson: Is my right hon. Friend aware that it is not certain that an effective mechanism, failing the use of the bank branch network, can be found to disperse and collect loans in time for implementation next summer? Would it not be better therefore to proceed with the enabling Bill but be ready to delay implementation until further thought can be given either to Government guarantees for the banks' money to be loaned or for the use of the Inland Revenue—as happens in Australia—as part of a proper Government-led system?
Mr. MacGregor: We have been through this and I have debated the issue with my hon. Friend on many occasions. I have drawn his attention to the difficulties in connection with using the banks' own funds for that purpose and also to what I consider to be the many serious objections to using the Inland Revenue mechanism.
When we considered the various ways in which we could operate the scheme, we gave a great deal of thought to alternatives to the bank branch network. Originally, on balance, we came to the view that it was best to use the bank branch network because of the point that I have made frequently, that it gives students easy access to the loan system. Incidentally, it also gives students the opportunity to discuss their overall financing position with branch managers. Those aspects will be lost as a result of the banks' decision.
As a result of our earlier work with regard to the preparation of the scheme, it will not require too many changes to switch over to the alternative scheme which will probably—and I use the word "probably" advisedly because we will have to take final decisions in due course—in some senses have to operate through the post. The scheme will now be like all the other northern European

625
loans schemes which have been very successful. The administration of our scheme will operate in roughly the same way as they do.
Mr. Merlyn Rees: Despite the certain amount of levity with which this matter is being treated, does the Secretary of State accept that it is really very serious? Did an administrative error or a political error in the Secretary of State's Department lead to today's decision? Is it not important that the ombudsman should consider this with the clarity that he used when considering the Barlow Clowes issue, which is, of course, a more serious matter? It is important that we know who is to blame. In previous Administrations and over a longer period, ministerial heads would have rolled for this kind of thing. It is extremely serious for the Secretary of State to make such a statement.
I hope that we will not have another statemen in a year's time telling us that the Student Loans Company has failed. It is important that the Secretary of State spells out who is responsible. Just to nationalise—to use the phrase—is not good enough. We need to know more about it. Today's statement was very serious and it has not been treated in the right manner.
Mr. MacGregor: I believe that the levity came entirely from Opposition Members. They were not prepared to listen to my replies, which are very clear in terms of the points raised by the right hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Rees) and in terms of their perspective.
With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's point about background and responsibility, my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Mole Valley (Mr. Baker), told the House on 19 June:
"I am glad to be able to tell the House that, following discussions with representatives of the Committee of London and Scottish Bankers, a scheme has been designed which is agreed to be a cost-effective and feasible means of introducing top-up loans in September 1990 as planned."—[Official Report, 19 June 1989; Vol. 155, c. 21.]
Since then, we have held discussions with the banks to draw up the details of the scheme. In November we signed a memorandum of understanding with the banks on the preparatory work and 10 banks came into that. That was clearly the next and very important stage in developments. All the preparatory work has taken place on that basis. The banks have now gone back on that memorandum of understanding and it is for them to say why they have withdrawn.
The Government's position has been entirely clear. All the main arrangements in relation to the student loans scheme, all the principles and key ingredients, have been debated in the House on many occasions. They are contained in the Bill and are being debated in Standing Committee. They are not affected by the banks' decision. The banks have decided that they cannot act as agents for the Government in the way that we had hoped that they would. We have lost the branch network, but nothing else has changed. The Student Loans Company has been set up and we shall now have to run it. We were going to finance it anyway. The main difference is that the students now lose the benefit of the branch network. That is all, and that was the decision of the banks, not the Government's.
Several Hon. Members rose—
Mr. Speaker: Order. I remind the House that we have a series of debates on the motion for the Adjournment of
626
the House today. I will allow questions to continue for another five minutes which will include both Front-Bench Members and then we must move back to the main debates —[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] That is all very well, but hon. Members have taken part in the ballot to speak today and have earned a place.
Mr. Patrick Thompson: We have heard reference to the experience in other countries. Will my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State accept that Conservative Members can see the advantages, both administratively and otherwise, of a Government-led scheme? Does he accept that the decision that was announced this morning has no bearing on the case for the student loans scheme? In the Standing Committee, the Opposition have totally failed to make any good case against a scheme which will be to the long-term benefit of students in this country and of their parents.
Mr. MacGregor: My hon. Friend is entirely right, and that is why Opposition Members have had difficulty in attacking the principles and overall objectives of the scheme. They are trying to make something out of an administrative aspect which is way out of perspective. My hon. Friend was also right about support on the Government Benches for the scheme, as was shown by the fact that the Bill received its Second Reading by a majority of 81.
Mr. John P. Smith: Does the Secretary of State recognise that this is a great day for students and for higher education? No one believes that the Secretary of State's statement does not severely undermine the loans scheme—no one, that is, except a few right hon. and hon. ostriches on the Conservative Benches. The ability of the Government to offer sweeteners to private organisations is now on the record. However, they have clearly failed to sweeten the banks. Why is that?
Mr. MacGregor: The hon. Gentleman has got it completely wrong. There was no question of sweeteners. We offered to pay a fee to the banks for administering—as our agents—one part of the scheme because of the benefit of the bank branch networks. That was all. It was entirely reasonable to pay the banks a fee for doing that because a cost to the banks was involved. I repeat that the Government were to finance the whole scheme and they will continue to do that. There is no major material change of any kind. The hon. Gentleman's remarks were ludicrously out of perspective.
Mr. Roger Knapman: If 20 people leave an average school, why should the 10 who leave early, perhaps to become plumbers or electricians, have to pay the taxes of the 10 who want to go on to university? Why should the Opposition want to perpetuate such privileges?
Mr. MacGregor: My hon. Friend is right. Many of the people to whom he referred and the vast bulk of taxpayers will earn a good deal less throughout their working lives than students who get the benefit of higher education. All we are asking students to do is to pay a part of their maintenance through a loan scheme while at university, bearing in mind that the vast majority of them will gain substantial benefits and income thereafter as a result of the investment in their higher education. For those who do not take jobs and for those who have lower incomes than 85 per cent. of the average, we have introduced generous

627
repayment terms. They will not have to repay during those periods, which is more generous than loan schemes in any other country.
Mr. Andrew Smith: In view of the Secretary of State's total failure to answer the questions put to him by Opposition Members, will he confirm the written answers that were given to me by the Under-Secretary of State that the scheme will cost the taxpayer £2·17 billion over and above the cost of grants over the next two decades? First, should that money not be put into grants to improve the grant system and opportunities in education instead of being wasted on this fatally flawed scheme?
Secondly, what mechanisms is the Secretary of State considering for forwarding students' applications to the loans adminstrator? Did I correctly understand him to say that it will probably be through the post? Thirdly, will he answer the question by the hon. Member for Leeds, North-West (Dr. Hampson)? The right hon. Gentleman now faces a desperately tight timescale to try to get the scheme up and running. If he will not dump it altogether, will he seriously consider deferring it for at least a year? Should he not drop the scheme altogether? It is an utter shambles and a farce, which shows great contempt for the House and a lack of concern for higher education.
Mr. MacGregor: The hon. Gentleman uses extravagant language. He is making such trivial points that it is a way of hiding their triviality. I have answered all hon. Members' questions, and I will answer the hon. Gentleman's three questions.
Hon. Members have debated the funding point at length both in the Chamber and in Committee. The crucial comparison is between the overall costs, by the end of the decade, of the Government's combination of grants and loans and the Opposition's approach to tackle it through grants alone. As the hon. Gentleman knows, that would be much more expensive to the taxpayer and would be paid
628
for by people whose incomes will often be lower than those of the students when they get jobs. [Interruption.] Of course that is true, because loan repayments will be coming in.
On the hon. Gentleman's second point, I obviously wish to make the means of access for students as satisfactory as I can. I had hoped that it would be done through branch networks. One possibility is that it may have to be done through the post. I will seek ways of making that better, because I want to retain as many benefits as possible that we would have got from the branch networks.
Finally, I did respond to the point of my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, North-West (Dr. Hampson).
Mr. Dennis Skinner: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: I hope that the hon. Gentleman is not seeking to prolong discussion on the statement. It is a private Members' day.
Mr. Skinner: I appreciate that.
Mr. Speaker: I have to call Mr. Dennis Skinner.
Mr. Skinner: You, Mr. Speaker, preside over the Second Reading of Bills and the money resolutions. A money resolution must be in order and in accordance with the Bill as presented. From what the Minister said, it is clear that the scheme may be cheaper or it may be dearer. If it is dearer, I ask your Office to check whether the money resolution that was presented on Second Reading is now in order and can incorporate the changes that have been announced by the Secretary of State today.
Mr. Speaker: I clearly heard the Secretary of State say that no amendment will be necessary.
We now return to the Adjournment debate. I must say to the hon. Members for Bournemouth, East (Mr. Atkinson) and for Dunfermline, West (Mr. Douglas) that they should divide the next hour between them—about 28 minutes each.

COCOM
Question again proposed, That this House do now adjourn.
11.34 am
Mr. David Atkinson: I am grateful for this opportunity to refer to COCOM and, in particular, to draw the attention of the House to the recommendations of my report to the Western European Union, which were unanimously endorsed by the parliamentary assembly in Paris earlier this month. As the House will be aware, COCOM stands for the Co-ordinating Committee for Multi-lateral Export Controls. It is the means by which for the past 40 years the western Alliance has prevented what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister recently described as
"our most cherished scientific achievements"
from falling into the hands of the Soviet bloc. Matters in which the West is understood to have superiority include micro-electronics, optics, super-conductivity, passive sensors, phased array radars, lightweight composite materials, and air-breathing propulsions. In general, it is believed that we have a 10-year lead in technology over the East, with the Soviet bloc, for example, being eight years behind in semi-conductors, five to seven years behind in computers, and a decade behind in machine tools. When applied to western defence, that superiority in strategic technology has ensured peace and is contributing to the end of the cold war.
I accept that there remains a continuing need to protect those technologies through COCOM until arms control negotiations and reductions and confidence-building over a reasonable period justify a review of that need. However, my report to the Western European Union suggests that the western Alliance should now accept a number of realities in the light of current events in eastern Europe which have immediate consequences for the COCOM rules that control the trade in technology. It suggests that, in the light of performance, the enforcement of those rules needs to be critically examined. It suggests that the basis of those rules—the state of Soviet technology—needs to be reassessed. It suggests also that opportunities for trade in technology between East and West should be discussed more openly than ever before in a forum that already exists—the conference on security and co-operation in Europe —while still accepting that both sides have secrets to protect in the interests of their own security.
Despite our success in establishing the technology lead that I have mentioned, it is relevant to remind the House that COCOM's rules and controls have failed to prevent a serious transfer of technology to the Soviet bloc at the expense of our own security. The list of COCOM violations reads like a horror story. Illegal exports of American precision ballbearing grinding machines now enable the Soviet Union to manufacture more accurate guidance systems for missiles trained on western targets. Western technology, which manufactures drill bits for the Soviet oil industry, enables the Soviets to produce new armour-piercing projectiles. Western oceanograph technology enables the Soviet Union to locate our submarines with greater accuracy.
Probably the most publicised recent violation was the illegal sale of lathes and numerically controlled machine tools to the Soviet Union, for which Toshiba is paying a considerable price in being outlawed from United States
630
markets. The theft from last year's Farnborough air show of the technology behind the Agile Eye helmet, which allows fighter pilots to aim missiles at targets simply by looking at them, should remind us that there is no let-up —what the Soviet Union cannot obtain by fair means it will seek to obtain by espionage, subterfuge and outright theft.
It is understood that the foreign intelligence section of the KGB and the GRU Soviet military intelligence remain as strong and as committed as ever to engaging their officers in missions of scientific and technological espionage, which is why, for as long as the Soviet Union undertakes such operations, it must always expect its spies to be expelled when they are found out. It cannot have it both ways—glasnost and espionage. That is why my report urges controls and enforcement procedures that are more effective, more efficient and common to all COCOM member states. Clearly they have not satisfied those criteria in the past.
Ideally, it must surely be sensible to seek national legislation based on an agreed control list that is commom to all COCOM member states. That, in itself, would do much to dispel the widespread resentment of many western companies that complain that the United States can control the exports of other COCOM states through its extra-territoriality claims yet appears to turn a blind eye when its own companies are selling banned items. The continued charge of double dealing and cheating is threatening to discredit COCOM—in particular, United States participation in it.
The United States attempted to embargo British and other western equipment for the construction of the Siberian pipeline but we subsequently found that it was supplying much of the equipment. On a much smaller scale, there appears to be a growing number of cases of European business men who dare not set foot in the United States because they have been put on a CIA blacklist simply for selling to eastern Europe without licence technology that is clearly obsolete. Others have found that they have been set up and entrapped by over-zealous United States customs officials on the pretext of breaches of the COCOM rules. A constituent of mine, Mr. Andrew Kuzan, obtained an American licence to export a second-hand obsolete test head to Hungary. The licence was withdrawn at the last minute without explanation. He was arrested for attempting to export sensitive technology illegally, and he has just spent two years in an American gaol. It was particularly galling for him and his family to find that only a few miles away from their home in Bournemouth there is an American enterprise that has won a Russian order to supply more advanced versions of the test equipment that he had been convicted of selling illegally. I drew my constituent's case to the attention of my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence Procurement nearly two years ago when he was Minister of Trade.
My second recommendation concerns the assumption of the current state of Soviet technology that is the basis of the COCOM rules. There is a growing amount of evidence to suggest that the COCOM rules are being inappropriately applied because our assessment of the state of Soviet technology does not stand up to analysis. For example, it was understood that the Soviets were well ahead in ground-based laser technology to knock out satellites and incoming missiles. But when American Congressmen visited the Soviet facility at Sary-Shagan this July, it was

631
concluded that the Americans' own technology, being developed at White Sands, was further advanced and greatly superior and that the Pentagon had presented a worst-case assessment to boost the strategic defence initiative and advance COCOM. That is not the only example.
Last month, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee accused the United States Government of defence statements that are
"out-dated at best and absolutely false at worst."
To the United States' credit, on that country's initiative, COCOM members have recently established security and technology meetings—STEM—to assess the state of technology for both East and West, but those assessments are not being reported to COCOM and are being left to national Governments to interpret for themselves. Nor have they said much about the state of Soviet technology. I urge a fundamental reassessment of the current state of Soviet technology and a complete review of the COCOM list in the light of the reassessment.
When President Gorbachev addressed the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe at Strasbourg in July, he said of COCOM that, even if one could justify such practices at the peak of the cold war, today many of its restrictions seem utterly ridiculous. He suggested that experts and representatives of respective Goverments could get together and break down the cold war logjams to bring secrecy down to the reasonable limits that are still required for security and to give the green light to normal trade in scientific knowledge and technology. Since then we have been told that such a transfer of technology would not be a one-way process and that there are benefits to us in the West to share.
Last month the Soviet deputy premier, Dr. Abalkin, urged in Brussels that there should be more technological co-operation between his country and the European Community:
"The Soviet Union has something it can offer, several lines of technology that have not yet been developed in the West. This has become clear since we lifted the lid of secrecy from our defence and space programmes. We want to act as partners on the basis of equality."
I believe that the time is now ripe to respond positively to President Gorbachev's appeal for western technology to support the restructuring of his economy for the betterment of his people, and for the sharing of technology between East and West for mutual benefit.
My report to the Western European Union suggests how we might achieve that. First, where on-site verification procedures for the transfer of sensitive technologies would be appropriate and would satisfy COCOM member states, let the list be liberalised accordingly. Secondly, as there is already an opportunity forthcoming for Europewide economic co-operation to be discussed, let it be used to discuss trade in technology. That opportunity will come as soon as next March in Bonn with the conference on economic co-operation in Europe as part of the CSCE process. That provides exactly the right forum for trade in technology to be discussed because it involves all COCOM member states—and all the states that it prescribes—that belong to Europe. It will also be underpinned by the Helsinki principles of security co-operation, human rights and confidence-building so recently reinforced by the Vienna concluding document.
632
There is already an impressive list of possible collaborative projects, most notably in space, which the strict application of COCOM rules, as they stand today, would prevent. If that happened, Europe would be the loser. Those projects range from the technologies of manufacturing and distribution, which can transform the standard of living of the people of eastern Europe, to participation in the Eureka project, shared research in nuclear technologies and the joint Anglo-American and Soviet project for a supersonic business jet.
Is there not scope for the United States, Japan, Britain, France, Germany and the Soviet Union to combine their resources and technology to produce that "space plane" known as the Orient Express, Hermes, Hotol and Sanger in the West, which it is the ambition of each country to build? That would be a symbolic end to the scandal of costly competition and duplication in space. I recommend that, should there remain areas of mutual suspicion and mistrust based on a false assessment of the state of each side's technology, a committee of experts should be established within the CSCE framework to make recommendations for the way forward in the sharing of technologies between East and West. That will clarify the no-go areas for each side and will confirm the areas that are ripe for mutual and maximum co-operation and on which future binding commitments can be entered into with confidence by both sides.
I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will accept that my recommendations for the future of COCOM are responsible and realistic, and reflect the mood of these historic times. We are now, at last, moving forward to a new world in which man can share and pool his vast technological achievements for the benefit of all without fear that he is abandoning his own security. It is, of course, essential that whatever changes we propose, we carry our ally the United States with us. It has, after all, produced most, although not all, of that technological superiority under whose protection we have enjoyed unparalleled peace and prosperity. There is now evidence that the United States is responding. President Bush, after the Malta summit, said that President Gorbachev's approach
"now absolutely mandates new thinking on the part of America."
I hope that it will be accepted that the COCOM rules can be revised without abandoning our secrets, our advantage or our security and that the part of our technology that it is now prudent to share should be used to support reform, to enhance civilisation and to encourage perestroika in the Soviet Union, on the understanding that a stable, country and a happier Russian people are also in the interests of a stable, happier and peaceful world.
11.49 am
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Francis Maude): The House owes a considerable debt to my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East (Mr. Atkinson) for giving us the opportunity to discuss COCOM. It is not an organisation which frequently sees the light of day or is frequently the subject of great public discussion and scrutiny.
My hon. Friend is right when he says that the times through which we are living—times of great change, excitement, hope and opportunity in eastern Europe and in the Soviet bloc—throw into sharp relief the issues that

633
the COCOM organisation and the COCOM principles embody. He has done a considerable service to the House in enabling the matter to be debated at this time.
However much COCOM may be reformed and retargeted, the fundamental point remains that it has a vital role in protecting our security interests through protecting our strategic technology. Running through my hon. Friend's speech was a recognition that that was the case. COCOM is not an economic embargo or a mechanism for applying sanctions. It is not a form of political leverage on the "proscribed destinations", which are principally the countries of the Warsaw pact and China. It is not a mechanism to ensure and preserve a technological gap between West and East for economic and commercial reasons.
Mr. Gorbachev, speaking to the Council of Europe in July, said:
"East-West relations have of late been bled white by COCOM."
That is a gross overstatement and it is wrong on two counts. Our exporting potential and performance have not been bled white; nor is the crippling economic mess in eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union a result of our strategic export controls. It is true that COCOM has had success in denying the Warsaw pact access to critical technology, but that has had virtually no impact on the eastern European civilian consumer. The impact has fallen on the military consumers, which is, of course, the purpose of COCOM. That is the real cause for the Warsaw pact's complaints about COCOM.
It is undeniable that COCOM controls have borne directly on some industrial sectors, but the real stranglehold on eastern European economic development has been caused not by controls on the top slice of western technology, but rather by the chronic economic, industrial and infrastructure inefficiencies stemming from a system of centralised planning. The current problems are due not to technology starvation, but to starvation of rational economic management and the West is already beginning to help the East to remedy this.
As my hon. Friend has stressed, Europe is experiencing a wind of change the like of which it has, perhaps, never experienced before. A vivid demonstration of this was provided recently in the halls of NATO where a Soviet Foreign Secretary criticised the Romanian regime, an ally in the Warsaw pact. However, we need to be assured of two points: that sensitive technology can be put to effective civil use, and that it will not instead be diverted to military use.
The West can gradually help to encourage the conditions for the former and, in the meantime, COCOM helps to prevent the latter. The movement in eastern Europe and the Soviet Union towards greater democracy and freedom in economic and political behaviour is vital. And I do not believe COCOM can or will stand in the way of this. Although it is an institution which was created at the time of Stalin, COCOM is not somehow a counterpart to Stalinism. We welcome the Soviet, Polish, Hungarian, Czech and East German debunking of Stalinism. However, the fact that that is happening, encouraging though it is, does not mean we can now debunk COCOM. Great expectations have rightly been aroused by developments east of the iron curtain. We shall do what we
634
can to help to bring those expectations to fulfilment. However, to flood those reforming countries with high technology cannot be the answer.
All partners in COCOM recognise the need to control only those items of genuine strategic significance. With them, we are urgently considering ways in which COC'OM can respond both prudently and imaginatively to recent events. Media headlines of a move, especially from the United States, towards wholesale liberalisation are misleading. President Bush at a news conference on 16 December said on the need for reviewing COCOM:
"there are certainly still legitimate national security interests that must be preserved … But I think it is timely that we take a new look at some of the commercial constraints."
There is nothing here with which we or, I believe, our partners in COCOM would disagree. The question is how to turn agreement on the need for a measured yet flexible approach into practice.
Many ideas are already under discussion in COCOM and more widely. Let me set out a few of these. The first is streamlining—the process of continuously reviewing the COCOM control lists to ensure that they apply only to genuinely critical items. This process must and will continue.
Secondly, there is verification. Poland and Hungary have offered guarantees against diversion from civil to military end use. Those are welcome, but guarantees alone, as my hon. Friend will accept, are not enough. The verification of certain exports is already a part of COCOM procedure, but verification cannot unlock the door to a flow of high technology across the iron curtain. We shall use this method to the fullest practical extent, but we should not fool ourselves by believing that we shall be able adequately to police every sensitive export for the duration of its strategic life.
In principle, of course, it would be ideal if we had a totally detailed knowledge of the extent of Soviet technological capability, but this is impossible to measure accurately even if we could be granted access to every Soviet office, factory or laboratory. I remain to be convinced by the suggestion that the Bonn economic meeting of the CSCE should provide a forum for the detailed discussion of eastern technological capabilities. I doubt whether that meeting would have the necessary levels of expertise, but of course we can raise this with partners. It may offer a way forward in some respects.
All these ideas and others now need vigorous discussion between COCOM partners. Following the high level meeting in October, senior officials will again meet in Paris, probably in February. Their aim will be to draw conclusions and policy decisions from the present mix of ideas. It is too early to predict what policy lines will merge, but we shall be arguing that COCOM's response to reforms in eastern Europe should be developed in a considered and co-ordinated manner. As my hon. Friend has observed, COCOM countries have two alternatives, both of which involve taking risks, and they should take the more imaginative of the two paths.
I can assure the House that, subject to the continuing need to protect our vital security interests, COCOM will not be, must not be, an impediment to reform in eastern Europe. We can both assist the East and keep up our own insurance. COCOM need not, I believe, be inimical to these twin objectives.

Rates (Scotland)
11.58 am
Mr. Dick Douglas: I regret that at this festive time of year I have to raise the unhappy topic of the implementation of the Abolition of Domestic Rates Etc. (Scotland) Act 1987. No single item of legislation in the past Thatcher decade better illustrates the Government's philosophy than that legislation, which the Prime Minister has called her flagship.
The theory underlying the legislation is that consumers of local government services should pay for them and that those who administer the services should be accountable to the electorate for their provision. Therefore, we have the concept of the community charge, which is in reality a tax, based on the view that it is possible to make people pay a flat-rate charge for local services. Conservative Members have argued that people should pay a flat-rate charge in the same way that they do for a television licence. But a moment's examination shows how absurd that is. If one could afford it, one could have three, four or even five televisions in the house, but pay for only one licence. Therefore, the consumption of the service is not related to the charge.
Originally, the view on the community charge—more appropriately called a poll tax—was that, if implemented, it should be as a supplement to and not a replacement of the rates. It has been well documented that the panic measure was introduced in the House because of the revaluation in Scotland in 1985. The Government sought a cheap and effective way of replacing the rates, initially in Scotland, and they introduced the legislation just before the 1987 general election.
It is valid to examine the legislation because when it was introduced it applied to no section of the United Kingdom other than Scotland. Even now, there is no poll tax legislation for Northern Ireland. We are a United Kingdom Parliament and theoretically we are all subject to similar, if not the same, levels of taxation, but there are differences and distinctions.
At the time of the 1987 general election, no other piece of legislation, passed by the House, was subjected to the direct examination of a part of the United Kingdom. The Government argue that they are accountable to the people for legislation which affects local authorities, but when we examine what happened in Scotland at the general election we find that the Tories were almost wiped out. No one can say, with any measure of truth, that the poll tax legislation was not the subject of intense debate at that time. Scotland, the specific subject of the poll tax legislation, overwhelmingly rejected that legislation, yet we still got it. So much for electoral and democratic accountability.
I do not know how any Scottish Minister, knowing that he owes his place at the Dispatch Box to the electorate, can say at the next general election that, even if the Government's record is rejected, they will continue with their policies because they have a majority in the United Kingdom Parliament.
This legislation, the Government's flagship, places an enormous strain on the Union. Those who persist in neglecting the democratic views of the Scottish people and at the same time mouthing unionism in terms of the United Kingdom are verging on being hypocritical. They are endangering the Union. The Government cannot say that people have a vote which counts, which has to be related
636
to a specific piece of legislation, and yet, when the electorate affected by that legislation rejects it, continue to force that legislation down their throats.
Unfortunately, memories are short when it comes to the implementation of the legislation. One of the most invidious features of the legislation is the infringement, and continued infringement, of individual liberty. The poll tax registration officers seek personal information to find out where a person is living and whether they should be subject to the poll tax. They even get hold of unlisted telephone numbers.
A student was living with one of my constituents. His telephone number was unlisted, but, somehow or another, the poll tax registration officer in Fife managed to get hold of it. That is the extent to which he was prepared to go to get hold of information. He is responsible to no one—neither to the Secretary of State nor to the regional councils in Scotland. No democratic control is exercised over poll tax registration officers.
The poll tax bears no relation to ability to pay. It is a flat-rate tax. The Government argue that its effect is modified by a complicated rebate system. However, the tax burden will be shifted from the backs of those who have sufficient resources to the backs of those who have not. It is a highly regressive and painful tax. That pain is inflicted in various obnoxious ways. In order to secure the payment of the poll tax, certain sanctions are imposed. We know about the sanctions relating to income tax and rates.
As for the cost of administering the poll tax, yesterday the Under-Secretary of State gave what I consider to be a wholly bogus figure when he said:
"The cost to local authorities of collecting the community charge in 1988–89 is estimated by authorities at £31·8 million."
That is well over £14 million more than the cost of collectting rates. I believe the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, which says that the true cost of collecing the community charge will probably be £50 million. The Under-Secretary's figure does not include indirect charges. The poll tax costs more to collect and employs 2,000 additional people. Scotland has lost jobs in shipbuilding, steel and coal mining, but those losses are compensated for, theoretically, by the creation of 2,000 additional jobs. So much for keeping control over local authority manpower.
When the local authorities considered how much the poll tax would yield, they believed initially that there would be a downturn in the yield of about 6 per cent. There ought to be about 4 million people on the register. I ask the House to bear that figure in mind.
If the tax is to work, the penalties must be severe, and the Government know that. It is one thing to try to enforce penalties in relation to a tax that people have accepted as fair but another to have similarly severe penalties in relation to a tax that people do not accept and have voted against and that is manifestly unfair. The penalties for non-payment include arrestment of wages or salaries, arrestment of bank accounts and such things as income support and the poinding of one's goods and, eventually, one's savings.
I want the House to realise how obnoxious the warrant sale procedure can be. I do not think that this has been shown before. One of my constituents, Mr. Terence Donnelly, received a letter dated 14 December from H. M. Love and Partners, 8 Abbey Park place, Dunfermline. Representatives of that firm called at Mr. Donnelly's house while he was working. The letter stated:

637
"We refer to the Summary Warrant granted at Dunfermline Sheriff Court in connection with arrears of Community Charge for the year 1989/90.
As payment has not been made, our Officer has called today with instructions to carry through a Poinding of your household effects. As no one was in attendance, you are hereby notified that unless payment, as detailed below, is made to our office immediately, our Officer may be instructed to return to your premises.
It should be noted that the warrant carries authority to open and shut lockfast places."
If the householder is absent, the sheriff officers or the messenger-at-arms can break in. That is the sanction which the Government are willing to impose to collect this regressive tax. The Minister must respond to that point in relation to the sanguine speech that the Secretary of State made in Edinburgh on 4 December and the figures that were repeated yesterday. The Secretary of State said that 70,000 warrants were being issued in Strathclyde, but only a minute number of warrant sales are being effected.
All Scottish local authorities have avoided the imposition of warrant sales. I am told that Strathclyde has not had a warrant sale in 14 years. Depending on how the figures are calculated, nine months into the financial year between 500,000 and 750,000 Scots have not paid the poll tax. If the Government want to impose the full rigour of the law, they will have to stand back—they will say that this is not their responsibility but that of the local authorities—and watch those authorities get themselves into extreme financial difficulties. They may say, "It is your responsibility to collect these sums." To put it crudely, Scottish Labour local authorities will have to do the Tories' dirty work.
Scottish local authorities have assured-warrant sales for the rates. I shall repeat Strathclyde's record because it is worth repeating: it has had no warrant sales in 14 years. However, the local authority is to issue about 300,000 letters through the sheriff officers saying that people are in debt. I do not see how warrant sales can be avoided if the full rigour of the law is enforced. Perhaps the Under-Secretary will explain his proposals and how local authorities can avoid that.
In addition to those complications, we have the pressure applied by English Back Benchers to alter the scheme halfway through. The Opposition have arguied that people with Alzheimer's disease should be totally exempt but the Minister said no.
Mr. Harry Barnes:Warrant sales would be required for large amounts of money if we are talking about a year's poll tax. The furniture collected and sold secondhand and the costs involved with that mean that a person's house will be virtually stripped bare and still the money would not be raised to pay the poll tax and the debt would be outstanding. That is a horrendous device.
Mr. Douglas: I accept that point.
I return to the subject of altering the rules of the game—with some justification—halfway through, and the complexity involved for Scottish local authorities. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities said that the stumbling block over transitional relief is the Government's desire to see the recalculation of rebate for any qualifiers who are currently in receipt of such benefit. COSLA says that it cannot administer this along the lines that the Government suggest and that the cost will be
638
enormous. The Government are now suggesting that COSLA employs a firm of consultants to investigate the cost.
One of the forms of arrestment was to go to the bank. In a letter of 22 November the Scottish clearing banks said that the cost to the banks of trawling through their accounts would be considerable. A paragraph that was not entirely accurate in terms of total numbers but which illustrates the point said:
"Press reports suggest that there are now 450,000 non-payers which could result in an inordinate cost being placed on the banks if a corresponding number of arrestments were to be served on them. Should even 100,000 arrestments be served on a bank, the cost for that bank would run into several millions. If these costs are multiplied across all four banks, the costs could exceed £20 million."
What is the Government's reply about the cost effectiveness of the collection of taxes?
Round one of safety-netting transferred resources from the rural regions to the more urban regions. Next time the Government will finance part of it and the charges to Strathclyde and Glasgow will rise to an estimated £20 million. So the poll tax will soar.
I know that time is short. As it is the season of good will 1 will not he unduly offensive to my absent friends in the Labour party although I have given notice that I intend to refer to them. The Government are in a dilemma and so is the Labour party—theoretically the party of conscience. At a rally a few weeks ago the shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar), and my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) paraded themselves in front of a banner saying, "No warrant sales." Does the Labour party mean it? If it does, how will it present itself at the next regional elections? Will it say, "If you elect a Labour regional councillor there will be no warrant sales"? That is difficult to do. Will it say, "If you elect us, wait until the next Labour Government in order to get the poll tax repealed"?
If we raise that level of expectation and Labour is elected on a Thursday, by Monday nobody in Scotland will be paying the poll tax. The depth of hatred for the tax is not seen in the south-east of England. If that level of expectation is raised, nobody in Scotland will wait a year or 18 months for a Bill to go through the legislative process.
We are in the season of good will. To put it in biblical terms, if Mary and Joseph had gone to Bethlehem to pay their poll tax, they might have had to pay the standard charge for the stable and when they returned to Nazareth they might have found their furniture poinded and subject to a warrant sale.
The Bill is the Government's flagship. It epitomises a policy of making the poor pay. My party was created, in effect, to defend the poorer sections of the population. That is our raison d'etre. I am sad that my party says that it is opposed to warrant sales and poinding furniture but at the same time tells people that they must obey the law and pay the poll tax. To propose that people should obey the law is to imply that the law is just. But the law should have a democratic sanction behind it. This law does not have that sanction in Scotland. The Minister knows that, and knows that if the Conservative Government and the Conservative party continue to behave in the manner that they have, come the next election there will be no Conservative Members in Scotland. What will the Government do then? If there is a Labour Government

639
there will be a dilemma, and if there is a Conservative Government those who persist in stuffing this type of legislation down the throats of the Scottish people will be responsible for splitting the Union.
12.21 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton): In the limited time available I shall seek to answer as many as possible of the points that the hon. Member for Dunfermline, West (Mr. Douglas) raised.
The hon. Gentleman and his colleagues prophesied great difficulty in introducing this form of local authority tax. In fact, 99 per cent. registered and those who said that they would not pay failed in practice. I stress that we said consistently that over 1 million people in Scotland would receive rebates. It is now clear that that is indeed the case. Those on income support had their benefit increased to take account of the 20 per cent. of the poll tax that they would have to pay. They are exempted from paying the other 80 per cent.
The principle behind the community charge is that it introduces far more accountablity. We are convinced that it is an incomparably fairer system than the previous rating system under which only about 40 per cent. paid rates, although more contributed to them. Accountability is the principle.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the use of telephone numbers. I cannot comment on the circumstances of the case that he mentioned without further information. I suggest that it is reasonable that people who are liable for the community charge should be registered so that they pay their fair share towards the cost of local authority services.
The figures for the cost of implementing the poll tax are as given in the parliamentary reply to the hon. Gentleman. One of the common threads running through our debates on the community charge is that the Opposition have never presented a clear view of their position on the community charge. As the hon. Gentleman says, the official position is that people should pay. The hon. Gentleman represents a minority view in his party.
The number of people who have made some payment of community charge throughout the regions is largely within the range of 85 to 95 per cent. of those liable to pay. In one region 98 per cent. of people were recorded as having paid something. I acknowledge that those figures do not take account of people who are in arrears. As I said to the hon. Member for Dunfermline, West, the figures are not available from local authorities. The figures for the total number of people in arrears would be misleading. The legislation allows people to be up to two instalments in arrears before they risk losing their right to pay by instalments. Many people take account of that in their payment pattern, just as they did under the domestic rating system.
Even the figures for summary warrants do not provide a particularly accurate guide to the number of people in arrears. Those figures simply show the number of people who failed to clear their arrears at particular dates at which local authorities decided to proceed with the next
640
stage of their arrears collection process. The ideal course is for everybody to pay on time, but I have yet to hear of any tax at any time for which that happens.
The collection procedures are no different from those used under domestic rates. They were agreed by the House of Commons as recently as the Debtors (Scotland) Act 1987. We have heard a great deal about the numbers of people that local authorities are pursuing for arrears. It is the last hope of those campaigning for non-payment that these procedures will prove ineffective. However, there are already signs that people are responding to the notifications that they have received about summary warrants and are paying up or entering into a payment arrangement with their local authority. All the evidence suggests that that pattern will be repeated across Scotland. All that people who have received a summary warrant will have gained is a 10 per cent. surcharge.
Much has been made of the numbers of warrants so far and those likely to come next year. One non-payer per local authority is one too many because that person is consuming services without paying for them—simply getting a free ride at the expense of the rest of the community. Nevertheless, realistically a certain level of non-payment must be expected and authorities have budgeted for that.
Inevitably, comparisons are sought to be made with the rating system. They are difficult because many aspects of the two systems are different. The figures emerging from local authorities are broadly in line with what we expected at this stage from the evidence of what happened under the rating system.
Mr. Douglas: Will the Minister give way on that point?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I have only four more minutes and I should like to deal with the hon. Gentleman's questions on warrant sales.
Recently there have been reports that the local authority power to arrest bank accounts might prove unworkable. As with so much else, the reports were misleading. I understand that in recent meetings between local authorities and representatives of the banks many of the banks' initial fears were allayed. Moreover, bank account arrestment is only one of several diligences available to local authorities.
The ultimate sanction is the warrant sale. It is fair to say that nobody wants any case to reach that stage, but it is only right that the process should be available to local authorities as a weapon of last resort. It is important not to get this aspect of debt collection out of perspective. It is not the case that almost everyone in arrears will face a warrant sale. First, other means of collecting debt are available to authorities, such as the arrestment of bank accounts or earnings. Secondly, almost all people either pay their debts in full or reach an agreement with the authority before a sale is reached.
I have been informed that last year in Strathclyde the number of warrant sales in respect of rates arrears could be counted on the fingers of one hand. The hon. Gentleman claimed that there were none. Whatever the case, it shows the scale on which warrant sales were carried out.
The Scottish Law Commission found similar arrangements existed in every other western country. After looking thoroughly at the whole question, it concluded that the procedure should be retained in Scots law. However, it recommended that some of the more resented

641
aspects of warrant sales, such as the advertisement of sale showing the debtors' name and address, the requirement to hold the sale in the debtors' house and the inclusion of most household effects in the goods to be sold, should be changed. They were changed in the Debtors (Scotland) Act 1987 and it is noteworth that when the Bill went through the House the Labour party did not vote against it in principle. Before a sale is reached, the person in question will have been given every opportunity to settle his debt by other means.
I understand that the hon. Gentleman is recommending non-payment of the community charge. Few of us like paying taxes, but it is wholly irresponsible for a Member of Parliament to adopt that attitude, not only because Members of Parliament should be setting an example and not encouraging law breaking, but because they are wealthy members of the community who can well afford to pay. It is unfair for a Member of Parliament to refuse to pay and, by his actions, put a burden on the less well-off members of the community that he represents. In the circumstances, it is right that the local authority should have the power to enforce payments. If non-payers were allowed to get away with it, authorities would have to cut back on essential services or on the number of employees, or they would have to require more people who pay the charge to subsidise those who do not. I believe that that would be unfair.
The hon. Member mentioned the transitional—

Royal Assent
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified Her Royal Assent to the following Acts:

Consolidated Fund (No. 2) Act 1989.

South Yorkshire Light Rail Transit Act 1989.

Scottish Episcopal Clergy Widows' and Orphans' Fund Order Confirmation Act 1989.

Chatham Dockyard
12.30 pm
Dame Peggy Fenner: I am pleased to have the opportunity to raise the important matter of the historic dockyard in Chatham.
In June 1985, the Secretary of State for Defence announced the closure of one of our royal dockyarcls— Chatham. That was a trauma for the people of the Medway towns, and particularly for the people of Chatham. For centuries the names of the Royal Navy and Chatham have been synonymous. Many people in Medway towns worked in the dockyards, as their fathers and grandfathers had done before them. It was urgent that the Government should ensure that the valuable riverside site in Chatham should not become a derelict eyesore but should be redeveloped to maintain and improve the quality of the environment in the Medway towns and to provide job opportunities to replace some of those lost by the closure of the dockyard.
The Government also faced the problem that one fifth of the acreage of the dockyard is the great historical section of the famous yard. That is in my constituency. When one walks through the famous gate, one is confronted by the most complete Georgian dockyard in Britain. Nelson joined the Navy there, and his flagship Victory was built there around 1760 and rebuilt there between 1803 and 1804.
The dockyard comprises some 100 buildings, and 47 of them are the greatest concentration of scheduled ancient monuments in one place in Britain. To preserve that great heritage, the Chatham Historic Dockyard Trust was set up in 1984 as a company limited by guarantee. Its objectives were prepared by the Government and they were, first,
"to secure for the public benefit preservation and use of the historic dockyard in Chatham in a manner appropriate to its archaeological, historical and architectural importance"; and, secondly,
"to promote and foster for the public benefit a wide knowledge and understanding of the archaeological, historical and architectural significance of the Historic Dockyard".
The Government gave the trust the freehold of the site so that it could pursue those objectives and meet the criteria. They also gave the trust £.11,350,000—they did not say how they arrived at that figure—and a number of large industrial artefacts which were extremely expensive to move and set out for display.
The Government also gave the trust the responsibility to honour a contract, which had already been embarked on, for repairs to the ropery. Those who are not familiar with Chatham dockyard should be made aware that the ropery is a brick building some quarter of a mile long with a roof to match which the House may be interested to know supports one mile of guttering. The contract that was embarked upon was for £2,650,000, but turned out to cost £3,023,000, which had to be deducted from the original £11·5 million.
The public had previously been allowed in to the dockyard on Navy days, but in July 1984 the visitor centre and the whole historic dockyard was opened to them for the first time. There is now a living, working museum. Ropes are being made in the ropery and sold; flags are being made in the flag loft and sold. An historic ship is being repaired and restored and there are five museum galleries. The wooden ships gallery has recently been

643
completed and the trust now wants to embark on an iron-clad gallery. There are facilities for temporary and visiting exhibitions, a steam centre and an extensive education programme which encourages schools and school parties to visit and make the most of the educational and historical opportunities there.
There is a seasonal theatre company, a range of annual special events, concerts and theme weeks. Visitor numbers have gradually increased as the museum has developed. This financial year, they numbered 95,000, which was a 43 per cent. increase on the previous year. The all-party heritage group, the chairman of which is my hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire, South (Mr. Cormack), were recent, distinguished visitors. My hon. Friend hoped that he might return to the Chamber in time to speak in this debate, but he has sent me a letter saying that the group was extremely impressed with the progress being made and the quality and excitement of what is on offer at the dockyard, and that I should convey to the House its strong support for the plea that I am making.
The trust's strategy can be encapsulated quite briefly. The museum's theme is principally to tell the story of the building of British warships and the life of dockyard workers. It is to develop housing in the dockyard. There is a magnificent terrace of 12 Georgian buildings there. To bring people to live in the dockyard again, a high-quality scheme has been prepared which we hope will be completed in 1992–93 and enable 82 families to return to the dockyard. The scheme provides facilities for maritime and craft-related tenants. So far, we have more than 50 tenants, two thirds of whom meet those strict criteria. By about 1993 the trust hopes to have developed residential courses in maritime-related skills and crafts on offer to the general public.
To the initial endowment, the trust has attracted, generated and earned through the gate donations and grants nearly £1·1 million. It also has £500,000 in loans, making a total of £12,453,000. The trust appointed a full-time fund raising officer in October 1988 further to develop and increase the fund-raising activities. The number of visitors has increased and a charge is made on them. That income has risen to £107,000 in the financial year that has just ended. Income from the 50 commercial tenants has risen dramatically to £195,000 in line with the growing rents on commercial property in the Medway towns.
The trust has doubled its original money by wise investment and income generation. A simple summary of the trust's current position is as follows. Capital receipts and commitments to date total £12·5 million. The reduction for the restoration liability—which was very heavy as it involved a concentration of 47 scheduled buildings—has declined from £22 million to £15 million and the total expenditure to date has been £13·5 million. At the end of the current financial year, the total remaining funds are a little less than £8·5 million.
I bring this case before the House in prudence before the trust's funds reach a lower level. The management team has recently completed a draft budget for 1990–93 because it wants to look ahead at the level of expenditure on further restoration and development of the museum facilities. The trust is committed to further restoration as the buildings concerned are scheduled buildings. The trust
644
is committed to their restoration because the Government have scheduled them as a precious part of the nation's heritage and that restoration will cost a further £15 million. The development of the museum that is outstanding, including the iron-clad gallery, amounts to £5 million and a sum of £4 million is required to fund the budget deficit. In total that is just over £24 million.
I have already placed this matter before my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. I know that the all-party heritage group has visited the museum and has listened to the facts. It fully supports my comments today. I trust that my hon. Friend the Minister will be able to convey to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State my wish to see his commitment to our national heritage and his reassurance to the trust which is caring for it.
The museum site is unique in Britain's history. The work on the site to date has been carried out expertly by the trust which has some very devoted trustees under the chairmanship of the chairman and chief executive, General Sir Steuart Pringle, former commandant general of the Royal Marines. Their work is of high quality. They have mapped out the path ahead, and I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will express a further commitment to that work and match it with the necessary funding.
12.44 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. David Heathcoat-Amory): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Medway (Dame P. Fenner) on securing this debate and raising the important matter of the future of Chatham's historic dockyard. The dockyard is widely recognised as one of the nation's most important heritage assets. Indeed, it is probably the most complete Georgian dockyard in existence. Chatham was once the country's premier fleet base and, later, a most important repair and building yard. It is a memorial and a testament to British sea power. My hon. Friend has described its importance.
The Government's recognition of the historic importance of the dockyard was clearly reflected in our commitment to assist its preservation when the royal naval dockyard was closed in 1983. That commitment was delivered by the establishment of the Historic Dockyard Trust in 1984, together with an endowment of £11·35 million. That money went towards the cost of preserving and maintaining the built heritage assets. We have also given added legislative protection to many of the buildings and sites within the dockyard—50 are scheduled ancient monuments, and 13 of them are also listed.
The Government accepted, on the trust's inception, that the costs of maintaining the buildings and developing the site into a "living dockyard" through a mix of visitor facilities, light industry and housing would probably exceed £11 million. However, it was rightly felt at the time that, with a vigorous development and marketing strategy, the new trust would be able to supplement its endowment with private sector investment. So it was made clear to the original members of the trust that the £11 million was for the preservation and maintenance of the site and was not primarily intended to finance the developments that were necessary to establish the site as a heritage and tourist attraction.
We did not, and do not, underestimate the difficulty of attracting such private funding and, so far, the trust has

645
not been as successful in attracting private support as it had hoped. Nevertheless there has been considerable additional finance from the public purse since 1984. English Heritage has provided about £420,000, the National Heritage Memorial Fund has provided £130,000, the English tourist board has offered a £200,000 repayable grant, Kent county council has contributed £360,000 with the prospect of more by way of a loan, and Rochester upon Medway city council has contributed £50,000.
I pay tribute to the considerable achievements of Lieutenant General Sir Steuart Pringle, his fellow board members and the staff at the trust over the past five years, particularly for bringing back into imaginative use a number of the historic buildings.
My hon. Friend has well described some of those activities and new facilities. The initiatives have attracted more than 50 commercial tenants, and developed the heritage assets of the dockyard for thousands of visitors to enjoy each year. We also welcome Sir Steuart's continuing commitment and enthusiasm to build on these achievements.
Despite the indisputable historical importance of the dockyard, however, I do not think that the House could readily or easily agree to the allocation of further public money at this stage—certainly not to the £24 million that Sir Steuart is seeking. But I recognise the Government's obligation to the funding of heritage projects—indeed, our overall budget next year will be about £150 million, compared with Government expenditure of only £37 million in 1979. Within this large national sum the grant-in-aid to English Heritage is nearly £80 million, of which it aims to spend about £30 million on repair grants to historic buildings throughout the country.
Despite the significant overall budget for heritage and the increase over the past 10 years, we must be cautious about spending large sums on any one site which would prevent money from being spent elsewhere. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Medway knows that there are many pressing candidates for additional spending in other parts of the United Kingdom.
There are, indeed, many worthy causes for public and private patrons. To see and understand the very best of objects and buildings from the past is important to our national way of life. It helps us to define who we are as a people. It helps us to form roots and it is an important component of education. The country's rich and valued heritage—of historic towns and villages, great houses and early industrial and military sites such as Chatham —has also provided a base for our growing tourist industry.
Against that background, I can assure my hon. Friend that the Government remain keen and concerned to
646
identify a way forward for Chatham which is acceptable to all concerned and which secures the long-term future of the dockyard. The task is by no means easy; we do not dispute that the trust has a particularly difficult job on its hands. But, as my hon. Friend knows, we are undertaking detailed discussions with Sir Steuart to identify options for the future.
Senior officials from the Department will be meeting Sir Steuart again early in the new year; I think that the date is set as 10 January. That follows visits to the dockyard in October and November by my hon. Friend the Minister of State with responsibility for heritage matters, and my noble Friend Lord Arran on behalf of the Ministry of Defence. I am pleased to note that the chairman of the all-party heritage group also visited the site and I shall take careful note of his comments—in particular, of his message of support to my hon. Friend for today's debate. We shall pursue with the trust the feasibility of its current development strategy and its plans for attracting private investment and looking for new and increased commercial opportunities.
Dame Peggy Fenner: Does my hon. Friend accept that it is extremely difficult to get private patronage or support for maintaining the fabric of many historical buildings?
Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: I acknowledge that. That is why, when the trust was set up in 1984, the £11 million endownment was primarily designed to be spent on the repair and maintenance aspects of the site. In addition, we recognised that development expenditure would be required, and that should be funded, at least in part, from private sources. I have emphasised throughout that we understand the difficulties of attracting such funding. I am pleased to note that a fund-raising officer was appointed in October 1988. That is a welcome development and we look forward to learning about what the trust plans to achieve through that appointment.
We all admire the vision of Sir Steuart and his colleagues, but we must be wary of counsels of perfection, even in the context of a unique asset such as the historic dockyard. A Rolls-Royce development plan would require massive short and long-term public investment, and that may not be realistic or feasible. However, I hope that a sensible compromise can be identified. I will convey these thoughts and the views of my hon. Friend to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, as she has asked. I hope that we can find a way to enable the trust to meet its original objectives—albeit over a longer time than it might have wished—and to secure the effective preservation of this historic dockyard.

Education (Cornwall)
12.55 pm
Mr. Matthew Taylor: I welcome the opportunity to take part in this debate and I thank the Minister for staying on as we are just about to break for Christmas. I know that the Minister visited Cornwall not long ago and that the county's problems have already been brought to her attention. I requested a debate on the funding of the education service in Cornwall because there is no more important investment than the investment that we make in the future of our children. However, the disparity between what needs to be spent on education in Cornwall and what the Government are willing to spend —or, more accurately, will allow to be spent—is widening to an ever more worrying extent.
There are changing financial arrangements. Our schools have been under-resourced for far too long, but the introduction of the poll tax and the associated changes will make matters worse. Cornwall could reasonably expect its prudent management in the past to be recognised in the level of Government financial support that it is to receive, yet Cornwall, which is underspending by £4 million on the Government's current assessment of its spending need on education, is overnight to be turned into a so-called "overspender" when measured against the new standard spending assessment. That is absurd to anyone who looks at the figures and it arises for a number of reasons which are, by and large, unconnected with any assessment of the needs of the education service in Cornwall.
The Government's financial support includes wholly inadequate provision for the effects of inflation on local authority spending. It is inadequate in terms that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would accept, although it has not been changed in terms of local government funding. Apart from being a real cut because of the effects of inflation, it takes no account of the need to increase spending to meet the increased pressure that schools face in implementing recent legislation.
To compound all that, the method that has been adopted for calculating Cornwall's education standard spending assessment takes further resources away from Cornwall. Under this element, the county has lost grant equivalent to £11 per adult. To make matters worse, resources have been moved from poor counties, such as Cornwall, to support richer counties around London. The area cost adjustment has lost Cornwall a further £7 an adult and is another example of the problems that will arise from the introduction of the poll tax. I hope that the Minister will agree that it is unfair that people in Cornwall, where wages are 20 per cent. below the national average, should have to subsidise counties around London, where incomes are substantially higher than the average. Even if Cornwall spends at the Government's standard level for education need as now defined, despite higher inflation, my constituents will contribute 40 per cent. more than they do this year.
Against that background of more financial constraints, there is a huge demand for resources for buildings, maintenance, books, equipment, in-service training for teachers and training for governors. However, the capital budget is of particular concern in Cornwall because we have so many Victorian primary schools and nine split-site secondary schools which need urgent attention. Over 50
648
primary schools have outdoor toilets and over 80 are without a hall. The county tells me—and I am sure that it is right—that it has no hope of meeting the regulations on the standard of premises by the deadline of 1991. In other words, the Government have set standards but are not allowing the money to meet them.
I visited Mevagissey school in my constituency recently. Huge problems arise there as a result of overcrowding. The school hall has to be used on the same day as a gym, a meeting place and a classroom, but the school has been taken off the lists of schools urgently needing new buildings. It was on the council's priority list last year, but this year it has been replaced by another school equally, or more, deserving. It is a vivid illustration of the merry-go-round of hopelessness in trying to meet £100 million worth of need with £7 million or £8 million worth of spending.
I heard this morning devastating news about the capital building programme for next year. The council asked for permission to spend £18 million, including ongoing commitments from this year to £10 million. The Minister discussed those needs with those councillors during her visit and they made strong representations to her. However, the announcement just made is that the figure allowed by the Government for 1990–91 will be only £6·522 million, against a need of approaching £100 million, of spending to meet targets that are meant to be met by 1991. This means that the LEA will need £3·5 million from further savings or sales of assets just to keep up with the projects already in progress, let alone any projects that county councillors and others from all parts of the county might wish to have for next year. Many planned projects will not now be able to go ahead.
The situation regarding building is nearing disaster again and no one in the county, of whatever political persuasion, can understand why the Government will not allow the county council to act. Teachers, governors, parents and children will be stunned by the sad news that they have just had, and people will be justifiably angry. I hope that the Minister will now agree, as at least one concrete measure arising from this debate, to meet a delegation from the county to press this concern. I am sure that the county will be seeking such a meeting.
The hon. Member for Cornwall, South-East (Mr. Hicks), in an Ajournment debate in July 1988, also raised the problem of bringing school buildings up to standard —that emphasises the all-party nature of this concern—but, despite his efforts, today's announcement will leave the situation worse than it has ever been. It is about time that Ministers recognised the difficulities in which they are putting Cornish schools.
Major investment is needed to ease the growing problem of teacher morale, and a greater Government appreciation of the valuable job that teachers do would be welcome. That arises, in part, from the difficulties that they face working in schools, but also from the frustration that they have in implementing the changes that the Government are introducing. The falling morale among teachers particularly saddens me, but the Government ignore the difficulties that teachers are facing, and just heap more and more work on them.
Already, there are chronic teacher shortages in many parts of Cornwall and difficulties in getting teachers with the skills required for teaching maths and sciences, and the situation is worsening. In letters to the Secretary of State for Education and Science—which have been copied to me

649
—from head teachers, they raise many deep concerns about the situation in schools. Rather than try to express their frustration in my words, it would be best to quote some of the letters, because they speak powerfully about this crisis of morale.
One head teacher wrote:
"The workload is becoming almost insurmountable for all of us—we will work for the sake of our pupils but these excessive demands, lack of time and preparation to complete everything within Government issued deadlines will result in the continued erosion of the teaching profession, and you will find that existing expertise, dedication and professionalism will recede."
Another teacher, with 30 years' experience, said to the Secretary of State:
"Please, please wake up to the fact that it is now our caring, dedicated staff who are desperate to leave teaching. We are continually being encouraged to be 'positive'. I and many other teachers never found this a problem until recently. There is more to 'job satisfaction' than salary. Top of my list comes inner satisfaction that I am giving of my best to my class—this is becoming increasingly difficult."
A young head teacher only recently appointed wrote:
"I do not have enough books or books of the right quality. We are short of basic equipment and expensive equipment needed for science…I am tired, under extreme stress and have lost a great deal of enthusiasm. I have been offered three jobs in industry at twice the salary I am getting at present and it is likely that I will accept the next job offered to me."
Another teacher said:
"I have a good many years left to give to education but my enthusiasm for teaching cannot go on indefinitely unless the Government provide significant additional resources to enable us to implement the National Curriculum in a professional manner."
Finally, another teacher wrote:
"Morale in my school is at an all time low and deteriorating. I no longer have the time or reason to motivate staff. I shall be seeking early retirement myself at the earliest possible time, if the stress does not kill me first."
I emphasise that those letters come from head teachers in schools of acknowledged high quality. There is no argument about the results that we get from the county. But to tackle the problems we need to have proper recognition of the problems that teachers face and pay must be part of that priority.
I should like a commitment from the Minister that the £600 million limit on the amount to fund the teachers' pay increase next year will be increased. That limit represents an increase across the board of only 7·4 per cent. In view of the present level of inflation, that will make financial hardship for teachers worse rather than better. I implore the Department of Education and Science to start talking again to teachers through a proper negotiating structure. That can only be fair, especially in view of the extra demands being placed on teachers.
I should also like to see the Government invest in much higher profile recruitment for properly qualified teachers to ensure that the maths and science teacher shortages in the county, which are even greater in other parts of the country, are addressed.
I must also make it clear that none of the letters that I have received makes the problem of pay the priority. They refer to something much more basic—training, books, the most basic materials for making the most of the brief, unrepeatable time that we have to give our children their education.
Ministers may not like the issues that I raise. They mainly concern funding and the Government are averse to that, because they have to go to the Treasury to ask for
650
funds, and I understand the difficulties in doing that. But the Government must face the fact that more money is desperately needed, not least in our county.
The announcement that we have heard today is inadequate. Teachers' morale is undeniably low. The teachers whom I have quoted today are talking of resignation. We hear the Government talk about new schemes and CTCs which will never be seen in my county, but schools for the vast majority of children in the county are running out of the basic resources that they need to give children the fundamental and best education that they need.
Teachers in my county are struggling against many odds and achieving good results. They do not have the best of teaching facilities, not through any fault of the Government but because they are old schools, and that needs to be changed. The teaching that is provided in the county is excellent, with excellent results. Cornwall is pressing ahead with implementing the Education Reform Act 1988. Despite the problems and under-resourcing that Cornish schools face, the results are good at GCSE and A-level, as is the staying on rate post-16. We pride ourselves on the efficiency and value for money that is achieved by our education service. But the problems that I have been addressing today are real and immediate and cannot be wished away. The money will have to be spent sooner or later. The present spiral that we are entering is one of decline, and I hope that the Minister will accept that that needs to be reversed.
As I said earlier, I hope that the Minister will agree to meet a delegation from the county, no doubt with other hon. Members who represent Cornwall, which will seek to press the immediate problems of the announcement on capital spending.
1.8 pm
Mr. David Harris: I welcome the debate, and I am grateful for this opportunity to say a few words. I should be glad to join any delegation that my hon. Friend the Minister of State might care to receive. I very much hope that a delegation will come to London to see her and talk about Cornwall's problems. The hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Taylor) has outlined some of them. He was right to emphasise Cornwall's legacy of outdated Victorian schools, particularly in the villages.
The problem cannot be laid entirely at the Government's door.
Mr. Matthew Taylor indicated assent.
Mr. Harris: I am glad that the hon. Gentleman agrees with me about that. It arises, in part, because of Cornwall's previous priorities. It used most of its building resources on secondary education, with the result that some village schools have been neglected.
The hon. Member for Truro referred to the pressure on the school hall in Mevagissey. There are several village schools in my constituency that do not have school halls. I am thinking in particular of Breage school near Porthleven. That school faced closure a few years ago. It is now flourishing, thanks to the head teacher's inspired leadership and the backing of the staff. The school is literally bulging at the seams in an old building that has not been modernised this century.
A delegation ought to come to see the Minister about Cornwall's capital building programme. I share the hon.

651
Gentleman's disappointment that it did not feature more prominently in yesterday's announcement. He referred to the education authority's request that the capital building programme should be increased to £18 million, but the county council knows perfectly well that that is an unrealistic hid; it would be horrified if it were given permission to spend £18 million. It could not finance it. Therefore, it submitted a high figure in the hope of attracting a realistic increase. I hope that it will be allowed to spend more than the £6·5 million increase that has been allocated to it.
There is a tendency in this place and throughout the country to say that underfunding is the Government's fault. All of us would like more money to be spent on education. The hon. Member for Truro will join me in another debate to argue for more spending on Cornwall's health services. We are both fighting the case for the air ambulance, for example. One has to apreciate the Government's problems over managing the national budget. There is also a local problem over managing Cornwall's education budget.
I am told that during the last three years Cornwall education authority has overspent its budget. According to reliable information, I also understand that this year it is likely to overspend by £1·5 million. Consequently, it is now having to make cuts. It has cut £500,000 on the repair and maintenance of the kind of schools to which the hon. Gentleman and I have referred. It has also cut £450,000 from the school transport budget. That creates problems in rural areas such as those that the hon. Gentleman and I represent.
We should consider the reasons for overspending. I am told that the overspend on education officers' car allowances is about £136,000. That is nothing to do with the Government; it is Cornwall education authority's problem. I agree with the hon. Gentleman's general case, but I do not believe that all the blame should be laid at the Government's door. Cornwall education authority, at county hall, must, where this is needed, put its house in order.
1.14 pm
The Minister of State, Department of Education and Science (Mrs. Angela Rumbold): I have listened carefully to the hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Taylor) and my hon. Friend the Member for St. Ives (Mr. Harris). It is important to start by saying that any delegation that asks to see a Minister normally receives a courteous reply and an answer to that request in the affirmative.
It is right to remind the House that the level of education spending in any local education authority, whether for recurrent or for capital expenditure, is not directly under the Government's control, as my hon. Friend the Member for St. Ives said. Local authorities decide their own priorities and direct their budgets accordingly. It is therefore the Cornwall local education authority, and ultimately the voters of Cornwall, to whom the hon. Member for Truro needs to direct most of his animus.
Recurrent funding accounts for teachers' salaries and other running costs for schools will be delegated to most schools under the local management of schools provision in the Education Reform Act 1988. I am delighted to hear
652
that Cornwall is pressing ahead in implementing reforms under that Act. I am sure that many of the points made by the hon. Member for Truro on the funding of individual schools and the pressures placed on teachers, especially head teachers, will be alleviated by the introduction of the local management of schools provision. That has proved to be the case in pilot schemes. We are convinced that there will be more effective spending and that, therefore, available funds will go further and buy more.
The critical issue for Cornwall's funding, as for all other authorities, is the level of its education standard spending assessment. As I am sure the hon. Member for Truro knows, the SSA takes the place in the new finance system that was occupied by the grant-related expenditure assessment in the old system: it is the figure at which the Government consider that an appropriate and standard level of service could be provided by the authority. The total of all SSAs for all local authority services is the level at which the charging authority will be able to levy the community charge for standard spending—£278 before contribution to or receipt from the transitional safety net. The SSA takes account of the numbers of pupils, students, adults and children under five deemed to be in receipt of the authority's services. It also gives weight to the particular circumstances of each authority. In Cornwall's case, that is important because the SSA places more emphasis on the costs of providing education services in sparse areas than the GRE did. Cornwall has the fifth highest sparsity index in the country and is therefore a beneficiary of this change.
In 1990–91, Cornwall's education SSA will be 8 per cent. above its education GRE for 1989–90—a rise broadly in line with the change for most LEAs. However, the SSA will also be 16 per cent. above Cornwall's education budget for 1989–90, as reported on the form RER—the report that comes back to the Department of Education and Science from the local authority—and this means that the authority should find no difficulty in coping with the new finance system, at least through its recurrent education expenditure. This is a reflection—the hon. Member for Truro drew attention to this point—of the authority's past prudence and efficiency. I hope that the local authority, despite the view of my hon. Friend the Member for St. Ives on part of its expenditure, will continue to look carefully at how it budgets.
On the more general question of capital resources for schools, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State secured a substantial increase for local authority capital and for grants to voluntary-aided and grant-maintained schools in the current year's public expenditure round. Details for individual LEAs were announced yesterday, and I shall come to Cornwall's position in a moment. I should like first to make some general points on the Government's approach to work on school buildings.
The big increase in funds available will allow local education authorities and governing bodies to continue their programme of improvements to schools, including preparation for the national curriculum and following the guidelines of the 1981 regulations that are currently being looked at. We are making available for new improvement work alone a four-and-a-half-times increase in the equivalent sum made available last year. That amply demonstrates the importance we attach to capital spending on schools.
My hon. Friend the Member for St. Ives is right in saying that if by any chance the sums of money put in by

653
the local education authorities for capital spending had been allocated, they would have found considerable difficulty in managing to achieve spending on that level.
Mr. Matthew Taylor: I understand the Minister's point. However, there is a degree of cynicism in the local education authorities since we have received approximately two thirds of what we asked for, and so has the average authority nationally. There is a suspicion that more attention has been paid to cutting the bid down by two thirds than to what is required by any individual authority.
Mrs. Rumbold: I must quickly dispel that misapprehension. A careful study of the capital allocations throughout the country will reveal that it is by no means the case that local authorities have received two thirds of what they bid for. Would that it were so in my local authority's case.
I should not give the impression that everything necessary can be done at once, or that what we are making available will meet all the spending needs identified by all local education authorities. A great deal needs to be done to the fabric of schools all over the country to bring them up to scratch and to make them fit for the delivery of the high standards of education to which parents and teachers alike aspire, which our children deserve, and which we believe that our education reforms will achieve. Local education authorities have in recent years added to that substantially from receipts generated by sale of education assets—typically school sites sold as part of reorganization—by the use of revenue funds, and grant from the Department in the case of voluntary-aided schools. Of course, there is never enough to satisfy the full needs that people put forward.
It is important to remind the House that the numbers of pupils, and thus of schools, have been falling for the past 10 years. Capital spending per pupil has nevertheless increased by 10 per cent. in real terms over the past 10 years. We recognise that more needs to be done, and it is against that background that we have announced the big increase in annual capital guidelines and grant to governors of voluntary-aided schools.
As in recent years, priority has been given first to meeting committed expenditure on projects outstanding from previous years. This year we have uprated these sums by a realistic figure to allow for inflation, which should go a long way to meet complaints from LEAs that inflation has been insufficiently allowed for. Priority is next given to meeting the cost of new school places in areas of population growth. There must be places in schools for all children who require them. Priority is then given to projects designed to remove surplus places. That is because more efficient use of buildings releases resources which can be recycled for the benefit of the rest of the education system in the local authority concerned. Funds are then allocated, by means of an objective formula, for school improvements, and it is in this area that we have been able to distribute a four-and-a-half-fold increase compared with last year.
Mr. Matthew Taylor: I am sorry to interrupt the Minister again. She is aware that the amount needed to bring us up to the Government's target levels for 1991 is many times greater than that allocated to the county council and well below what it could usefully spend, whatever the arguments about the hid put in. We will not meet those targets. How does the Minister answer parents and teachers on that point?
Mrs. Rumbold: Those guidelines were laid down in regulations in 1981. It is clearly recognised that in past years requirements to be met under those regulations have changed. It is in light of that that we are currently reviewing those regulations to see whether we can ease the requirements for local authorities.
Mr. Taylor: As I understand it, the Minister is saying that because the money is not being made available to meet the targets they will reduce the targets.
Mrs. Rumbold: That is not what I am saying. We are reviewing the needs as we perceive them now. They are generated by a different set of circumstances, principally the Education Reform Act 1988. We are considering the guidelines to see how schools, particularly small schools, can be accommodated within the terms of the 1981 guidelines.
We have talked about the overall total guideline for Cornwall, which is £6·522 million, of which the apportionment is £5·557 million for schools and £965,000 for further education. That represents some 35 per cent. of the authority's total bid and this proportion, I should emphasise, is exactly the national average for all LEAs in this exercise. But the settlement for Cornwall fits the national pattern not only in terms of arithmetical proportion, but in the more general sense that, while it does not meet all the authority's objectives—I am clear about that—it will allow for significant progress to continue in the improvement and adaptation of its schools and colleges.
I have already mentioned that the guidelines should not be seen as the sum total of what is available to authorities for capital expenditure on education; they are more a catalyst to which can be added other resources such as capital receipts, and other sums made available by virement from other resources at the disposal of county councils. I am glad to see, from an observation of the educational spending patterns of recent years, that Cornwall makes significant use of those flexibilities.
In the voluntary-aided sector, we have met in full the considerable bid for committed expenditure of over £1 million. The authority's bid for new works was entirely in respect of minor works, and here we have made available a sum of £90,000, which should enable the authority, at its discretion and, no doubt, in consultation with the dioceses concerned, to start a number of planned works at primary schools in the coming year. I hope that that news is welcomed by hon. Members. In further education, the authority received an allocation for its sole bid for a new major building project.
The other subject that the hon. Gentleman raised was teachers' morale. I am familiar with the contents of the letter that he has received from the National Association of Head Teachers and other organisations. We recognise the extremely hard work put in by teachers throughout the country. We welcome their devotion to their work and acknowledge a debt of gratitude to them especially as they have undertaken the introduction of the Education Reform Act 1988. The implementation of the national curriculum and other new provisions place a great demand on teachers.
We have been at pains to make it clear that teachers deserve both recognition and respect for their professionalism and commitment. Teaching is an attractive career. Some 25,000 people enter or re-enter the profession each

655
year. Applications for primary initial teacher training are up by 15 per cent. The proportion of teachers leaving teaching for other paid employment is less than 1 per cent. each year.
Clearly, pay is important. Teachers' pay has risen by 40 per cent. overall since March 1986. This year we have given the interim advisory committee a remit to examine, in particular, the pay of head and deputy head teachers. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the total sum given to the interim advisory committee is twice that given last year. It is important to recognise that the Government have taken steps to make teachers' pay a high priority.
The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the new pay machinery. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State had a constructive round of meetings with the teachers' unions and employers a short while ago. He is now considering the points made to him and he aims to put in place machinery for the 1991 settlement. He is pursuing the matter vigorously, but he does not underestimate the difficulties that remain. I hope that I have managed to reassure the hon. Gentleman that the Government take schools, education, capital and teachers seriously.

Housing (North Yorkshire)
1.29 pm
Mr. William Hague: I am grateful for this opportunity to raise the problems of housing in North Yorkshire. It is a broad topic and could cover a multitude of subjects, but as my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State knows—I am delighted to see him here to reply to the debate—I wish to raise the specific problems experienced by my mainly rural constituents of finding suitable accommodation to buy or rent locally.
The problem has been aired in the House before, particularly in the last Session during the passage of the Local Government and Housing Bill. Yet it merits further attention because it is the single most pressing social problem for my constituents and has a particular impact on rural communities.
My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary will be aware of the nature of the problems in North Yorkshire. They are nothing new. There have always been population movements into particular areas. Once it was into the cities, then into the suburbs and now it is back into the countryside. Such movements have always created pressure on housing stock and difficulties for those who were living in the areas concerned to begin with. The problem has always been with us and will probably always be with us.
What is new, however, is the intensity of pressure on housing in areas such as the one I represent. In the 1980s the demand for homes in the environmentally attractive area of North Yorkshire soared. Greater wealth and improved transport allowed many people to move into the area, some for retirement, some for a second home and some for work. In addition, many cottages were turned into holiday homes.
In February when I was canvassing in the Richmond by-election I saw how whole villages closed down for the winter, with a large proportion of the housing stock unoccupied for many months of the year. It is principally the natural attractiveness of the dales and moors which has spurred this great demand for housing. Ironically, that natural attractiveness makes it impossible adequately to expand the supply.
Planning controls, particularly in the national parks which cover half of my constituency, are tight and have been tightened. Many local people have the money to build a house and even the land to build it on, but not the planning permission to do so. I would not argue for any general relaxation of planning controls. It is in the interests of the whole nation that our most attractive natural areas are preserved for future generations, but it is important for the nation to acknowledge the price paid and the trouble taken by the local residents. They want to make a living and bring up a family, and they love their surroundings, but they often ruefully reflect that a beautiful view does not pay bills. The price to be paid threatens to be high.
Lancashire polytechnic recently highlighted the scale of the problem in my constituency in a comprehensive survey of all households in Wensleydale. The work was carried out on behalf of the Wensleydale housing forum, to which I pay tribute. The survey confirmed what we already knew. Many people are moving into the Dales. Indeed, in the past 10 years one in three households has moved in. At the same time, local young people cannot find anywhere to live. Forty per cent. of households are of pensionable age

657
and fewer than 20 per cent. include anybody between 16 and 25. The consequences of such changes can be both great and serious.
The effects on schools and public transport are predictable, as is the strain on health care. There is also the sometimes forgotten impact on the environment. The natural environment that people find so pleasant and attractive depends on the maintenance of upland farming. If the next generation of farming families cannot find anywhere to live, the impact on the environment will be serious.
I do not criticise anyone for wanting to live in or move into the area. Many of those who move in become among the most active local citizens. I should like the strains which have arisen to be recognised. Some people in my constituency have said that 95 per cent. of the local population cannot afford the average price of a small house in the Dales. That may be an exaggeration, but I do not think that it is a wild exaggeration.
I know that my hon. Friend the Minister will agree with me when I say that it is a distressing experience for people who were born in the area, brought up there, and who feel that they belong there, as they have friends and family in the area, to find that they are unable to get any accommodation there.
Many married couples in my constituency have to live in caravans on the premises or in the gardens of relatives. In far-flung rural areas people are not able to go to live in the town down the road instead of in a village or in the countryside. There is no town down the road. People who work in rural areas in many parts of my constituency could not commute from nearby towns because the towns do not exist.
One may say that there have always been problems, but when a whole generation faces the same difficulty throughout the country, the problem merits considerable attention. Some people may say, "So what? Populations shift, communities come and go. Industrial and urban communities have experienced great and traumatic changes in the past, so why do any special favours for rural areas?" My answer is that no one wants any special favours. My constituents are the last people to expect the Government to bail them out on any occasion.
Given the tight constraints imposed on the supply of local housing, people are entitled to seek ways to redress the balance in their favour. It is ridiculous to say that we have a free market in housing when the supply is so restricted. My constituents are entitled to ask whether we can interfere in the market to help rather than to hinder local people who understandably desire to live in their home area.
There are powerful moral, environmental and social reasons for active Government assistance to help to alleviate the problems. Perhaps my hon. Friend the Minister, does not need persuading that there are such reasons but it is worth placing them on record in the House.
It is all the more important for the Government to tackle the problem successfully because if they do not the Opposition will come up with silly, unworkable plans such as their scheme to require planning permission for the ownership of second homes. I warn the Opposition that with that scheme they risk enmeshing themselves in a bureaucratic tangle that has considerable implications for
658
basic civil liberties. The Government bear a heavy responsibility to get things right so that the Opposition do not get the opportunity to wreak havoc.
To be fair, my hon. Friend and his colleagues in the Department of the Environment in the past year have shown a refreshing awareness of the scale and the urgency of the problem. The noises that have emerged from the Government on rural housing have been positive I congratulate the Minister on the announcement last February about village sites for low-cost housing, on the great increase in funding for housing associations, on the constructive nature of the recently issued planning guidelines, and because they have generally recognised the existence of the problem. However, I think that the Minister will accept that the initiatives taken so far will take time to bear fruit, and the results may be limited in relation to the scale of the problem.
My hon. and learned Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning yesterday gave a written answer on Housing Corporation funding and activity which was impressive. The Government are providing the means for a huge increase in the activities of housing associations. However, when the money has been shared out by region, county and district, the effects on the ground over the next few years could be small. I have been told by Hambleton district council, one of two districts in my constituency, that one £4 million scheme for 28 dwellings would take up its total share of housing association funding for two years.
Will my hon. Friend impress upon his colleagues at the Department of the Environment and at the Treasury that there is a need for continued increases in Housing Corporation funding as a high priority? He should consider carefully whether rural areas receive as much funding as the seriousness of their problems warrants.
The work of the housing associations is welcome, but inevitably, local authorities are still in the front line of dealing with the rural housing shortage. As planning authorities they unfortunately bear the brunt of local dissatisfaction with planning constraints. Responsible local authorities, such as those in my constituency, and throughout the rural areas of North Yorkshire, feel harshly constrained when they try to help to tackle the problems that I have described.
I am aware that, when I raise the subject of local authorities' role in housing provision, I am entering a political minefield. Their creation of great municipal estates was a disaster for Britain and must never happen again, but local authorities in North Yorkshire have a much more distinguished record on housing provision, to say nothing of many other things, and it seems to me that there are three ways in which they can help to tackle the local housing problem. In all of them, there is scope for the Government to be helpful to local authorities without unleashing a spending spree by the less responsible of them.
First, local authorities can seek restrictive agreements on the sale of properties to put people who already live locally at an advantage in the housing market. The Yorkshire Dales national park is making a major effort, which I warmly applaud, to place as many newly constructed properties as possible under section 52 agreements, which restrict subsequent sales. I know that the Government have encouraged the use of such

659
agreements in certain circumstances and places. Such a policy must be applied sensitively, and sometimes flexibly, but it is a genuine and constructive attempt to help.
There is much confusion and concern about whether such agreements can be made to stick in planning appeals or in subsequent tests in the courts. Clearer guidance from the Government on this matter would be welcome, although I recognise that it is a complex topic and my hon. Friend the Minister might not be able to give a full and definitive answer today.
Secondly, there is potential for local authorities to provide land or low-cost developments by housing associations or other bodies. At the moment, local authorities are sometimes boxed in by restrictions and penalties if they try to help in that way, and some housing associations are worried that local authority assistance with many possible low-cost developments will never happen. I know that the Government have recently tried to help in this respect and that there is always a danger when local authorities are given financial freedom that that freedom will be abused by a minority of them. I should welcome clarification of the Government's stance and any additional leeway that can be given to local authorities with suitable land or available funding that could be used for rural development.
Thirdly, local authorities still have a limited role in providing housing directly. Forthcoming restrictions on the use of capital receipts are likely to reduce the scope of their activity. If so, that will not help the rural housing situation. Local authorities in my area have never been extravagant. They have never incurred huge debts, but their ability to use money to help the local community with its most pressing problem may be curtailed.
I know that this is another difficult area for Ministers, mainly because some local authorities have behaved very differently from those in my constituency, but can the Government study how changes in local authority regulations will affect rural housing, and will they try to find ways in which to replace the much-needed funding that may be lost? There may be other ways in which to assist with rural housing through changes in the planning process. I wonder whether the planning system could be reformed to encourage the private sector to think ahead about the provision of low-cost, local-need housing. Within the framework of a county structure plan, district councils could put forward bids looking, say, five years ahead, specifying how many of the planning permissions they grant should be reserved for local need or be part of low-cost schemes. Such provision would then be built more into the expectations of developers and the plans of housing associations.
There may be other ways in which to assist. It may be possible for the Government to give local authorities more advice about opportunities already available to them so that they take advantage of initiatives that the Government have already provided, which they may not do at the moment. Whichever of these suggestions turn out to be practical, I think that my hon. Friend the Minister will recognise that there is a strong feeling in North Yorkshire and many other rural areas that more must be done and that pressure must be maintained on this subject.
This is a most pressing social and economic problem, although none of us is so naive to think that it will ever be
660
solved to universal satisfaction. We can no more stop the high demand for homes in the most attractive parts of the country than we can stop the tide coming in. However, we can help those people who wish only for relatively modest accommodation in their own home areas and who want to see suitable sites and local money put to the best use in providing that accommodation. No one is asking for special favours. I ask only that people are given a fair chance instead of facing a planning system and housing market that are stacked permanently against them.
1.45 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Christopher Chope): I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) for choosing to use this short debate to raise an important subject. As he does so often, he spoke eloquently and persuasively today. Like my hon. Friend, the Government are concerned to maintain the viability of rural communities and we recognise that ensuring that there is affordable housing for local people to rent or buy has a key part to play in that.
Unlike some Opposition Members, we believe that people must be free to choose where they live. That means that we have no intention of forbidding long-distance commuters and second-home owners moving into rural areas. We recognise that it is important for the health of rural communities that they do not become merely dormitory villages for commuters or twilight homes for the elderly. It is crucial that affordable housing is available for those who live and work in rural areas, including people with limited incomes.
We are, indeed, the first Government to recognise the distinctly rural angle to public housing policy. In July 1988, we announced our rural housing initiative which for the first time set out a specific policy on low-cost housing in smaller villages. Since then we have been steadily putting in place a package of measures designed to tackle the problem.
We are increasing the level of investment in rural areas through housing associations, which have a major role to play in providing affordable housing both for rent and for low-cost sale, in particular shared ownership. We have significantly increased the public funding of the National Agricultural Centre Rural Trust to support its work in providing start-up funds for rurally based housing associations. We have greatly increased the public funds available to the Housing Corporation, so enabling it to establish a special rural programme aimed at villages with a population of under 1,000. The Housing Corporation has recently brought forward increased targets under this programme which should be providing 1,500 homes a year for rent in small villages by 1992–93. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for recognising the enormous additional assistance that we are giving to housing associations in our programme over the coming years.
Most people in rural as in urban areas, including those on modest incomes, want to buy rather than rent a home. We are anxious to stimulate provision for low-cost home ownership, and have taken a series of measures to stimulate this under both housing and planning powers. Particularly important is the encouragement of shared ownership schemes, which enable people to part-rent part-buy, thus reducing the initial cost of purchase and

661
thereby lowering the barriers of entry to owner-occupation. Most are offered by housing associations, some with public subsidy, others without, but there is no reason why commercial developers should not run similar schemes, and we are beginning to see signs of interest in that.
As my hon. Friend reminded the House, there was considerable debate during the passage of last Session's Local Government and Housing Bill about whether shared owners should be prohibited from "staircasing" to full ownership. I hope that we have now settled that debate. We entirely agree that shared ownership housing should be retained for local people in rural areas, but not by denying people the opportunity to become full owners of their homes. We are introducing a scheme whereby housing associations in certain rural areas will have a pre-emption right to repurchase former shared-ownership dwellings when the occupier moves on, thus ensuring their retention as low-cost housing. The Housing Corporation will guarantee to make the necessary funds available without reducing its rural rented or shared ownership programmes.
The corporation has also been invited to identify separately for the first time a rural element within its low-cost home ownership programme, to allow 250 approvals next year rising to 350 by 1992–93, a trebling of the present level. Of course, the figures are still small, but in a small village even one or two houses can make a substantial difference. We shall keep progress under close review in consultation with the Housing Corporation.
We have been encouraging local authorities to see their housing role as more of an enabling one, working with housing associations and the private sector to increase the supply of low-cost housing rather than developing new housing for rent or sale themselves. They can sponsor housing association schemes from their own resources to top up Housing Corporation provision, and if they choose, they can pay subsidies to private landlords. Next year's local authority housing investment programme allocations were announced earlier today. The average allocation is twice that for 1989–90 because of the better targeting that our new system permits. That is possible only because we still maintain some control over the amount of capital receipts that local authorities are able to spend. If we did not have that control, we would not be able to target our resources in the way that we intend next year. I am delighted to tell my hon. Friend that Richmond has been allocated 230 per cent. of its 1989–90 figure, and Hambleton has been allocated 203 per cent. They have done very well out of today's housing investment programme allocations.
We recognise that there is still a role for direct local authority provision, but we hope that authorities will operate through housing associations where possible. If a local authority gives land to a housing association for low-cost housing development, without retaining nomination rights, there would not normally be any consideration and, therefore, no requirement to set money aside to redeem debt. If it retains nomination rights, there is a non-monetary consideration; but my noble Friend the Paymaster General announced in another place on 24 October that we would provide in subordinate legislation that, in those cases, no debt redemption would be required. So, effectively, there is no deterrent to authorities making land available freely or cheaply for low-cost housing.
662
There is also no reason why low-cost rural housing should not be provided by private developers, whether alone or in conjunction with housing associations or local authorities, and whether for rent, shared ownership or direct sale, and we are starting to see signs of that happening.
We are taking steps to encourage landowners and developers to help in providing affordable housing for local people. As my hon. Friend said, in February 1989 we announced changes to planning rules, whereby local planning authorities may exceptionally release small pockets of land, not previously designated for housing, for low-cost schemes. The key point is that if the land does not have development value, because planning permission for general purpose housing would be refused, the houses can be let or sold at well below the market price, subject to conditions that ensure that they remain available to local people.
We would expect to see appropriate covenants between the landowner and the developer to ensure that the additional housing remains available for local needs, normally backed up by an agreement with the planning authority under section 52. It is very important that those guarantees are carefully worked out, but I do not share my hon. Friend's doubts about whether they are workable. Many authorities are already working with them very satisfactorily.
My hon. Friend mentioned that there are some local doubts about the legal basis on which low-cost housing would be reserved for local needs. From a planning point of view, it is important that authorities set out clear policies for low-cost housing in their local plans to provide a framework for individual decisions. My hon. Friend referred to a programme for the next five years. Such a programme can be contained within a local development plan produced by the local authority. That would help to reduce any risk of challenge on appeal. I shall give one example, although it is not in my hon. Friend's constituency, but it is nearby. The North Yorkshire authority, Ryedale, has already adopted such a policy on an interim basis, pending revision of its statutory local plan. The policy is very much along the lines that we want to see, and I hope that other authorities will follow their lead. We published guidance on local needs policies in our recent draft planning policy guidance note on housing, and we shall be issuing the final version of that guidance early in the new year.
If there are uncertainties about the legal mechanisms, I suggest that authorities contact the National Agricultural Centre Rural Trust. It has been instrumental in promoting village housing schemes; it has produced an admirable guide to village housing; and it can point to cases where legal arrangements have been made to the satisfaction of all the parties concerned. I hope that, if my hon. Friend's local council has not contacted that organisation, our debate today will encourage it to do so.
The trust sees signs of widespread interest among private landowners in making small sites available for low-cost housing. A growing number of schemes are already under way. For instance, in Gloucestershire, an area of very high prices—probably even higher than in my hon. Friend's constituency and with equally strong pressures from outsiders—the Gloucestershire housing society has two shared ownership schemes under way on low-cost sites made available by private landowners, and

663
several more in prospect. That illustrates what can be achieved by using the opportunities that the recent policy initiative has made available.
In giving new priority to low-cost rural housing, we are not in any way abandoning our concern to protect the rural environment. We are not abandoning our planning policies or our concern for countryside protection. But it is important to remember that not many new houses are needed in a village—just enough to ensure that children brought up in the village can set up house there if they want to. Many villages have small sites that could be used for two or three houses without any damage to the environment. Most rural district councils are concerned to protect the beauties of their landscape, and I am sure that they will go on being scrupulous about inappropriate development. But that does not mean that there should be no development whatever. It is especially important in rural areas that developers should pay close attention to the environmental aspects of what they plan to build.
The Government have thus responded to the growing concern about the lack of affordable housing in rural areas. Inevitably, our initiatives will take some time to have their full effect, but we have put in place the mechanism to deal with the problem, and that, coupled with increased public and private funding, should provide a significant boost to the output of low-cost housing.
Of course, it can always be argued that more needs to be done, but in the two years since we introduced the rural dimension to housing policy, we have made real progress, and I am encouraged by the reports that I am receiving of innovative housing schemes in a variety of rural areas. Needless to say, we shall be watching developments closely and considering whether further steps are necessary. If more resources are called for, we shall do our best to provide them, although we have to balance rural against urban needs. We are also working on research proposals to assess the effectiveness of our initiatives.
We have recognised a problem which previously went unacknowledged. We have put in place a policy for dealing with it and we have made significant additional resources available to back up that policy. There may be further to go, but I hope that my hon. Friend and the House acknowledge how far we have already come.
Our approach is a positive approach to get more houses built for those in rural areas who need them without imposing restrictions on other people's freedom to own what property they choose. We have spelt out clear and coherent policies that work within the framework of a planning system that protects the countryside without imposing planning controls where they are not justified. As usual, the Labour party is running to try to catch up with us.

Judges
1.57 pm
Mr. Brian Sedgemore: Let me begin, Madam Deputy Speaker, by wishing you and everyone else a happy Christmas and a merry new year. In a few hours' time, this place will be closed. The heat of battle will be over and tranquility will have returned to our land. Before that happens, I should like to give the Law Officers a chance to lift the veils that shroud our system of judicial appointments—veils which make that system a complete mystery to the public. I should also like to give the Law Officers a chance to explain why the system is sexist and racist as well as being based on snobbery and class.
As a barrister, I know only too well that the secrecy that surrounds the appointment of judges is almost masonic. Judges are drawn almost exclusively from the ranks of barristers, and most of them are appointed by the Lord Chancellor, in consultation with other judges. The result of that system is that judges recruit other judges to the Bench in their own image—their own sex, colour, class and prejudices. This system produces an elite—a self-perpetuating oligarchy. It creates a judiciary which in my view is composed of the least forward-looking, least radical and most hidebound body of our citizenry.
Justice at the highest levels has become the preserve of cloistered, geriatric, white men. Is it any wonder that we have judges asking in court, "Who is Mick Jagger?" Is it any wonder that judges have to ask barristers to explain what "bonking" means? If I said to the Law Officers, "Bonking is good for you", they would know what I meant and would not need an interpreter or a barrister to demonstrate it for them.
More seriously, the character of these cloistered, geriatric, white men can explain some of the tragic mistakes that the Court of Appeal made in the cases of the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six. Perhaps the character of these geriatric, cloistered, white men can also help to explain the reaction of judges to the Lord Chancellor's proposals to get rid of the restrictive practices of barristers and solicitors.
That brings me to the question of how the Lord Chief Justice is appointed. Can the Minister describe the system under which the current Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Lane, will be replaced when he resigns? Which Ministers will be consulted? Presumably the Lord Chancellor will consult the Prime Minister, but what about the Home Secretary and the Attorney-General? Which senior judges will be consulted? The Law Officers may say that this is all hypothetical and that they do not know that the Lord Chief Justice will resign, but they should remember that the Lord Chief Justice described the proposals to get rid of the restrictive practices of barristers and solicitors, which were brought forward by the Lord Chancellor, as "sinister". He said two days ago in the House of Lords:
"the interests of justice have gone."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 19 December 1989; Vol. 514, c. 146.]
It is inconceivable that the Lord Chief Justice could preside over a system that he believes to be sinister and could continue to preside over a system from which he believes that the interests of justice have gone. It is not tenable that the Lord Chief Justice should be engaged in a running battle with the Lord Chancellor. Although I am sure that the Lord Chief Justice would prefer that the

665
reforms were withdrawn and that the Lord Chancellor resigned, that will not happen. Many of us at the Bar believe that the Lord Chief Justice is honour bound to resign and we want to know the system by which he will be replaced.
There is racism and sexism in the system of the appointment of judges. We know that over 50 per cent. of the population of this country is composed of women, yet out of 10 Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, there are no women. Out of 27 Lord Justices of Appeal, only one is female. Out of 81 High Court judges, only one is female. Out of 422 circuit judges, only 17 are female, which is 4 per cent. Out of 703 recorders, only 25 are female, which is 3·6 per cent. I should have thought that by any standards that was a disgraceful state of affairs and that it shows that women are shunned, scorned and rejected in recruitment by myopic male judges.
I am convinced that it is no use for the Attorney-General to say, as he has in a parliamentary answer, that we must simply encourage more women to come to the Bar and to put themselves forward as judges. The system must discriminate positively in favour of women as judges. We also need positive discrimination by chambers to ensure that the number of women practising at the Bar increases and thus that more women can come forward as potential judges. How many chambers have a quota for women barristers? In the medical profession, over 50 per cent. of those putting themselves forward to become doctors are women, but I am certain that nothing like 50 per cent. of those coming to the Bar are women. What are chambers, the Bar Council, judges and the Lord Chancellor doing to ensure that more women come forward?
How many chambers where groups of barristers meet have a creche? How many chambers or groups of chambers have a workplace nursery to help women barristers? How many courts have a creche or workplace nursery to help women barristers and solicitors? Is it any wonder that both the Bar and judges exude sexism? Ironically, sometimes this works in favour of women. Judges tend to see the women before them not as intelligent, rational beings but, bringing with them the prejudices of a thousand years of male chauvinism, as pretty little things, full of feelings and sentiment, but lacking in logic and reason. One strange result of that is that women in the criminal courts may get lower sentences than men who have committed the same crimes.
In the civil courts, we have judges such as Mr. Justice Bernard Caulfield fantasising over women. He described one witness as fragrant, radiant and elegant. I shall not be a chauvinist and comment on whether Mrs. Mary Archer is radiant and elegant. However, some women have asked me how the hell the judge knew that she was fragrant. What scent was this woman using that was so powerful that she could deceive this besotted judge? "I say, it is Chanel No. 5, old man." "Sorry, mind, it is Poison by Dior." That is a strange way to approach women in the witness box, and it is strange to use such phrases in summing up.
What about black people? The last census showed, the proportion of black people in the population as 3 per cent. but I should not be surprised if, when the 1990 census comes out, the proportion is more like 5 per cent. Out of 10 Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, none is black. Out of 27 Lord Justices of Appeal, none is black. Out of 81 High Court judges, none is black. Out of 422 circuit judges, only
666
one is black—one fifth of 1 per cent. of the total. Out of 703 recorders, only five are black—0·7 per cent. of the total. That does not mean that judges are racist, but it reflects the institutionalised racism of the judiciary. It suggests a shocking lack of concern on the part of judges about the future of black people.
How can black people trust the system of justice when all they ever see before them are these cloistered, geriatric white men?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Miss Betty Boothroyd): Order. I have allowed the hon. Gentleman a great deal of leeway, but I hope that he will not reflect in that manner on the judiciary. As he well knows, to do such a thing, he would need to table a substantive motion.
Mr. Sedgemore: I am not criticising them. "Cloistered" means that they come from a narrow social background. That is a matter of fact, because they basically come from public schools and universities. "Geriatric" was a phrase used by Lord Scarman. He gave me the idea to raise this debate. I heard him on the radio talking about the response of black people to our legal system and he explained that there were not enough black policemen and was asked, "What about the number of black judges?" He became so embarrassed that I started to table questions and find out what went on. "Geriatric"—at the highest level, although not at the level of the recorders or circuit judges—is a description of the age group of these people. "White" is a description of their colour. No criticism is intended. It is a plain, straightforward statement of fact.
How can black people feel confidence in the system? What will the Law Officers and the Lord Chancellor do about it? Again, positive discrimination is one of the answers, but I have one or two new proposals. We need a fundamental review of how judges are trained and appointed. We need a review that will open out access to the judiciary and get rid of the virtual monopoly of the Bar.
It is clear to me that being an advocate is not the same thing as being a judge. Yet nearly all the judges are appointed from advocates, from members of the Bar and mainly from people who have become Queen's counsel at the Bar, but they do not have the same function.
Of course it is clear that judges need to know how the courts work. They need to know what counsel for the prosecution and for the defence, for the plaintiff and for the respondent, get up to. But it does not follow that a judge must have been a barrister, and that is not the case in some countries.
All solicitors should be eligible for appointment as judges. Academic lawyers should be eligible for appointment as judges, as should other people who have had distinguished careers in entirely different areas. The Lord Chancellor should look to headhunting when he wants to appoint judges, and that may involve something which is distasteful to the Bar, although perhaps not so distasteful to the Lord Chancellor who is more radical than some of his predecessors. I have great sympathy for the Lord Chancellor and the battle that he is having with the judges in his attempt to reform the legal system. If I can catch Mr. Speaker's eye on another occasion, I shall be saying words in his favour on that matter. Such an approach may involve not only headhunting but advertising.

667
That is a wide issue which we do not have time to go into in this debate. The fusion of solicitors and barristers would help to widen the arena from which judges could be drawn. Fusion is a contentious issue. There are arguments for and against, and it is not solely concerned with the appointment of judges but with the whole system of justice. But for other reasons as well, fusion would widen the area from which judges could be drawn.
We should set up a judicial commission along the lines of the Civil Service Commission to look at the recruiting and training of judges. That judicial commission should contain not only some judges—I accept that there would have to be some judges—but distinguished lay people who have been successful in other spheres of life. That commission should look at the issue and make recommendations that would widen the character and nature of those who make up the Bench.
Justice is a precious thing and it should not only be for all the people, it should be seen to be for all the people. Therefore, I hope that the Solicitor-General will come forward with some new and constructive ideas so that we can go into the 1990s improving our system of justice.
2.7 pm
The Solicitor-General (Sir Nicholas Lyell): I congratulate the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) on initiating the debate. He masquerades most convincingly before you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as a respectable, suited, balding white man, as I do myself.
The debate provides an opportunity to explain briefly the way in which judges are appointed. It also provides an opportunity to dispel some of the myths and misunderstandings that prevail when the subject is discussed.
It will surely be common ground that it is essential to the fair and proper working of Britain's system of justice that those appointed to the judiciary should be of the highest quality, in terms of intellect, character and experience, and of the highest integrity.
It should come as no surprise that successive Lord Chancellors have testified that they regard the appointment of judges as among their most important duties. The number and range of the modern judiciary make that task more difficult than it has ever been. I will briefly outline its extent.
First, the Lord Chancellor is responsible for advising the Prime Minister on the appointment of the most senior judges of all, the Lords of Appeal, the heads of the four divisions of the High Court and the Lords Justices of Appeal. He is also responsible for making recommendations on the appointment of High Court judges, circuit judges and Queen's counsel. Those appointments are all Crown appointments and the Lord Chancellor's function is to provide advice to the Prime Minister who, in turn, advises the Queen.
The Lord Chancellor is also responsible for appointing judicial officers, such as masters of the Supreme Court and registrars of the High Court and county court, stipendiary magistrates and many tribunal chairmen. He is also responsible for appointing, or advising on the appointment of, a wide range of part-time judges and judicial officers, including recorders and assistant recorders with similar jurisdiction to the full-time office holders whom I
668
have already mentioned. Finally, he is responsible for appointing all the lay magistrates in England and Wales, except in the Duchy of Lancaster. They number over 28,000. As the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch accepts, there is a very high, and growing, proportion of magistrates from the ethnic minorities, for the reason that the pool from which they can be appointed is already much wider and more easily available.
To assist the Lord Chancellor in making the main judicial appointments, he looks for the great bulk of his advice to the senior judiciary: to the judges and leaders of the legal profession. To help him in the task of gathering and recording their views, interviewing actual and potential candidates for many of the appointments and summarising and correlating the large amount of information gained, the Lord Chancellor has appointed a small team of officials within his Department, but he personally takes all the important decisions—in particular, on every full-time appointment and all the senior part-time appointments.
Eligibility for judicial appointment is regulated in the first instance by statute. At present, a Lord Justice or above is required to be a barrister of at least 15 years' standing, a High Court judge to be a barrister of 10 years' standing and a circuit judge to be a barrister or solicitor of 10 years' standing, provided, if he or she be a solicitor, that they have served as a recorder for at least three years. There is no statutory requirement for Queen's counsel. These eligibility requirements will be changed if the proposals in the Courts and Legal Services Bill become law in due course. The main change, in terms of judicial appointments, is that solicitors with appropriate advocacy qualifications will be eligible for appointment to the High Court and above.
Progression to the most senior ranks in the judiciary depends primarily on experience and performance in previous appointments. In modern times, the Law Lords have been drawn almost exclusively from the Court of Appeal, and Lords Justices almost exclusively from the High Court. High Court judges are appointed from those members of the senior Bar who are recognised as being at the head of the profession, augmented by some promotions from the circuit bench. The circuit judges are chosen on application from the relatively small number of recorders of sufficient seniority and standing who are recognised as suitable for full-time appointments at this level. At any one time, therefore, although the overall numbers in the profession—6,000 barristers and nearly 50,000 solicitors—may seem large, the pool of real candidates for a particular appointment never looks very extensive.
The fundamental principle applied by successive Lord Chancellors is to appoint to each judicial post the candidate who appears to him to be the best qualified to fit it and to perform its duties, without regard to sex, religion, ethnic origin or any perceived political opinion. Professional ability, experience, standing, character and integrity are the criteria, coupled with the requirement that the candidate must be physically capable of carrying out the often quite tiring duties of the post.
The hon. Member asked whether the Lord Chancellor has appointed sufficient women judges, or sufficient judges from the ethnic minorities. He has argued that the judges are drawn from a narrow class and that they are insufficiently representative of the population as a whole. The Lord Chancellor would certainly not reject out of

669
hand the notion that in a diverse society those with the responsibility of appointing or recommending appointment to positions of influence and responsibility should be astute, where they can, to make appointments that command the confidence of, and thus where appropriate reflect, the composition of society as a whole. He would therefore readily accept the desirability, where suitable candidates presented themselves, of seeking to make more such appointments, but I do not understand the hon. Gentleman to be arguing—even if he were, I should not be able to agree with him—that this should be the primary criterion.
The prime consideration at every level must be that the judiciary should be appointed from among those best qualified to do the job in question—to carry out judicial tasks. For this, the first requirement, supplemented and combined, of course, with the necessary qualities of character, standing and integrity, must be tried and tested knowledge and experience of the law and practice of our judicial system.
Most of our courts, unlike those on the continent, operate by means of the adversarial system. The judges must, therefore, have the qualities of a skilled umpire between contesting parties, but he or she must have more than that: the judge must have both the detailed knowledge of the law and the necessary analytical faculties to identify and isolate, whether for himself or for a jury, the essential features of a case. He or she must have a knowledge of the rules of evidence and understanding of proper practice, the facility of courteous explanation and the power of judgment—qualities which can normally be gained only by long and dedicated experience as an advocate in the courts. These qualities are not called for as mere artificial barriers or disguised exclusions based on prejudice. They are genuine requirements. In a criminal case, to allow one inadmissible question can abort a trial.
The prime requirement for our judges, therefore, is the ability to manage trials skilfully, to preside effectively without intervening too much and to produce sensible, just and legally valid decisions. To do this requires long years of experience in successful practice as an advocate—normally at least 10 years is appropriate and, for the more senior and taxing appointments, even longer is desirable. Without such a background, the judge will simply not have the experience to do the job properly and he or she will not command the respect and confidence either of the advocates or of the litigants who appear before him or her.
This need for essential experience has a number of important implications for judicial appointments. It means primarily that the composition of the Bench at any one time is to a great extent dependent on the composition of the legal profession in the age groups from which appointments can reasonably be drawn. I cannot help observing that if the ethnic minorities have increased from 3 to 5 per cent. in the 10 years since the previous census, that increase of 2 per cent. must be composed to a considerable extent of people under the age of 10—a little early, I think, for judicial appointment!
That is the principal reason why, at the moment, more women or more members of the ethnic minorities have not already been appointed to the Bench. The Lord Chancellor has stressed time and again, and I am happy to repeat it today, that he is personally anxious to see more women and more members of ethnic minorities appointed to the Bench. But he cannot properly appoint to positions of such responsibility people who do not have the necessary
670
qualities to do the job; and it is a simple fact that, at present, there are not enough women or ethnic minority candidates in the legal profession in the appropriate age groups and with the right experience for him to be able to make many such appointments. Nothing would be worse for the reputation of the judiciary—nor would it be fair either to women advocates or to advocates from the ethnic minorities—than for the Lord Chancellor to lower the standards for appointment to the judiciary simply to ensure a different racial or sexual mix. The Bench in 10 or 20 years' time is likely to look very different in terms of racial and sexual composition from the way it looks today.
I revert therefore to the way in which the Lord Chancellor makes his decisions. His aim is to do so on the basis of the widest and fullest possible consultation with the senior judiciary and leaders of the Bar. The purpose is to obtain the verdict of the professional community on each candidate, in so far as there is one. The main method of consultation is by organised rounds of regular consultations with all Supreme Court judges and Law Lords and by annual meetings with a broad cross-section of the circuit bench, including all the resident and designated judges, and with the leaders of the circuits and the Bar as a whole. Particular efforts are now made to seek out views on solicitor candidates for appointment. That can sometimes be difficult, as they may not be seen so frequently in court, but the Lord Chancellor makes appropriate allowances for that when reaching his decisions. It is perhaps worth stressing what, again, the Lord Chancellor has said on many occasions: he is anxious to encourage more solicitors to put themselves forward for judicial appointment when they have reached the appropriate age and standing.
The breadth of the Lord Chancellor's consultations enables him to apply another important principle in the modern system. As far as possible, he avoids making final decisions about a candidate on the basis of the advice of any one person, however senior. That is a safeguard against both favouritism and personal prejudice.
As a result of those continuing consultations, the Lord Chancellor's Department holds a large and growing body of information and opinions about several thousand lawyers and judges. In so far as the material consists of facts about them, they are treated as entitled to be told what it consists of and, if necessary, to correct it. If the material consists of expressions of opinions—as much of it does—about a candidate's work and his suitability for appointment, it is treated as confidential.
In addition to the regular and extensive process of consultation, the Lord Chancellor regards certain senior judges as having a special voice as his advisers on certain appointments. In particular, the Lord Chief Justice and the other heads of division have that position in relation to appointments to the High Court, and the presiding judges of each circuit have it in relation to the appointment of recorders and circuit judges. However, in the end, the responsibility for all those appointments is the Lord Chancellor's alone, and he alone makes the decisions on whom to recommend for each of them.
The hon. Gentleman has suggested—it is by no means a new suggestion—that some sort of commission should be appointed to replace the Lord Chancellor's role in advising on judicial appointments. But how will a commission be in a better position to appoint women or members of the ethnic minorities to the judiciary? At the end of the day, a judicial appointments commission will be working with

671
the same raw material in terms of candidates for appointment that the Lord Chancellor is now and, unless the hon. Gentleman is seriously arguing that judges should not be appointed on merit but on the basis of some artificial quota, a judicial appointments commission will not be able to make any significant difference to the number of such candidates who can be appointed.
The position is, however, improving, or perhaps one should say developing, as the House would hope, as both women and ethnic minority members become more established and senior in the profession. Over the past 10 years, the proportion of women called to the Bar has risen from 24 per cent. in 1977–78 to 37 per cent. in 1987–88. Among solicitors, the proportion of women admitted has likewise risen over the same period from 26 per cent. to 45 per cent. and it may already this year have reached 50 per cent. There are no comparable statistics for the ethnic minorities, although the numbers are increasing. In the past two years, the Lord Chancellor has recommended the appointment of two black silks in each year. As their seniority progresses, we can look forward to women practitioners and practitioners from the ethnic minorities playing an increasing and valuable role in the ranks of the judiciary.

Judges

  Ambulance Dispute (Protest)
  Mr. Simon Hughes: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. At the beginning of each Session we pass an order to protect people's rights of access to the House. I seek your assurance that that will be guaranteed for those who are outside now. There is currently a protest in Parliament square by ambulance personnel. The protest is on the move, but it has not interrupted the traffic and it is not meeting any public opposition. I want an assurance that they will be allowed to continue, provided that they keep moving, that they will not be moved away and that the police will not over-react. While the House is still sitting it is important that we have a clear ruling that they are within the law and can make a peaceful protest. It must be stated that, provided that they are not stationary and do not block the traffic, they are within their rights to carry on that protest for as long as they reasonably wish to do so.
  Madam Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member is a man of honour so, of course, I accept what he says. I am not there to see the demonstration. I shall have the matter looked into. I am sure that what the hon. Member says is correct.

Planning Applications
2.30 pm
Mr. Anthony Steen: At this time of Christmas, it would be churlish of me to introduce a note of discord into the House. However, it is right to ask what is the point of passing laws in the House or in the other place if the House is unable to enforce them. I refer in particular to the planning legislation. It illustrates my point well. We pass more and more laws here and find it increasingly difficult to have them enforced.
Much of our time in the House is spent debating in detail, for many hours, points of law that we believe will be enforced in the highest courts of the land once we have passed them. I am afraid that I must tell the House that that is not the case with our planning legislation.
What could be a more sensitive issue in this small island than the ability to control land use? That has been recognised by successive Acts of Parliament and town and country planning legislation. It is true that there are armouries of controls. We have statistics and population forecasts. We have structure plans and local plans. We have Government planning inspectors, applications guidelines and procedures. We have planning committees throughout the length and breadth of the country. Planners form an enormous profession. There are planning advisers—usually local government planners who have retired. There are degrees in planning laws. There is a huge industry to control and manage planning.
I wish to speak about what happens if one cocks a snook, to coin a phrase, at the planning system. If one decides to go ahead regardless of all the planning regulations, laws and procedures, what will happen? My hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, Acton (Sir G. Young) would have been here if he had not had to chair a meeting on urban problems. His interest in planning and environment is well known. When asked what would happen if one defied the planning system in his constituency, he said that very little would happen and there was not even a planning enforcement officer in Acton. He wondered why some developer with a little speculation had not built a skyscraper in his constituency. He doubted very much that anyone would have stopped him because there is no one to enforce the law.
My hon. Friend the Member for Wealden (Sir G. Johnson Smith) would also have been here but for the pressure of business in his constituency. He echoes the same complaint—that enforcement in his constituency is not effective. I am sure that the Minister recognises that the law is not working. Members of the public do not seek planning permission but go ahead and find little opposition.
In my constituency in south Devon, in the area of South Hams, houses and extensions have been built without planning permission. Barns have been converted and factories and shops built but not in accordance with the detailed plans and regulations. Recreation and leisure facilities have been built, seemingly without anyone knowing that planning permission had not been obtained. Raw sewage has been discharged into our beautiful rivers without planning consent.
I am sure that the nation is under the mistaken illusion that when such things happen the whole planning contraption springs into action and the local authority, poised like a greyhound, chases out those who defy the

673
law. That is not the case. As my hon. Friend the Minister would expect of me, I have gone into great detail on what happens at the rock face when planning laws are defied.
South Hams council has a department specifically geared to deal with people who defy the law. That does it great credit. It has all the machinery ready to pounce. But does the House realise exactly what takes place? I have a letter from David Incoll, solicitor to the council, who says:
"It is a legal requirement that"
to stop somebody doing something which he should not do and for which he needs planning permission
"an Enforcement Notice is served upon everyone with a legal interest in the property or land."
That means not only the owner of the land, but everyone with an interest, however remote, in that land. The enforcement notice must be served on all those with any legal interest.
The first action of the South Hams district council or any other council which has enforcement officers and a legal department is to serve a requisition for information notice on people with a legal interest in the land. The problem is that the council faces great problems in having that notice for information served. It must be served by recorded delivery and its service can be avoided, as Mr. Incoll says,
"by not accepting or collecting the letter."
Therefore, the initial inquiry can be prevented by the person who is addressed refusing to accept the letter which is only a request for information about who has an interest in the land.
As the Minister will know, many councils, including South Hams, have dramatically cut back staff and expenditure to keep to the Government's guidelines on local government expenditure. South Hams planners have kept as far as possible a powerful department, but many local authorities do not have one. Even before an enforcement notice is delivered or sent, the council must send out staff to find out who has an interest in the land.
After 21 days and no reply to the request for information, council staff go out and find out who has an interest in the land. The enforcement notice must then be served on everyone with an interest in the land, not just the owner. It may take many months to serve the enforcement order and, what is worse, many months for it to be enforced. Even then the presumed owner may deny any interest, thus necessitating further inquiries.
Mr. Incoll gives as an example a current case in which he received instructions in November 1988 but has yet to ascertain the ownership, despite the use of private investigators. The Minister will appreciate that the cost in terms of staff time and money on that particular case is considerable and that there are hundreds of other such cases.
I need not trouble the House now about various legal requirements, but if the enforcement notice is not served on everyone with a legal interest the High Court can negative the enforcement notice and charge the local authority with costs for proceeding with it without serving it on all those who should have been served with it.
I have got only halfway through the procedure and the House will appreciate how complicated it is. I should pursue this because Hansard should have on record how complicated these matters are. Moreover, if the Minister is not fully briefed, he can be briefed now.
Once the legal interest has been ascertained the enforcement notice can be served and will come into effect
674
in not less than 28 days. A notice has to set out a period for compliance. However, if an appeal is made to the Department of the Environment, the effect of the notice is suspended.
Let me give an example. If someone starts to build a factory or a bungalow without planning consent, notices must be served on all the people who have an interest in the land to tell them to stop building. If one cannot find out who they are, one cannot serve an enforcement notice. If one finds them and serves notice, that may take many months, and in the meantime the builders go on building. The council can attempt to serve a stop notice on the builders, but if the builder appeals to the High Court the notice is cast aside, and the builder can go on building. That has been happening throughout the country.
As Mr. Incoll says, the risks involved in serving a stop notice is that compensation is payable if the notice is successfully challenged on appeal for any reason other than that planning permission should have been granted.
I hope that I have given sufficient details to show how complicated the procedure is. Very few people understand it—I am sure that the Minister is one of those who do—and, as a result, it does not work.
To enforce the present procedure one needs a vast battery of staff, and one has to rely on the good will and good sense of the British people not to build on our green fields without planning consent, but, if they choose to do so the Minister could and would do little to stop them. Local authorities cannot do what the public want, and the law has become an ass when it tries to enforce stop notices and the planning regulations.
The public criticise the planners every week, local newpapers carry articles chastising the planners for failing to stop schemes, and local politicians are heavily criticised and lose their credibility. Confidence in the planning regime is being destroyed.
Fortunately, Mr. Carnwath QC has come to the rescue like a knight on a white charger and has produced a report in which he said that things are as bad as I say they are, and that the Government must take action. Surprise, surprise, the Government have done nothing. That is odd because one would have thought that they would put something in the Environment Protection Bill that they have just published. Of course we need to do something about dogs mess and litter. That is important, but what about the land? Why are there no enforcement clauses in the new Bill? Unless the Minister puts one in or introduces other legislation by the end of the Session, I warn him that the planning group which consists of some 90 Back-Bench Conservative Members mostly from the south of the country has agreed to put an amendment in the Bill on Report. That will help the Government to do something about a problem that the Minister says needs to be tackled.
It is all very well to clear up litter and dog mess, but it is more important not to have our green and pleasant land covered with unauthorised developments.
The problem has been caused in this place, because we have not passed legislation that is effective and efficient. A clumsy, inefficient and protracted state of affairs exists.
The public have a right to expect something from the Government, and if the Minister will not commit himself today a question mark will be raised over the Government's green policy and programme. There is no point in dealing with trivia if the major problem is not tackled.

675
The Government have robustly stated the importance of local plans. They confirm that the boundaries laid down in them are near sacrosanct. Successive Secretaries of State have said that they must not be breached on appeal by planning inspectors. Only 10 per cent. of the nation has properly consitituted local plans. I am glad to say that South Hams district council, as one would expect, has properly constituted plans. They are current, excellent, well prepared, there has been adequate local consultation on them and they are in place. The problem is that developers are waiting like sharks for one Government inspector to breach the boundary of the development area. South Hams is in great danger. We have more areas of outstanding natural beauty, of great landscape value, protected coastline, heritage coastline, conservation areas and national park than any other area. We could not have more designation designed to protect the environment from development outside the local plan, but we have a problem with twin tracking.
Twin tracking is nothing to do with British Rail having a second line or being privatised. It is a way in which developers may bounce the system by putting in two identical planning applications at the same time. One runs through to the local authority which should have come to a decision within eight weeks. Often, however, the application is too complicated to decide on quickly, so the details have to be discussed with the developer. After eight weeks, the second application jumps straight to the planning inspector. The developers try to bounce the local planning committee and get the Government to decide something which should be a local authority planning matter.
We should also consider the time and cost to which the local authority is put when it has to deal with two planning applications, one for its own planning committee and one for the Minister. The Minister should deal with this matter seriously. He probably knows of a written answer I received on 5 December which said that planning appeals rose from 19,856 in 1986–87 to 22,482 in 1987–88 and to 28,659 in 1988–89, representing increases over the previous year of 11.3, 13.2 and 27.4 per cent. respectively. Planning appeals have increased by 40 per cent. during the past three years. Why? Because of twin tracking. Regardless of cost, big developers will try to speed things up and put pressure on the Government and local authorities to make a decision that they might not want to make.
I shall give my hon. Friend an example of what I mean. It is unfortunate that large developers such as George Wimpey should try to buck the system. Two applications for major developments in South Hams are pending. One is in Wembury, which is an area of great landscape value, outstanding natural beauty and a conservation area. That company has put in an application to build 16 detached bungalows right outside the development area. I hope that my hon. Friend will say that he will robustly encourage inspectors not to breach local plans and the development area. In a letter, the chairman of George Wimpey told me:
"Whilst I appreciate the concerns expressed in your letter it is the opinion of the management within Wimpey Homes and their planning advisers that the site in question will make a sensible rounding off of the present village envelope and that the proposed development would not detract from the high quality environment."
676
As if that was not enough, George Wimpey put in an application on 20 December to build 193 houses in the South Brent area, which is on the edge of the Dartmoor national park.
My hon. Friend the Minister should say something about the importance of local plans, how they are sacrosanct and how he would, through his planning inspectors, resist any attempt to breach them as George Wimpey would wish him to do.
I have spoken for 20 minutes about two aspects of the planning laws that are in disarray. We need to hear from the Minister today that the Government will be robust. Whenever I see my hon. Friend on the Front Bench, I am encouraged because I know that he is a man after my own heart. He will agree that preserving and keeping the environment is uppermost in our minds. I look forward to hearing what he has to say.
2.49 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Christopher Chope): As always, I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for South Hams (Mr. Steen) for his contribution to the debate about planning. He has made his contribution with his customary vigour and he was as persuasive as ever.
I must state at the outset that while last year I had more specific responsibilities for planning, my responsibilities this year have more to do with housing and local government finance. However, that does not mean that I have not had the opportunity to discuss these isues with my hon. Friend as frequently as I did—
Mr. Steen: Perhaps the wrong Minister is here today.
Mr. Chope: In one sense perhaps the wrong Minister is present. I am here because the Minister with specific responsibility for these matters, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, East (Mr. Moynihan), has a problem with his teeth. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for South Hams will excuse his absence from the Chamber today. No doubt my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, East will read the report of our debate with interest. Needless to say, I have been well briefed to respond to my hon. Friend's concerns.
My hon. Friend has drawn attention to the difficulties experienced by his local planning authority—South Hams district council—particularly in connection with enforcement. The Government recognise that there are difficulties with enforcement and that those difficulties are not unique to south Devon, the area which my hon. Friend has the good fortune to represent.
I want to refer briefly to the issue raised by my hon. Friend the Member for South Hams about the problems in the constituency represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, Acton (Sir G. Young). Planning enforcement is a responsibility for local authorities. If they choose not to employ anyone to carry out that planning enforcement, local citizens should look to the local authority because that is where the blame lies. In May 1990 the citizens of Ealing will have an opportunity to express their views through the ballot box.
I emphasise that, much criticised though they are, the present enforcement powers in part V of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971, are not so defective in practice as some critics would have us believe. Indeed, one of the unfortunate results of the repeated criticism of the present

677
powers is that those responsible in planning authorities for using them sometimes too readily assume—and say publicly—that nothing can be done. That becomes a self-defeating attitude because it encourages some of the least law-abiding developers—who are a fairly small minority in any area—to defy the planning laws.
The experience of some planning authorities is that, despite certain shortcomings, the present enforcement provisions can be made to operate to good effect, provided that the planning authority is determined in its approach to dealing with breaches of planning control and is seen —especially by those who may be tempted to carry out unlawful development—to move quickly into action when it is essential to do so.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Hams referred to a report prepared by Robert Carnwath QC. When my right hon. Friend the present Secretary of State for Trade and Industry was Secretary of State for the Environment, he commissioned the Carnwath report because of the Government's concern about certain shortcomings on the enforcement side of planning. As my hon. Friend is aware, Robert Carnwath is a highly respected barrister with a thorough knowledge of planning law. His report was published last April and it has been generally welcomed during the consultation exercise which my Department set in hand immediately following the report's publication.
The Government very warmly welcome the recommendations in that report. Some of the Carnwath recommendations deal with the precise concerns expressed by my hon. Friend. For example, there are recommendations that stop notices should be allowed to have immediate effect in special cases, by which Mr. Carnwath means cases in which serious harm to the local environment is occurring.
Mr. Carnwath also recommends that stop notices should in future be able to prohibit the unlawful stationing of a caravan on land that is being used for residential purposes. Because many planning authorities still fear the potential compensation liability if they serve a stop notice and the accompanying enforcement notice is later quashed on appeal, on "legal grounds", there is a recommendation that the extent of the compensation liability be made more precise, and be strictly limited when the developer fails to provide adequate information about his activities on land on which a breach of planning control is occurring.
Among other helpful recommendations, perhaps the most important to my hon. Friend is Mr. Carnwath's suggestion that the planning authority should be able to obtain an injunction to restrain a threatened as well as an actual breach of planning control. That is really a further extension of authorities' existing powers in section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972, but it is the application of the power to a threatened breach which is vital in the context of some of the problems to which my hon. Friend has referred.
My hon. Friend referred also to problems with serving enforcement notices. He will know that on page 75 of the Carnwath report there is a recommendation to amend the law dealing with that problem. The recommendations have been made, and the Government accept them. The remaining issue is when legislation can be brought before the House. My hon. Friend referred to the Environment Protection Bill. That is not a planning Bill. The Government hoped that it would be possible to bring forward a planning Bill this Session, but it so happened that there was insufficient parliamentary time for that to
678
happen. I hope that we shall be able to bring forward a planning Bill next Session and that my hon. Friend's concerns can be dealt with in that legislation. On amendments to the Environment Protection Bill, my hon. Friend will need to consider that matter in the light of the basis of the Bill. I would not seek to advise him about that. However, I will report his comments to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.
My hon. Friend also mentioned his concern about the difficulties caused by the submission of dual planning applications. I certainly understand that concern. Among other things, the practice is wasteful of local authorities' time and potentially confusing for members of the public who are interested in the proposed development.
Many developers submit duplicate applications for the same proposal so that if the local planning authority fails to reach a decision within the statutory period, they can appeal in respect of one application while continuing to negotiate on the other. It appears that the purpose of that "twin tracking" is to spur the local planning authority to make a decision on the second application before the first has been decided on appeal, in which case the appeal can be withdrawn.
Developers have been encouraged to submit dual applications by the fact that once a case has gone to appeal under section 37 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 because the local planning authority has not determined it within the statutory period, the authority ceases to have any jurisdiction over the application. That problem would largely disappear if all local planning authorities were to meet the Government's target of deciding 80 per cent. of their applications within eight weeks. However, we must obviously address the fact that, unfortunately, many authorities fail to perform as well as that. My hon. Friend's own district council of South Hams is still falling well short of that target.
Mr. Steen: Is my hon. Friend aware that the Government have also been failing? Only 50·8 per cent. of all cases on appeal have been fulfilled within the period set down by the town and country planning inquiries procedure rules? The Government are only 50 per cent. as good as they should be.
Mr. Chope: I would be the first to accept that there have been shortages of resources on both sides. My hon. Friend has referred to the dramatic increase in the volume of planning appeals, partly engendered as a result of the slowness of local authorities and the number of appeals that have come forward through non-determination. We have put substantial additional resources into the appeals system. For example, we have appointed many new inspectors. I hope that that will result in improved performance in the coming months. We are not complacent about that, and I am prepared to accept my hon. Friend's criticism.
In the time available it is not possible to examine in detail all the cases to which my hon. Friend referred. In any event, he will probably recognise the formula that, because my right hon. Friend sits in a quasi-judicial capacity as an appellate authority, it is not possible for him to comment on individual cases.
My hon. Friend said that he would like to say a little about local plans. The Government have encouraged local authorities to develop local plans and I am delighted that my hon. Friend's own authority has been quick to come

679
forward with a clear local plan. The effect of that should be that there is a greater awareness locally of the developments that are likely to be acceptable and the developments that are not. I am pleased to be able to tell my hon. Friend that there is quite a lot of evidence to suggest that, as a result of having a local plan, South Hams has a lower percentage appeals success rate. That means that fewer people are appealing successfully against my hon. Friend's local authority because it has a local plan. That should be an example to other authorities who complain about the volume of appeals. If they introduce a local plan, fewer appeals should be made against them in future.

Bus Routes (London)
3 pm
Mr. Tony Banks: I was intending to start by saying that it falls to me to make the last Back-Bench speech not only of 1989 but of the decade. It will not be the speech of the decade, but I had thought that it would give me a minor place in history at least. Selfless as I am, however, I have given that honour to my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing). This will be a double act on behalf of Newham, and my hon. Friend will have the last word unless my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) rushes in with a last-minute point of order. If he does, Mr. Speaker, I hope that you will show him no mercy whatever.
The decade has not been a good one for London. I am afraid that during the past 10 years homelessness and poverty in the capital city have doubled so that cardboard boxes and begging have become very much the symbols of Thatcherism in London. With the abolition of the GLC, London became the only capital city in Europe without a citywide local authority and, whatever the Minister and Conservative Members may say, that shows in the largely unco-ordinated planning that we now have in London. Many of our roads resemble ploughed fields and traffic congestion is appalling. Recently the Government announced their proposals for red routes. What we need in London is a bit of red terror to go with those red routes. The extent to which people park on double yellow lines and at bus stops is appalling. It is anarchy, in traffic terms, out on the streets of London, and parking laws are largely unenforced.
This may be the time of good will, and the spirit of Christmas may be all around us, but I have no good will whatever towards selfish parkers in London. Rather than having their cars clamped, I should be in favour of having their cars towed away to the car crusher straight away and sending them the bill afterwards. That is how strongly I feel about selfish parkers.
I want to discuss transport in London. The policies pursued by the Government during the past decade have resulted in London's having probably the most understaffed, unreliable, overcrowded, dirty and inefficient transport system in Europe, and certainly the worst that London has had. London seems to many of us to be going backwards from developed status towards less-developed status.
Earlier this week, the Secretary of State for Transport announced the phasing out of revenue subsidies for British Rail's Network SouthEast. It is ridiculous that whereas the French, German, Belgian and Dutch Governments are all giving more subsidies to their urban transport system, the British Government are taking away revenue support. They talk about capital investment in transport in London and elsewhere, but most of that capital investment comes from internally generated sources within British Rail and co-operative schemes with private enterprise.
If we had a beter transport system than the Belgians, the Dutch or the French, the Government might have a case to argue for their policy. But we do not. We obviously —manifestly—have a far worse transport system in London and elsewhere than any of those countries, and everyone knows it.

681
Only today, I noticed in the newspapers that London Regional Transport, in response to excess demand, has announced that there will be fare increases each year for the next five years at least above the rate of inflation to
"deter passengers because soaring numbers cannot safely be accommodated."
What sort of system is that? If one had a restaurant where people wanted more tables, or if one were selling things from a market stall and there was great demand, one would not try to kill off that demand, but to expand the capacity and produce more goods, and so continue to increase revenue. One would not try to kill off revenue, but that is what LRT will do by imposing increases to deter passengers. That is absurd. What sane commercial undertaking would pursue such a course? The Government are not fit to run a market stall despite the spiv-like tendency of a number of Conservative Members. I exonerate from that accusation, of course, the young and handsome Minister for Public Transport, who will reply from the Dispatch Box.
London, and especially London transport, have become a sick joke. Passengers are treated as if they were an inconvenience getting in the way of running an efficient transport system. The blame for that attitude lies wholly with the Government and their inefficient and purblind transport policies. A classic example of the chaotic nature of London transport may be seen in the system of tendering for bus routes currently being operated by LRT, at the insistence of the Government themselves. Tendering has been taking place since 1985. The system is designed to try to cut the cost of bus operations by inviting various companies to undercut each other in a bid to win contracts.
For the workers, tendering means lower wages, worse conditions and longer hours. The passengers do not benefit from lower fares because the same fares apply on the tendered routes as on the routes operated by London Buses. Passengers will notice that the service is far less efficient in many cases than on the routes operated by London Buses. Many of the companies use older vehicles to save money which leads to more breakdowns and unreliability. Low wages mean staff shortages, the cancellation of buses and longer waits for passengers at bus stops. Safety standards are also much reduced. Private bus companies simply do not demand the same level of safety as does London Buses and they do not carry out the same medical checks on staff. London Buses has a good reputation for ensuring that the most rigorous health checks are carried out on its drivers. Some people who have previously been rejected by LRT or who have been discharged by LRT as being unfit to drive end up as bus drivers on some of the tendered routes. That cannot be good for the safety of passengers in London.
Tendering is not full privatisation, but it is a form of sub-contracting. I find it especially objectionable that London ratepayers and passengers have to pay the bills. All London Regional Transport has done is to say that it will give companies a certain amount of money to operate bus routes. London ratepayers and the London travelling public have to pay the full cost.
The tenders are decided in secret and we do not know how the system operates or what is taken into account. It is said that no one is entitled to know that because of commercial confidentiality. When the Greater London council used to run the London transport system, we would not have been able to get away with that. There
682
were part 2s on our agendas so that matters of commercial consideration would be respected by members, but members would know about them and would be accountable for what they did. There is no accountability now, which is one of the most objectionable aspects of tendering for bus routes that I have discovered so far.
I shall take us on a little trip around some of the routes in London that have been put out to tender, so that we can see what has happened to them. On route 317, from Enfield to Upshire the tender was awarded to Samson Coaches. Unfortunately, because of its policy of low wages and the use of old buses, it simply could not get the staff, and after one year, LRT was forced to take back the route.
Route 250, which runs from Romford to Hornchurch, was awarded to Front Runner. The company had to bus its drivers down from the midlands to drive in London because the low wages and poor conditions that it offered did not attract drivers from London. The knowledge that such drivers had of the routes in London was not as good as that of native Londoners, but that is not a matter of any consideration for LRT and the Department of Transport. That route was taken back from Front Runner and awarded to Ensign Bus Company. Let us hope that it is slightly more successful.
Route 200 runs from Kingston to Streatham and route 196 runs from Crystal Palace to Brixton. They were awarded to a company called Cityrama on a three-year contract basis. Route 200 was taken back after two years by LRT and handed back to London Buses. Route 196 was taken back in October this year and awarded to a company called London and Country Buses.
Route 403, from Coulsdon to Epsom, and route 197 and 197A, from Caterham to Croydon, were also awarded to that company, but, because of staff shortages brought about through poor pay and long hours, the service was appalling. Many complaints were received not only by LRT but by Members of Parliament representing Croydon. In August this year, LRT asked Croydon garage to provide evening and Saturday services for those routes. On 26 October, it was asked to take over the routes completely.
On the same day, London and Country Buses was asked to take over the 196 route. That is madness. Here is a company that is manifestly incapable of running an efficient bus service for the people of south London, particularly the people of Croydon, with whom you have more than a passing acquaintance, Mr Speaker. Having failed to run that service, it was still offered another service by LRT and a service that had been taken away from another inefficient private company. Is this the way to run a bus service in London? The question is rhetorical, because no one who uses London buses would say that it was the right way. Dogma cannot drive buses, but that is what the Government, through LRT, are attempting to do.
I would give a great deal to inspect the finances behind the No. 24 route. This is a prestigious route, which stands alone in comparison with the other tendered-out routes. That route is important, and goes right by the House of Commons. Many distinguished Members of Parliament use it. That route is a fiddle—I am convinced of that. Something has happened between LRT, the company that runs it—Grey-Green—and the Department of Transport. I hope that the Minister will say that he is prepared to let me go over the books so that I can see how the tender was awarded.

683
London buses are in a mess. I know that the Minister will say that bus miles are at an all-time record. I do not know how often he uses buses, but those bus miles are being kept up in several ways. The first is by the use of the small feeder buses—hoppers. One cannot make a comparison between those buses and enormous double-decker buses. Secondly, because many double-decker buses run into congestion problems on the streets of London they are being told to run empty with "Special" in the destination window. They go past bus stops with passengers waiting for them. Many passengers say that they wish that they could live in a place called "Special service" because there seem to be so many buses on their way to it. That is nonsense and it goes back to the point that I made earlier. We now have an organisation running London's transport which thinks that passengers get in the way of the operation of an efficient transport system. That is the madness that the decade has brought us to on the buses and in London's transport generally.
London used to have one of the best bus systems in the world, but it is now reduced to an overpriced slow and unreliable patchwork quilt of a service. After a decade of authoritarian second-rate government, the Government cannot even share the boast of a previous dictator, in justification for what he was doing, that the trains have been made to run on time.
I cannot allow my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, South to intervene without wishing you and your family, Mr. Speaker, the happiest Christmas and, on behalf of my colleagues on the packed Benches on both sides of the House, I offer our thanks to all the staff of the House of Commons who have worked so hard over the year and over the decade to provide us with the sort of service that we have come to expect. We may have a rotten bus service out there, but we have high standards in here. We make sure of that. I should like to see the standards that we operate here operating on London buses as well. On behalf of all my colleagues, I thank them for all the services that they have given us.
I can now wish you, Mr. Speaker, a happy decade to come. I hope that that decade will see the restoration of a Labour Government; Labour Members translated to the Government Benches. Who knows, I and my hon. Friends may be making a speech from the Dispatch Box at the last knockings of another decade. There would certainly be a better country and a better capital city in which to live because we would restore Londonwide government to London.
I hope also that we shall be able to say that as the 1990s draw to a close we have an efficient, properly run and comfortable transport system in London, which is something that Londoners want and deserve.
3.17 pm
Mr. Nigel Spearing: I join my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) in wishing you, Mr. Speaker, and the staff of the House who have served us so well a happy Christmas and new year.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for allowing me a few minutes in which to contribute to the debate. We in east London are particularly dependent on public transport.
684
Car ownership is our area is, understandably, rather lower than elsewhere and that has the advantage of not adding to congestion.
My hon. Friend referred to the great London transport system of the 1930s which was brought about by the London Passenger Transport Act 1933—a bipartisan measure. That organisation became the envy of the world. The former boroughs of East Ham and West Ham and the former London county council willingly gave up their tramway services, locally controlled to help local people, in order to provide that very service.
Now we find the reverse tendency. My hon. Friend referred to the red buses. Alas, there are now 11 companies ready to be split up and no doubt privatised if the Government so wish. The ability to do that is contained in legislation. Some of the minibuses to which my hon. Friend referred belong to London Buses Ltd. and some are organised by private contractors, not even subject to London Regional Transport which has a statutory duty to co-ordinate transport. They are clearly designed to undercut the existing comprehensive service, in 11 parts though it be, and it is no doubt the Government's ultimate intention to have a sort of Hong Kong situation, a territory in which they are rather interested at the moment.
In Newham there have been bus route changes without effective consultation with the council, leading to many problems for elderly people, particularly going to the Canning Town shopping centre. The zones, which are very useful for persons with through tickets, have been changed. If people want to go to the Asda supermarket, they now have to cross a zone boundary within the borough. I took up the matter with London Buses. I was told that this was to protect revenue. That sort of nonsense is spreading like wildfire throughout the city.
The Routemaster buses are coming towards the end of their useful life. It is a reflection on this Government's priorities, in terms of production as against services, that London Regional Transport contemplates obtaining engines for the buses—which were made entirely in London at Park Royal—from Poland, Italy and, believe it or not, from India. That is the state to which the Government have brought the country's manufacturing capability. We know what they have done to public services. There was an earlier debate about ambulances. The Government have destroyed the concept of public service.
The Prime Minister was right when she said that the House should call the Administration to account over legislation and taxation. However, her policies are wrong. I believe that the verdict on the Thatcher decade will be that the Government's social and economic policies have been disastrous.
3.20 pm
The Minister for Public Transport (Mr. Michael Portillo): I thank the hon. Members for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) and for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing) for what has turned out to be a historic debate. I had not fully appreciated its significance. I feel sorry for anyone who switched on their television set at 3·15, hoping to see the Prime Minister, and ended up watching me. However, anyone who switched on their set because they wanted to see the Leader of the Opposition but saw instead the hon. Members for Newham, North-West, and for Newham, South will have been delighted by the

685
substitution. Their remarks provide me with an opportunity to extend good wishes for Christmas to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the Officers of the House.
The hon. Member for Newham, South is concerned about transport in east London. If he were to be entirely fair, I think that he would be willing to admit that I have given a great deal of personal attention to transport in east London. I am very concerned about it. The Jubilee line extension to docklands and to the east end of London, including the constituencies of the hon. Members for Newham, North-West and for Newham, South was approved by the Government. We look forward to that extension becoming a reality. They also know that the east-west cross rail, which will he of particular benefit to Stratford, is being urgently considered by the Government and may be the line for which a Bill is introduced next year.
A number of privately operated minibuses are now used in dock lands. They benefit the constituents of both hon. Gentlemen. They could not have been provided without the liberalisation of transport under this Government. The main theme of the debate is about bus services that have gone out to tender, but it would be wrong not to say a word or two about the opening remarks of the hon. Member for Newham, North-West concerning revenue support and investment. As a former chairman of the Greater London council, he is in a very good position to appreciate the greatly increased investment in London Regional Transport and in the railways. It is much higher today than it was when the GLC had control of London Regional Transport. Today's investment in London Regional Transport is about double what it was under the GLC.
We propose to reduce Network SouthEast's subsidy from £100 million today to zero in about 1992. The network agrees that that is an objective which can be achieved. However, the £100 million reduction in subsidy has to be compared with the £5 billion investment programme in the network over the coming year. There is no comparison between a £100 million loss of subsidy and £5 billion of investment. Investment leads to the railway of tomorrow, new rolling stock and the better stations that many people in the south-east are now beginning to enjoy.
That investment will require a partnership between the taxpayer on the one hand and the farepayer on the other, or taxpayers—many of them from outside London—would have to bear the full brunt of British Rail's future investment in the London area.
I want to concentrate on tendering. Tendering of London bus services has led to increased reliability. The hon. Member for Newham, North-West was rather anecdotal, so I shall give some figures. Tendering has led to an increase in the number of bus miles run, a decrease in the costs of the services and meant, therefore—
Mr. Spearing: Fares have gone up.
Mr. Portillo: But, as the hon. Member for Newham, North-West pointed out, the fares are the same whether on a tendered service or on a normal service. The costs that have been saved have been ploughed back into better service.
I dispute the idea that there has been a compromise on safety. The hon. Member for Newham, North-West said that standards in the private sector were lower than in the public sector. All these services are subject to the public service vehicle operation conditions which are laid down
686
by the Department of Transport. Those are the minimum conditions and all the people who run bus services are required to meet those standards, whether they are in the private or public sector. If the hon. Gentleman knows of instances of bus drivers operating below those nationally set standards or of operators disobeying the law, he would draw that to my attention, because we would certainly want to know all about it.
Accessibility for the disabled and the elderly has been greatly improved under the tendered services. During bus strikes, the tendered services in London have continued to run. That gravely undermines any case that the hon. Member for Newham, North-West might care to make about wages being in some way unsatisfactory in the private sector on tendered services. The evidence shows that industrial relations have been better in that sector and that in those tendered services the public have been able to rely on a service when the rest of the network has been shut down.
The hon. Member for Newham, North-West was trying to have it both ways. He said that the services tended to run old, unreliable buses. When he came across a service where that was palpably not true—the No. 24, with new buses and where the public enjoy a good service—the only response he could make was that in some way it was a fiddle. That suggestion was not worthy of the hon. Gentleman. As for whether these matters are investigated, all the tendering processes are subject to strict audit. I receive many complaints from private sector companies saying that they believe that the system is tilted in favour of London Buses Ltd. They may have some justification on the face of it in that 103 of the 176 routes put out to tender so far—58 per cent.—have been won by subsidiaries of London Buses Ltd.
The Government strongly believe in the fairness of the system. Our auditors tell us that it works fairly. We are satisfied that even where London Buses Ltd. wins a tender in fair competition, it tends to act more competitively and show more respect and concern for the customer than before. The figures showing much better reliability of bus services apply not only to tenders that have been won by the private sector but to those won by London Buses Ltd. Operating in that more competitive environment, even London Buses Ltd. appears to wish to raise the standard of its services in order to compete.
LRT, which is responsible for judging the tenders, wishes to be sure that the record of the operator that is applying for the tender does not disqualify it from the competition, so it obviously takes account of previous performance. LRT wants to ensure also that the wages offered are set on a realistic basis and are likely to enable the tenderer to operate a reliable service with a reasonably contented staff. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and these services have continued to run when non-tendered services have been out on strike. The tender documents specify that the buses should be seven years old or less, so it is likely that these services will run by newer, better buses than traditionally run on other services.
There have been great benefits to the travelling public. There have been shorter waiting times for buses and the public have been able to rely more on buses turning up. The fact that the buses used by the tendering companies generally conform to the standards laid down by my Department's advisory committee on disabled passengers

687
means that there is a better prospect that the steps and handrails will be designed to help the elderly or disabled passenger.
The hon. Member for Newham, North-West was right on one point—this is only a halfway stage. It will be right in due course to press on to the privatisation of London's buses and full deregulation in London so that these great services, which are restricted at present, can be enjoyed by all.
Mr. Speaker: Before adjourning the House after the last debate of this decade, I should like to thank the hon. Members for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) and for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing), the Minister and the hon.
688
Member for Bolton, West (Mr. Sackville)—who has been faithfully in his place on the Treasury Bench—and echo the comment of the hon. Member for Newham, North-West about the staff of the House. We are deeply grateful to the staff for the service that they give us throughout the year. The hon. Member for Newham, North-West also mentioned the high standards that we have—I think that he meant standards of service from the staff. I echo his points. We have a reputation for other high standards—high standards of behaviour in the House, which I am sure we shall see in the new decade.
Question put and agreed to.
It being half-past Three o'clock, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to Order [8 December] and the Resolution yesterday till Monday 8 January.

ENERGY

  Power Stations
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy whether West Burton, Rugeley, Staythorpe and Aberthow power stations are to be transferred from National Power to PowerGen.

  Mr. Wakeham
  The Government do not intend to reopen the existing non-nuclear split of assets between National Power and PowerGen.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mr. Wakeham
  My Department has made no expenditure on the arts during the last financial year. However, my Department has commissioned original design and artwork for publications, exhibitions and advertisements. The amount spent on this work cannot be separately identified.

EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

  Capital Allocations
  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he provide estimates showing for each financial year from 1978–79 to 1989–90 the capital spending allocations for(a) local education authorities and (b) voluntary aided and special schools.

  Mr. Alan Howarth
  Total capital allocations for LEAs, which may be topped up from capital receipts and other sources, from 1981–82 to 1989–90 were as follows, together with figures for actual gross expenditure financed by allocations, capital receipts, and other sources.

  £ million

  £ million

  Allocations

  Gross expenditure

  1981–82

  355

  406·1

  1982–83

  338

  456·1

  1983–84

  295

  469·2

  1984–85

  300

  501·2

  1985–86

  315

  530·2

  1986–87

  297

  574·9

  1987–88

  306

  592·8

  1988–89

  387

  702·0

  1989–90

  352

  n/a

  Details of initial allocations to individual LEAs for these years were provided in the reply given to the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) by my right hon. Friend on 7 November 1989, at columns 588–636, and gave the
  350
  information requested in respect of local education authorities from 1981–82 to 1989–90. Comparable information is not available prior to 1981–82, as local education authorities did not receive block allocations, but were notified annually in the context of a rolling programme of the limit of the value of building starts in the following year.

  Payments of grants to voluntary aided and special agreement schools for capital expenditure were as follows:

  £ million

  1978–79

  16·4

  1979–80

  20·3

  1980–81

  22·1

  1981–82

  24·0

  1982–83

  26·1

  1983–84

  22·4

  1984–85

  29·1

  1985–86

  36·5

  1986–87

  31·8

  1987–88

  37·2

  1988–89

  50·4

  1989–90

  65·3

  Notes:

  1. Grant represents 85 per cent. of gross expenditure, 15 per cent. of which is met by governing bodies.

  2. Capital grant figures for 1978–79 to 1981–82 are not separately identified from a single building grant figure which included repairs and maintenance. The capital figures shown for this period are based on an apportionment of the building grant figure using the average ratio between capital and repairs during 1982–83 and 1985–86.

  Children (HIV)
  Miss Lestor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what guidelines have been issued to local education authorities about the admission to schools of children who are HIV positive.

  Mr. Alan Howarth
  Bulk copies of the booklet "Children at School and Problems Related to AIDS" were issued to all chief education officers in England and Wales in June 1986, sufficient in number for copies to be sent to all maintained schools. The booklet advises that the fact of HIV infection should not be a factor taken into account by LEAs, governing bodies or headteachers in discharging their duties concerning school admissions, transfer and attendance, or exclusion from school. The booklet also provides guidance on safety measures to be taken by schools to avoid any risk of transmission of HIV infection. There are no known cases in the United Kingdom of transmission of HIV infection in the school setting.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  In 1988–89 the Department made direct grants totalling some £15·7 million to individual bodies primarily concerned with the arts and design education. In addition, central grants to universities and other directly funded institutions of higher education were used to cover expenditure on arts and design education. However, information on the amounts involved is not held centrally.

  Religious Education
  Mr. Trotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science to what extent local education authorities in Tyne and Wear and Northumberland have complied with the requirement to establish statutory advisory councils on religious education.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  I understand that all local education authorities in Tyne and Wear and Northumberland have established standing advisory councils on religious education.

  Research Equipment (Survey)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he will be publishing the ABRC survey of academic research equipment.

  Mr. Jackson
  I understand that the ABRC will be publishing the report of this survey very shortly.

  Teacher Shortages
  Mr. Straw
  To ask the Secreatry of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the likely level of teacher shortages in January 1990.

  Mr. MacGregor
  The Department carries out a survey of teacher vacancies in January each year. I will report the results in the usual way.

  Teacher Vacancies
  Mr. Straw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what estimate he makes of the number of teacher vacancies in schools at 31 October or the latest available date.

  Mr MacGregor
  The most recent comprehensive survey of teacher vacancies was conducted by my Department in January 1989. Numbers of vacancies for full-time permanent teachers in maintained schools in England are given in the table.

  Full-time permament teacher vacancies in maintained nursery, primary and secondary schools—England, January 1989

  Local Education Authority/Region

  Number of vacancies

  As a percentage of teachers in post

  Gateshead

  31

  1·8

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  50

  2·3

  North Tyneside

  0

  0·0

  South Tyneside

  0

  0·0

  Sunderland

  13

  0·5

  Cleveland

  12

  0·2

  Cumbria

  22

  0·6

  Durham

  15

  0·3

  Northumberland

  11

  0·4

  North

  154

  0·6

  Barnsley

  5

  0·3

  Doncaster

  22

  0·8

  Rotherham

  32

  1·4

  Sheffield

  12

  0·3

  Bradford

  28

  0·6

  Calderdale

  20

  1·2

  Kirklees

  30

  0·9

  Leeds

  61

  1·0

  Wakefield

  70

  2·6

  Humberside

  29

  0·4

  North Yorks

  46

  0·9

  352

  Local Education Authority/Region

  Number of vacancies

  As a percentage of teachers in post

  York and Humberside

  355

  0·9

  Knowsley

  10

  0·6

  Liverpool

  20

  0·4

  St. Helens

  9

  0·5

  Sefton

  3

  0·1

  Wirral

  19

  0·7

  Bolton

  11

  0·5

  Bury

  14

  1·0

  Manchester

  55

  1·4

  Oldham

  7

  0·3

  Rochdale

  33

  1·7

  Salford

  58

  2·8

  Stockport

  14

  0·6

  Tameside

  38

  2·1

  Trafford

  9

  0·6

  Wigan

  9

  0·3

  Cheshire

  24

  0·3

  Lancashire

  193

  1·8

  North West

  526

  1·0

  Derbyshire

  76

  1·0

  Leicestershire

  44

  0·6

  Lincolnshire

  52

  1·2

  Northamptonshire

  10

  0·2

  Nottinghamshire

  108

  1·3

  East Midlands

  290

  0·9

  Birmingham

  188

  2·2

  Coventry;

  24

  0·9

  Dudley

  48

  1·9

  Sandwell

  25

  0·9

  Solihull

  27

  1·6

  Walsall

  4

  0·2

  Wolverhampton

  24

  1·0

  Hereford and Worcester

  50

  1·0

  Shropshire

  13

  0·4

  Staffordshire

  50

  0·6

  Warwickshire

  31

  0·8

  West Midlands

  484

  1·1

  Cambridgeshire

  39

  0·8

  Norfolk

  31

  0·6

  Suffolk

  36

  0·8

  East Anglia

  106

  0·7

  Barking

  51

  4·0

  Barnet

  85

  3·9

  Bexley

  31

  1·9

  Brent

  32

  1·6

  Bromley

  10

  0·6

  Croydon

  39

  1·7

  Ealing

  116

  5·5

  Enfield

  72

  3·6

  Haringey

  128

  8·5

  Harrow

  16

  1·2

  Havering

  51

  2·7

  Hillingdon

  58

  3·5

  Hounslow

  24

  1·5

  Kingston

  9

  0·9

  Merton

  47

  4·1

  Newham

  194

  8·2

  Redbridge

  36

  2·3

  Richmond

  1

  0·1

  Sutton

  21

  1·9

  Waltham Forest

  75

  4·2

  ILEA

  1,028

  6·5

  South East and Greater London

  2,124

  4·3

  Bedfordshire

  117

  2·8

  Berkshire

  91

  1·7

  Buckinghamshire

  73

  1·6

  East Sussex

  74

  1·9

  353

  Local Education Authority/Region

  Number of vacancies

  As a percentage of teachers in post

  Essex

  123

  1·1

  Hampshire

  134

  1·3

  Hertfordshire

  109

  1·4

  Isle of Wight

  0

  0·0

  Kent

  224

  2·1

  Oxfordshire

  9

  0·3

  Surrey

  131

  2·2

  West Sussex

  74

  1·7

  Other South East

  1,159

  1·6

  Avon

  21

  0·3

  Cornwall

  47

  1·4

  Devon

  122

  1·9

  Dorset

  11

  0·3

  Gloucestershire

  0

  0·0

  Somerset

  73

  2·4

  Wiltshire

  68

  1·7

  South West

  342

  1·1

  Total England

  5,540

  1·5

  Greehouse Effect
  Mr. Wray
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will list all projects funded by(a) the European Community and (b) Her Majesty's Government regarding global climate changes and all the environmental factors associated with the greenhouse effect.

  Mr. Jackson
  [holding answer 13 December 1989]: The provision of information in respect of projects funded by both the European Community and Her Majesty's Government is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

  Details of work relevant to global climate change undertaken by the research councils are as follows:

  Natural Environment Research Council:
  Application of weather radar to the alleviation of climatic hazards.
  Development of deep ocean pH instrument.
  Contribution to the world ocean circulation experiment.
  Fine resolution Antarctic modelling.
  Biogeochemical ocean flux study.
  Automatic submersible development programme.
  North sea project.
  Marine laboratories programme.
  Atmospheric sciences programme.
  United Kingdom universities global atmospheric modelling programme.
  Palaeoclimatology.
  BGS data collection for climatology.
  Pattern and change in Antarctic physical environment.
  Geological evolution of west Antarctica.
  Dynamics of the Antarctica terrestrial and freshwater ecosystem.
  Structure and dynamics of the South ocean ecosystem.
  Terrestrial and freshwater science programmes and support of research in universities and higher education
  institutions.

  Agricultural and Food Research Council:
  The absorbtion or release of carbon dioxide by plants in photosynthesis and respiration and the effects of carbon dioxide on growth, production and development.
  The fate of nitrogen in plants and soil and the release of gases such as nitrous oxide to the atmosphere.
  Predictive mathematical modelling of the response of plants and plant communities to the interacting effects of carbon dioxide, light, photoperiod, temperature, desiccation, water logging, pH and nutrition.
  354
  Effects of temperature of growth and development and the tolerance to extremes.
  Plant water relations and adaption to water shortage.
  The effects of changing environmental factors on pests and diseases.
  A significant part of the AFRC programme, especially in the plants and environment research area, bears on environmental aspects.

  Science and Engineering Research Council:
  The stratospheric and mesospheric sounder (SAMS) instrument for the NASA Nimbus 7 satellite.
  The improved stratospheric and mesospheric sounder (ISAMS) and the microwave limb sounder (MLS) instruments for the NASA upper atmosphere research satellite.
  The along track radiometer (ATSR) instrument for the ESA earth resources satellite (ERS-1).
  The geophysical data facility at the Rutherford Appleton laboratory.
  A mesosphere-stratosphere-troposphere (MST) radar facility is being constructed by University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, in collaboration with the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.
  In addition, SERC supports some research on chemical reactions relevant to the atmosphere, on improved combustion processes, on renewable energy sources, on the effects of environmental changes on civil engineering structures, projects on lower atmosphere and climate research and provides supporting computer facilities.

  In addition to the specific projects listed, other work of the councils has a relevance to factors associated with the greenhouse effect.

  Student Maintenance Award
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science (1) what was the average level of net student maintenance award and parental contribution for each year since 1979, at 1990–91 prices.

  (2) if he will give figures for the levels of student maintenance award, loan and parental contribution for students with average levels of maintenance award and parental contribution, at 1990–91 prices, from 1989–90 to 2007–8.

  Mr. Jackson
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: The table shows average grant (including average supplementary allowances), contribution (including any contribution assessed against a spouse's or the student's own income), and, for the relevant years, loan, in constant 1990 prices. The figures take into account the recently announced main rates of student grant for 1990–91, and assume an inflation rate of 3 per cent. per annum from that year onwards.

  Academic year

  Average main tenance payment1 2

  Average contributions 1 2

  Average loan

  Total average resources

  1979–80

  2,133

  548

  —

  2,681

  1980–81

  2,137

  533

  —

  2,660

  1981–82

  2,007

  588

  —

  2,595

  1982–83

  1,906

  645

  —

  2,551

  1983–84

  1,857

  647

  —

  2,504

  1984–85

  1,684

  838

  —

  2,522

  1985–86

  1,505

  972

  —

  2,477

  1986–87

  1,515

  963

  —

  2,478

  1987–88

  1,488

  1,008

  —

  2,496

  1988–89

  1,463

  990

  —

  2,453

  1989–90

  1,448

  974

  —

  2,422

  1990–91

  1,462

  972

  420

  2,854

  1991–92

  1,419

  941

  494

  2,854

  1992–93

  1,381

  913

  559

  2,854

  1993–94

  1,344

  886

  623

  2,854

  1994–95

  1,309

  860

  685

  2,854

  1995–96

  1,274

  835

  745

  2,854

  1996–97

  1,240

  811

  803

  2,854

  355

  Academic year

  Average main tenance payment1 2

  Average contributions 1 2

  Average loan

  Total average resources

  1997–98

  1,207

  787

  859

  2,854

  1998–99

  1,176

  764

  914

  2,854

  1999–2000

  1,145

  741

  968

  2,854

  2000–01

  1,115

  720

  1,019

  2,854

  2001–02

  1,086

  698

  1,070

  2,854

  2002–03

  1,057

  678

  1,118

  2,854

  2003–04

  1,030

  658

  1,166

  2,854

  2004–05

  1,003

  639

  1,212

  3,854

  2005–06

  977

  620

  1,256

  2,854

  2006–07

  952

  602

  1,300

  2,854

  2007–08

  928

  584

  1,342

  2,854

  2008–093

  900

  571

  1,383

  2,854

  Notes:1 Figures for 1987–88 and previous years are outturn recorded by local authorities; for 1988–89 estimated; and for 1990–91 and later years compatible with the latest government spending plans.

  2 Assuming a cash freeze on maintenance grant rates and average contributions from 1990; and average total resources constant in real terms from 1990, at an annual inflation rate of 3 per cent.

  3 If supplementary allowances are excluded the sum of the remaining maintenance element and contribution equals the average loan by 2008–09.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Estate of Mr. Freddie Andrews
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress has been made to date by the Royal Ulster Constabulary in their investigations into the handling of the estate of Mr. Freddie Andrews (1976 No. 516); and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Cope
  The Chief Constable has informed me that the RUC fraud section has carried out a thorough investigation of this complex matter. As a result one person was prosecuted and convicted for theft and deception. Any further information which may come to light will be carefully examined.

  Food Safety
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has received concerning difficulties experienced by public health officers in enforcing existing regulations in relation to the display and sale of cooked and uncooked meats in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Needham
  The Department of Health and Social Services has from time to time received representations from organisations representing enforcement interests about difficulties in enforcing these regulations. Similar representations have been received on the Government's recently published proposals for amending the existing law on food hygiene matters generally.

  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he proposes to strengthen the legislation governing the recommendations relating to hygiene regulations applying to the display and sale of cooked and uncooked meats in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Needham
  As part of a United Kingdom exercise, the Department of Health and Social Services recently completed consultations with interested parties on proposals for new legislation to tighten food hygiene law 356
  generally. Comments are now being considered and the Government intend that new regulations should be made as soon as practicable.

  RUC
  Mr. A. Cecil Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the cost to date of the Stevens inquiry into the Royal Ulster Constabulary and security; and when the inquiry will be in a position to make its findings available.

  Mr. Cope
  Precise costs for the investigations now being conducted by the deputy chief constable of Cambridgeshire, Mr. John Stevens, and his inquiry team are not yet available. However, it is estimated that they will be in the region of £ 100,000 to £125,000 per month, for the duration of the inquiry team's secondment to Northern Ireland.

  I understand that Mr. Stevens hopes to be able to report to the Chief Constable early in the new year.

  Anglo-Irish Agreement
  Rev. Ian Paisley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the expenditure of operating the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the running of the conference and the operation of the secretariat in Maryfield, Belfast, in 1989; and what was the comparable expenditure for previous years.

  Mr. Brooke
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: Details of expenditure are available only on a financial year basis. Between 1 April 1989 and 31 October 1989 identified expenditure by the British Government in holding meetings of the Anglo-Irish Intergovernmental Conference and operating the secretariat amounted to £529,000. Comparable expenditure in previous years is as follows: Expenditure by the Irish Government on conferences and the secretariat is a matter for them.

  £ million

  1985–86

  10·53

  1986–87

  11·09

  1987–88

  10·96

  1988–89

  0·93

  1 Includes estimated expenditure on additional policing.

  Harbour
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list by category the number of(a) yachts, (b) fishing boats, (c) pleasure boats and (d) other sea-going vessels registered at Portrush, Ballycastle, Bangor, Ardglass, Donaghadee and Portstewart harbours.

  Mr. Major
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: I have been asked to reply.

  I regret that this information is not available centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

TRANSPORT

  London Assessment Studies
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what is the estimate of the number of homes likely to be lost as a result of the decisions relating to stage 2B report of the London assessment studies;
  357
  (2) what levels of public transport fares increases and fuel cost increases were assumed in assessing the options in the London assessment studies;

  (3) what would be the estimated cost of implementation of each of the preferred options for each of the London assessment studies.

  Mr. Atkins
  The consultants assumed that public transport fares would rise in line with expected growth in gross domestic product, and that fuel costs would rise midway between the Department of Transport's high and low forecast. Forecast increases for the period from 1986 until 2001 are 46·3 per cent. and 13·7 per cent., respectively.

  Information on the cost and effects of the consultants' options is set out in their stage two reports, which have been placed in the Library.

  Learner Drivers
  Mr. Sumberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) if he will list those European Community countries in which it is unlawful to give private driving tuition to learner drivers;

  (2) what studies have been undertaken by his Department of the practices employed in other European Community countries in the supervision of learner drivers.

  Mr. Atkins
  The Department is a member of the Commission Internationale Des Examens de Conduite Automobile (CIECA) which exists to exchange information and experience about driver testing and training throughout Europe. We are participating in its latest update of national requirements. The value of these requirements needs to be assessed in the context of the accident records and problems of the countries concerned. CIECA data at present available indicate that Denmark, West Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Portugal do not allow learners to obtain practical driving experience other than through paid professional tuition.

  Aircraft Safety
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he intends to implement the aircraft safety recommendations set out in the Civil Aviation Authority's report on aircraft evacuations; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Civil Aviation Authority has the statutory responsibility for regulating safety in civil aviation. Consequently it is for the CAA to consider the results of the Cranfield trials, which were commissioned, funded and published by the CAA.

  British Rail (Investment)
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will bring forward an amendment to the Railways Act 1968 to permit British Rail to invest speculatively; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Portillo
  British Rail's duties and powers, which are defined mainly by the Transport Act 1962, enable British Rail to carry out any investment required for the purpose of its business. If my hon. Friend has a particular point in mind, I should be grateful if he would write to me.

  Penalty Points
  Mr. Waller
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) if he will report the results of the monitoring by his Department of the effects of the Penalty Points (Alteration) Order 1988;

  (2) what consultation he has had with the Magistrates Association concerning the effects of the Penalty Points (Alteration) Order 1988.

  Mr. Atkins
  We have invited the Magistrates Association to participate in monitoring the effects of the penalty points alterations which came into force on 1 March this year. No problems have been drawn to our attention so far.

  Traffic Area Organisation
  Mr. Prescott
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action he has taken on the Palmer report on traffic area organisation; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr Parkinson
  A number of interested organisations were invited to comment on the recommendations contained in the Palmer report. These are being considered. I expect to reach decisions on the main recommendations early in the new year.

  Gatwick Airport
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has as to when the TNA security equipment being installed at Gatwick airport will become operational.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The machine, which will be only the third of six production machines to be installed, will be loaned by the FAA for a 12-month trial and evaluation in a United Kingdom airport. We are in close touch with the FAA and Gatwick Airport Ltd. about the arrangements for its installation and operation. Many questions have had to be resolved and other agencies have had to be consulted. Negotiations and consultations are nearing completion. Before the machine can be delivered modifications requested by Gatwick Airport Ltd. will need to be completed by the American manufacturer. It will not become operational as part of the national aviation security programme until initial tests have been satisfactorily carried out.

  Lowlands Airports Policy
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to announce his decision on the Scottish lowland airports policy review.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  My right hon. Friend expects to be in a position to announce his decision in the new year.

  British Rail
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) if he will meet the chairman of British Rail to discuss the disposal of British Rail land in Nottingham;

  (2) what rate of return he requires from British Rail on the sale of derelict land holdings;

  (3) what rules apply to the sale of British Rail land and the putting out to tender of such land.
  359
  Mr. Portillo
  The disposal of British Rail land is the responsibility of the British Rail Property Board (BRPB). The board's objectives require it to manage its operational property in accordance with best commercial practice, and to identify and divest itself of all underused or surplus land and property as rapidly as possible, at a proper commercial price.

  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will meet the chairman of British Rail to discuss the electrification of the midlands main line.

  Mr. Portillo
  My right hon. Friend meets the chairman of British Rail regularly. We welcome worthwhile proposals for electrification schemes. I understand that British Rail has no plans to electrify the midland main lines at present.

  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what correspondence he has had with British Rail regarding the sale of land in Nottingham;

  (2) what fiduciary duties apply to the sale of British Rail land.

  Mr. Portillo
  My right hon. Friend has had no such correspondence. The objectives for the British Rail Property Board require it to secure a proper commercial price when disposing of underused or surplus land.

  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he will place in the Library a copy of the exchange of letters between British Rail and Eurorail referred to in his reply to the right hon. Member for Tonbridge and Mailing of 27 November,Official Report, column 81.

  Mr. Portillo
  No. The letters deal with commercially confidential matters.

  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport on what points he will require to be satisfied before giving his approval to the detailed shareholders' agreement for the joint venture between British Rail and Eurorail.

  Mr. Portillo
  I shall wish to be satisfied that the proposed joint venture offers value for money for British Rail, for the public and for the taxpayer. The details will depend on the ground to be covered by the agreement.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much direct funding has been provided by Her Majesty's Government to British Rail for(a) capital investment and (b) revenue subsidy in each year from 1980–81 to 1989–90 and projected for 1990–91, all expressed at constant prices.

  Mr. Portillo
  Her Majesty's Government do not usually provide direct funding for British Rail's capital investment programme, but the public service obligation grants meets the difference between costs and revenues for grant supported services. Eligible costs include depreciation, a supplement to fund capital renewals, and interest. Grant therefore provides support for capital investment, but grant is not allocated to particular categories of expenditure. The figures for "rail" investment and for revenue subsidy (PSO and level crossings grants paid in each financial year) are as follows, in £ million and at constant 1989–90 prices:
  360

  Year

  Rail investment

  Revenue subsidy

  1979

  526

  1,040

  1980

  537

  1,035

  1981

  439

  1,262

  1982

  357

  1,222

  1983

  352

  1,202

  1984

  1374

  1,110

  1985–86

  498

  1,060

  1986–87

  482

  912

  1987–88

  604

  915

  1988–89

  609

  2590

  1989–90

  2691

  3517

  41990–91

  962

  462

  1 1984–85 was a 15 month financial period. The figure shown for 1984 is the 12 month equivalent.

  2 Current forecast.

  3 PSO cash ceiling plus estimate for level crossings grant.

  4 Estimates.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mr. Atkins
  In the last financial year the Department made no expenditure on the arts. The Department is involved in many aspects of design across a wide range of activities, with work undertaken both in-house and commissioned from outside bodies. It is not possible to establish the level of expenditure on design, except at disproportionate cost.

  C. Maine Company
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement concerning his Department's inspection of the C. Maine Company, Milford Haven, under the terms of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988; in the light of the European Court judgment in the Jaderow case delivered on 13 December.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  This judgment has no bearing on the registration of fishing vessels under the Merchant Shipping Act 1988.

  Pacer 142 Trains
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will call for a report from the chairman of British Rail on the safety of doors on Pacer 142 trains; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Portillo
  British Rail is required under the statutory accident reporting procedure to notify the Department of a failure on any part of a train which causes, or is likely to cause, an accident. The railway inspectorate is discussing the problems with power doors with the British Railways Board.

  Oil Discharges
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what were the flag states of eight non-United Kingdom ships alleged to have been responsible for illegal oil discharges in United Kingdom waters since 1984; and when were these cases passed on the competent authorities in the relevant flag states for investigation.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information is as follows:
  361

  Flag stale

  Date case passed to competent authority

  Liberia

  13 August 1986

  Liberia

  7 April 1988

  Liberia

  27 July 1988

  Bahamas

  10 December 1988

  Turkey

  27 June 1989

  Cyprus

  3 November 1989

  Brazil

  9 November 1989

  Antigua

  11 December 1989

  Stratford Station
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if there have been any changes in the plans to refurbish Stratford station, London E.15.

  Mr. Portillo
  The planning of station improvements is entirely a matter for the British Railways Board.

  Traffic, (London)
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has regarding the total cost per annum arising from traffic congestion in London; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Atkins
  The Department does not make estimates of the annual cost of traffic congestion in London. Congestion causes major problems and the Government have just announced further proposals for dealing with them.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps he takes to consider the implications for London traffic flows arising from various building developments in the capital.

  Mr. Atkins
  The traffic implications of most new development in London is for the boroughs to consider as part of their development control and planning responsibilities under the Town and Country Planning Acts. The Government consider the traffic implications of new development affecting trunk roads on a case-by-case basis. It has established special liaison arrangements with the boroughs and the London Docklands development corporation over developments in docklands.

  Newbury Bypass
  Sir Michael McNair-Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to announce his decision about the proposed route for the Newbury bypass; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Atkins
  My right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for the Environment and for Transport are carefully considering all the objections and representations made together with the report and recommendations of the independent inspector who held the public inquiry. They hope to be able to announce their joint decisions very early in the new year.

  Road Excavations
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list all those authorities and organisations, both public and private, having a statutory right to dig up roads in London in(a) 1980 and (b) the current year.
  362
  Mr. Atkins
  Information is not available in the form requested. All highway authorities have statutory rights to carry out roadworks. The main public utilities have statutory rights of long standing to place and maintain their apparatus in the public highway. In addition various organisations have powers under public and private legislation or specific authority under licence to carry out excavation in the highway.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what efforts are made to co-ordinate road repairs and road excavation in London; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Atkins
  Individual highway authorities co-ordinate those roadworks in London for which they are responsible. The Department attaches particular importance to the careful programming and traffic management arrangements of works on its own roads. The Department also encourages highway authorities to promote cooperation between organisations having statutory rights to excavate roads and to co-ordinate these works with their own. The Goverment have proposed, as part of the legislation they intend to bring forward to implement the recommendations of the Horne report, that in future highway authorities will be given a positive duty to co-ordinate all excavations in the highway with a view to minimising the disruption to road users.

  Greater Manchester Northern Relief Road
  Mr. Lewis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport who were the consulting engineers for the centre section of the Greater Manchester northern relief road M6 to M66.

  Mr. Atkins
  Allot and Lomax with G. Maunsell and Partners (in consortium) are looking at options for the M56-M62 section of the Greater Manchester western and northern relief road.

  Planning, (London)
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what organisation he has established in his Department to deal with the strategic planning of London's transport; what is its name; what is its staffing; and at what ranks and grades.

  Mr. Atkins
  Work on the strategic planning of London's transport is undertaken by a number of directorates within the Department, in particular highways, railways, public transport. The heads of these directorates, and colleagues from the Department of the Environment's London regional office, meet regularly to discuss London's transport problems and to co-ordinate action. In this they are supported by a secretariat from the transport policy unit. The unit is headed by a grade 5 and is at present made up of four grade 7s, a senior economic assistant and a personal secretary.

  Driver Testing and Training Division
  Mr. Ward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if the annual report and accounts for driver testing and training division are available.

  Mr. Atkins
  The driver testing and training division's annual report and accounts for 1988–89 have now been issued. I am placing copies in the Library.

  Accounting Procedures
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether in the last 10 years he or his predecessors, either by direction or informally, secured changes in the accounting conventions followed by the British Transport Docks Board, Associated British Ports, the British Airports Authority or British Airways, respectively; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: British Transport Docks Board accounts were prepared under the historic cost convention during the period up to privatisation, adding current cost accounts as supplementary from 1980. British Airways accounts were produced under the historic cost convention with current cost accounts as supplementary for the whole period up to privatisation. British Airports Authority accounts were changed from modified historic cost convention to current cost convention in 1980–81 and produced on that basis up to privatisation. The change of convention was decided by the authority and agreed by the Government.

PRIME MINISTER

  Homelessness
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Prime Minister what plans she has to visit a shelter for the homeless in London or other major city in the United Kingdom during the Christmas period.

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

  Meetings (Mr. David Hart)
  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Prime Minister (1) when Mr. David Hart last met Mr. Charles Powell; in what capacity; and for what purpose;

  (2) when Mr. David Hart last met Sir Percy Cradock; and for what purpose;

  (3) when Mr. David Hart last visited Downing street; in what capacity; and for what purpose;

  (4) when Mr. David Hart last visited the Cabinet Office; in what capacity; and for what purpose;

  (5) when she or her officials last met Mr. David Hart; and if she will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Barnes) at column 1169. Mr. Hart is not employed by me or by 10 Downing street in any capacity.

  My normal practice is and will continue to be neither to confirm nor deny that meetings with private individuals have taken place even in those cases where no such meeting has occurred.

  Inland Revenue
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will visit the proposed relocation site for the Inland Revenue in Nottingham.

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

  Relocation
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Prime Minister what co-ordination exists between the Treasury and the Department of Transport on the use of British Rail land for the relocation of Government Departments.
  364
  The Prime Minister
  The use of British Rail land is a matter for the British Railways Board, which is free to deal with Government Departments.

  Official Historian
  Mr. Harry Barnes
  To ask the Prime Minister if she has any plans to establish an official historian's office for the Prime Minister.

  The Prime Minister
  No.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Prime Minister what expenditure was made by her office on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  The Prime Minister
  The total expenditure incurred by my office on the arts and design in 1988–89 was £9,794.

  Methodist Church
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Prime Minister what representations she has received in the last two years asking her to meet leaders of the Methodist Church; when she last met them; and when she next proposes to meet them.

  The Prime Minister
  I receive a considerable number of requests for official meetings each year. I have at present no plans to meet leaders of the Methodist Church.

LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL

  Select Committees
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will bring forward a substantive motion to give effect to the recommendations of the Liaison Committee report of Session 1984–85, HC 363, in respect of the automatic nomination of Select Committees after a general election.

  Sir Geoffrey Howe
  The Government's view of the recommendations of the 1984–85 Liaison Committee was given on 23 November 1987 by my right hon. Friend the Member for Colchester, South and Maldon (Mr. Wakeham) who stated that he did not consider that the existence of a Standing Order providing for nominations for these Committees to be put forward within a prescribed period would necessarily have expedited their establishment in this Parliament.

  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Lord President of the Council what was the expenditure on full-time specialist staff appointed to service departmental Select Committees in each year since 1979.

  Sir Geoffrey Howe
  The grade of temporary assistant (later to become specialist assistant) to Select Committees was introduced to the Clerk's Department in October 1980. The table sets out the numbers of specialist assistants in post at 1 April 1981 to 1 April 1989 and their total annual gross salaries payable at that date. All specialist assistants work for departmental Committees.

  1 April

  Numbers in post

  Total annual gross salary (£)

  1981

  5

  49,730

  1982

  6

  66,168

  1983

  6

  72,646

  365

  1 April

  Numbers in post

  Total annual gross salary(£)

  1984

  5

  64,892

  1985

  4

  53,756

  1986

  5

  69,909

  1987

  5

  75,862

  1988

  4

  61,128

  1989

  7

  117,691

  Voting Records (Press Fee)
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Lord President of the Council under what arrangements newspapers and broadcasting stations are being asked to pay a fee to publish details of the Division voting records of hon. Members; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Geoffrey Howe
  I have no knowledge of any such arrangements.

CIVIL SERVICE

  Staff (Pay Scheme)
  Mr. Baldry
  To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he will make a statement about the discretionary pay scheme for grades 2 and 3 staff in the home Civil Service.

  Mr. Luce
  In the third round of awards made under the arrangements announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 23 April 1987, awards have been made to 18 grade 2s and 77 grade 3s. The total number of staff currently granted awards following the first three rounds of the scheme is 36 grade 2s and 149 grade 3s, respectively 26 per cent. and 30 per cent. of each grade. This is within the ceiling of 35 per cent. of each grade recommended by the Top Salaries Review Body earlier this year.

  The full year cost of these awards is £463,400 or about 1·8 per cent. of the annual pay bill for the grades concerned.

  Next Steps
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he will set out in the Official Report a table of bodies announced as candidates for Next Steps executive agency status, showing the date of announcement of candidature, date of establishment as agency (where appropriate) and the number of staff and expenditure-turnover for each candidate-agency at latest convenient date.

  Mr. Luce
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: The information requested is as follows:

  Agency

  Date announced as candidate

  Established

  Vehicle Inspectorate

  18 February 1988

  1 August 1988

  Companies House

  18 February 1988

  3 October 1988

  HMSO

  18 February 1988

  14 December 1988

  National Weights and

  7 June 1988

  18 April 1989

  Measures Laboratory

  Warren Spring

  7 June 1988

  20 April 1989

  Laboratory

  Resettlement Agency

  18 February 1988

  24 May 1989

  Civil Service College

  9 May 1988

  6 June 1989

  QE11 Conference Centre

  18 February 1988

  6 July 1989

  Historic Royal Palaces

  18 February 1988

  1 October 1989

  Laboratory of the

  7 June 1988

  30 October 1989

  Government Chemist

  Total 10 Agencies

  366

  Announced Candidates for Executive Agency Status

  Dates

  Building Research Establishment

  24 October 1988

  Cadw

  23 October 1989

  Central Office of Information

  9 February 1989

  Central Statistical Office

  5 April 1989

  Central Veterinary Office

  20 April 1989

  Civil Service Commission

  13 April 1989

  Civil Service Occupational Health Service

  9 May 1988

  Defence Accounts Organisation

  18 October 1989

  Defence Research Agency

  18 February 1988

  Department of Registers of Scotland

  29 April 1988

  Driver and Vehicle Licensing Directorate

  18 February 1988

  Driving Standards Agency

  25 July 1988

  Employment Service

  18 February 1988

  Forensic Science Service

  23 May 1989

  Fuel Suppliers Branch

  28 July 1988

  Historic Buildings and Monuments

  29 April 1988

  Hydrographic Office

  18 October 1989

  Insolvency Service

  13 July 1988

  Intervention Board for Agricultural Produce

  11 January 1989

  Land Registry

  26 October 1988

  Meteorological Office

  18 February 1988

  Military Survey

  18 October 1989

  National Engineering Laboratory

  24 July 1989

  National Physical Laboratory

  7 June 1988

  Ordnance Survey

  14 December 1989

  Overseas Development Natural Resources Institute

  19 December 1989

  Passport Office

  18 February 1988

  Patent Office

  13 July 1988

  Planning Inspectorate

  21 December 1988

  Property Holdings

  27 September 1989

  Radiocommunications Division

  13 July 1988

  RAF Training

  18 October 1989

  Royal Mint

  23 November 1989

  Royal Parks

  18 February 1988

  Service Childrens Schools

  18 October 1989

  Social Security IT Services

  17 May 1989

  Social Security Benefits

  17 May 1989

  Training Agency

  5 December 1988

  Vehicles Certification Agency

  25 July 1988

  Veterinary Medicines Directorate

  20 April 1989

  Total 43 Agencies (This includes three in Northern Ireland that are not listed here)

  The numbers of staff and expenditure/turnover for each agency and candidate are contained in annex A of the White Paper "The Finance and Accountability of Next Steps Agencies" (Cm. 914, published on 14 December 1989), except in the case of the Overseas Development Natural Resources Institute (ODNRI) which employs 453 staff and has an annual expenditure of £16·4 million.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Mortgage Tax Relief
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the number of tax units receiving mortgage interest with investment income; and if he will provided a forecast for 1989–90.

  Mr. Lilley
  The information requested is in the tables. These estimates are subject to revision.
  367

  Tax units receiving mortgage interest relief by range of total income 1988–89

  (Thousands)

  Range of total income

  With no investment income

  With investment income

  Total

  Up to £5,000

  240

  280

  520

  £5,000-£ 10,000

  590

  1,380

  1,970

  £10,000-£15,000

  590

  1,970

  2,560

  £15,000-£20,000

  310

  1,510

  1,820

  £20,000-£30,000

  160

  1,350

  1,510

  £30,000 +

  50

  670

  720

  Total

  1,940

  7,160

  9,100

  Tax units receiving mortgage interest relief by range of total income 1989–90

  (Thousands)

  Range of total income

  With no investment income

  With investment income

  Total

  Up to £5,000

  210

  240

  450

  £5,000-£10,000

  490

  1,160

  1,650

  £10,000-£15,000

  530

  1,790

  2,320

  £15,OOO-£2O,O0O

  340

  1,690

  2,030

  £20,000-£30,000

  190

  1,680

  1,870

  £30,000 +

  50

  930

  980

  Total

  1,810

  7,490

  9,300

  Estimates of the numbers of tax units receiving mortgage interest relief are based on information from the 1987–88 survey of personal incomes. In the projections to 1988–89 and 1989–90, it is assumed that the proportions of mortgagors in each income range with investment income are the same as those for 1988–89 provided in previous reply to the hon. Member on 29 July 1988 at columns 732–34.

  Exchange Rate Mechanism
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what information he has on the next revaluation of the exchange rate mechanism; and whether he will be making representations to that revaluation meeting.

  Mr. Ryder
  Any future realignment of the currencies in the exchange rate mechanism will take place in accordance with the resolution of the European Council of 5 December 1978 on the establishment of the European monetary system and related matters.

  Tax Evasion
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list each type of tax currently levied on companies and the number of prosecutions for tax evasion in each category for the latest year in which figures are available.

  Mr. Lilley
  The four main taxes on companies and the number of completed prosecutions for evasion involving these taxes in the year to 31 March 1989 are:

  Tax

  Prosecutions

  Corporation Tax

  6

  Petroleum Revenue Tax

  0

  VAT

  33

  Rates

  1

  368

  1 Being a tax on property rates cannot be "evaded" in the sense that the term is normally understood. It follows there can be no prosecution in respect of rates although there are many civil actions for non-payment.

  Retail Prices Index
  Mr. Hunter
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the change in retail prices over the period June 1979 to October 1989, or the most recent month for which figures are available, measured against the retail prices index, of gas, electricity, bread, beer, four star/premium (97–99 RON) petrol net of duty and taxes and of four star/premium (97–99 RON) petrol including duty and taxes.

  Mr. Ryder
  The following table shows the percentage increase in the retail prices index (RPI) between June 1979 and November 1989, together with the equivalent increases for gas, electricity, bread, beer and petrol and oil (inclusive of duty and taxes).

  Percentage increase in the RPI between June 1979 and November 1989

  All items

  112·9

  Gas

  144·2

  Electricity

  122·3

  Bread

  86·7

  Beer

  176·7

  Petrol and oil

  88·8

  The RPI does not measure net prices; nor is a comparison for four-star petrol available separately from the RPI. However, using other sources, it is estimated that the price of four-star petrol increased by some 25 per cent. over approximately the same period net of duty and taxes, and by some 95 per cent. including duty and taxes.

  Value Added Tax
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what revenues he receives from the value added tax levied upon the sale of insulation, double glazing and heating control equipment; and whether he will make an estimate regarding the proportion of that tax which is reclaimed by value added tax registered traders.

  Mr. Ryder
  Details of the VAT charged on the supply of insulation, double glazing and heating control equipment are not available separately from other VAT revenue. Neither is it possible to determine the amount of such tax which is recovered by registered traders as part of their normal input tax deductions. When these products are incorporated in new domestic dwellings there is no burden of tax because the supply of new housing is zero rated to the consumer.

  Mr. Galbraith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the conditions under which value added tax may be recovered from privatised contracts for ancillary services within the National Health Service; and when these conditions were first made known.

  Mr. Ryder
  The conditions under which VAT may be recovered in respect of these contracted out services are set out in the Treasury directions made under the provisions of section 11 of the Finance Act 1984. The first such
  369
  direction was made in 1984 and the latest direction was published in the Edinburgh Gazette in the issue dated 7 April 1989. A copy is in the House Library.

  Tobacco
  Mr. Ted Garrett
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would have been the effect on the retail prices index had tobacco excise duty, inclusive of value added tax, been index linked for 1989–90.

  Mr. Ryder
  It is estimated that the impact effect on the retail prices index of an indexation of tobacco excise duty in 1989–90 would have been to increase the index by 0·15 per cent.

  Cash Limits
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make it Government policy to increase the appropriate cash limits in the Autumn Statement in line with inflation.

  Mr. Lamont
  No. Public expenditure is planned and managed in cash.

  Exchange Rates
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the exchange rate of the pound on the date of the publication of the Chancellor's Autumn Statement in terms of(a) the dollar, (b) the deutschmark, (c) the Japanese yen and (d) the sterling index; what are the latest available exchange rates for these categories; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Ryder
  At the close of business on 15 November and 19 December, the exchange rates against sterling for the specified currencies were as follows:

  $/£

  DM/£

  Yen/£

  £ERI

  15 November

  1·5825

  2·9113

  227·2

  88·7

  19 December

  1·6030

  2·7764

  230·4

  86·6

  Green Pound
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received from the National Farmers Union concerning a realignment of the green pound and other proposals; and what response he has made.

  Mr. Norman Lamont
  My right hon. Friend receives a large number of representations on a wide variety of subjects.

  Inland Revenue
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he is taking to ensure the successful relocation of the Inland Revenue in Nottingham.

  Mr. Lilley
  The Inland Revenue remains committed to its plans to relocate some 2,000 headquarters posts to Nottingham. However, it has always made it clear that its decision is conditional on obtaining a suitable site reasonably quickly on satisactory terms. I very much hope that, with the continuing support of the city and county councils, the department will be able to obtain a site in the near future.
  370
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he last discussed the relocation of the Inland Revenue.

  Mr. Lilley
  I keep fully up to date with developments, on the Inland Revenue's proposals to relocate some 2,000 headquarters posts to Nottingham.

  HMSO
  Mr. Wood
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what financial target he has set Her Majesty's Stationery Office for 1990.

  Mr. Ryder
  I have today laid a further Treasury minute setting HMSO the financial target for 1990 of achieving a profit after interest in current cost accounting terms of ·2.9 million. This compares with the target for 1989 of a profit after interest in current cost accounting terms of £1·7 million.

  Public Servants
  Mr. Wood
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will make a statement about the Government's policy of abating the pensions of retired public servants who are re-employed in the public service.

  Mr. Ryder
  The Government have been reviewing the current abatement policy and has decided upon a change. In future, the pay or pension of retired public servants will no longer generally be subject to abatement if they are re-employed in a different public service after retirement. However, those who retire early may continue to be subject to abatement until they reach the normal retirement age in the public service from which they first retired. The administrative arrangements to give effect to the change will be made as soon as possible.

  Abatement will continue to apply for those who are re-employed in the same public service from which they draw pension. The review of this arrangement is not yet complete. I will make a further statement in due course.

  Departmental Staff
  Mr. Wood
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the number of staff in post in central Government Departments at 1 October.

  Mr. Norman Lamont
  On 1 October 1989 there were 565,075 staff in post in central Government Departments. Of these 497,294 were non-industrials and 67,781 were industrials. The figures for 1 April 1990 will be published next, when available.

  Non-domestic Construction (VAT)
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much revenue has been raised to date due to the ending of zero-rating on non-domestic construction.

  Mr. Ryder
  Details of the revenue raised in the year to date as a result of the ending of zero rating on non-domestic construction are not available.

  Charities
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has any plans to legislate for the removal of taxation on charitable fund raising by appeals like that
  371
  for Children In Need or to make compensatory ex-gratia payments to such appeals of equivalent amounts to any taxation deducted.

  Mr. Major
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: Donations to charitable appeals are not liable to income tax, corporation tax or VAT, provided the donors receive no benefit in return. One-off fund-raising events held by charities are exempt from VAT, and non-charitable bodies can also obtain VAT exemption when organising one-off events as agents of an appeal fund which has charitable status. Income tax or corporation tax may be payable where the fund-raising activities amount to trading but, by concession, the Inland Revenue does not charge tax on the profits where certain conditions are satisfied. Full details of the concession (C4) are contained in the Inland Revenue leaflet IR1 1988.

  Building Societies
  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what action the Building Societies Commission has taken with regard to full distribution by the Guardian building society to its members;

  (2) what advice the Building Societies Commission gave to the Guardian building society and the Cheltenham and Gloucester building society in respect of prudential matters relating to the proposed merger of the two societies;

  (3) why the Building Societies Commission's advice to the Guardian building society in regard to the proposed merger with the Cheltenham and Gloucester building society had excluded the need for the Guardian building society to obtain an up-to-date valuation of its gross assets, including freehold property.

  Mr. Ryder
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: I refer the hon. Member to the reply to two previous questions on this matter on 11 December 1989 at column 448.

  Distribution of £73 million available to the Hospital and Community Health Services to implement the proposals in the While Paper Working for Patients in 1989–90

  £ million

  Personnel function

  Finance function

  Asset registers

  Medical audit

  Resource management initiative (RMI)1

  RMI(capital)

  Hospital information systems strategy (HISS) revenue

  Training2

  NHS While Paper development projects

  100 consultants

  Total allocated

  Staff

  Training initiatives

  Basic

  Methodology development

  Local projects

  Northern

  0·366

  0·634

  0·015

  0·865

  0·051

  —

  0·053

  1·472

  0·080

  0·255

  0·072

  0·025

  0·397

  4·255

  Yorkshire

  0·411

  0·711

  0·042

  0·920

  0·053

  —

  0·016

  1·794

  0·113

  0·000

  0·054

  0·025

  0·307

  4·446

  Trent

  0·512

  0·887

  0·028

  0·946

  0·064

  —

  0·043

  1·260

  0·410

  0·225

  0·054

  0·050

  0·124

  4·603

  East Anglian

  0·220

  0·381

  0·032

  0·460

  0·031

  —

  0·020

  0·300

  0·000

  0·000

  0·054

  0·994

  0·112

  2·604

  North West Thames

  0·427

  0·739

  0·021

  0·865

  0·051

  —

  0·107

  0·027

  0·000

  0·000

  0·072

  0·050

  0·119

  2·478

  North East Thames

  0·526

  0·910

  0·030

  1·062

  0·063

  —

  0·030

  0·000

  0·000

  0·000

  0·036

  0·000

  0·171

  2·828

  South East Thames

  0·463

  0·801

  0·030

  0·959

  0·060

  —

  0·084

  1·455

  0·392

  0·225

  0·054

  0·085

  0·200

  4·808

  South West Thames

  0·374

  0·648

  0·018

  0·800

  0·044

  —

  0·070

  0·000

  0·000

  0·000

  0·036

  0·025

  0·162

  2·177

  Wessex

  0·307

  0·532

  0·006

  0·643

  0·042

  —

  0·032

  0·332

  0·050

  0·000

  0·036

  0·062

  0·333

  2·375

  Oxford

  0·247

  0·427

  0·112

  0·518

  0·048

  0·090

  0·040

  0·960

  0·060

  0·000

  0·036

  0·000

  0·100

  2·638

  South Western

  0·364

  0·631

  0·033

  0·738

  0·044

  —

  0·054

  0·005

  0·000

  0·000

  0·054

  0·302

  0·265

  2·490

  West Midlands

  0·587

  1·016

  0·029

  1·288

  0·077

  —

  0·017

  0·686

  0·050

  0·000

  0·072

  0·040

  0·162

  4·024

  Mersey

  0·294

  0·509

  0·041

  0·601

  0·036

  —

  0·059

  1·115

  0·060

  0·000

  0·036

  0·025

  0·138

  2·914

  North Western

  0·502

  0·869

  0·045

  1·108

  0·067

  —

  0·026

  1·044

  0·070

  0·000

  0·054

  0·000

  0·348

  4·133

  RHAs Total

  5·600

  9·695

  0·482

  11·773

  0·731

  0·090

  0·651

  10·450

  1·285

  0·675

  0·720

  1·683

  2·938

  46·773

  Others2

  0·100

  0·174

  0·100

  0·227

  0·019

  0·120

  0·065

  0·453

  0·000

  0·650

  0·500

  0·000

  0·100

  2·508

  Grant Total

  5·700

  9·869

  0·582

  12·000

  0·750

  0·210

  0·716

  10·903

  1·285

  1·325

  1·220

  1·683

  3·038

  249·281

  1 Includes RMI training.

  2 Excludes RMI training.

  3 Includes London post-graduate SHAs and NHSTA.

  4 A further £23·757 remains to be allocated.

  372
  The discussions between the building societies concerned and the Building Societies Commission are confidential. Interested parties will have an opportunity to put their representations to the hearing now scheduled by the Commission for 15 February 1990, if the special investors' and borrowers' resolutions are passed.

  Cigarettes
  Mr. Pendry
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer by how much the burden of excise duty and value-added tax on cigarettes has outstripped the all items retail prices index since 1979.

  Mr. Ryder
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: The combined excise duty and value added tax levied on a typical packet of 20 king-size cigarettes increased by 32 per cent. more than the retail prices index in the 10 years between October 1979 and October 1989.

HEALTH

  "Working for Patients"
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Heath (1) what is the distribution by National Health Service region, by spending head, and by spending head within each National Health Service region of the sums so far announced for the implementation of the proposals in "Working for Patients" for the financial year 1989–90;

  (2) if he will publish a table showing the distribution between functions and National Health Service regions of the extra resources to implement "Working for Patients" including sums available for medical audit and information technology training.

  Mr. Freeman
  The £73 million available to the hospital and community health services in 1989–90 has been distributed as shown in the table.

  Sight Tests
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in the Durham area have had eye tests since April 1989; and what was the figure for the same period in 1988.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Statistics relating to private sight tests have not been gathered since April 1989. It is not therefore possible to supply directly comparable figures for the periods in question.

  Miss Widdecombe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to monitor the volume of private sight tests.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State is instituting a survey covering Great Britain which will begin next month. The results should be available in the early spring.

  Miscarriages
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information he has concerning the number of miscarriages caused by pregnant women coming into contact with chlorydiosis infected sheep.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  We have assumed that the question was intended to refer to sheep infected with chlamydia psittaci. The information available for the years since 1984 is shown in the table:

  Chlamydia B/Chlamydia Psittaci 1984–88

  Laboratory reports to PHLS CDSC of miscarriage/abortions in cases of known contact with aborting sheep or who had ovine infections.

  Year

  Total lab reports

  2Miscarriage/Abortions

  1984

  410

  1

  1986

  326

  2

  11989

  568

  2

  Total

  2,516

  25

  1Provisional.

  2 Evidence for ovine origin is difficult to determine.

  HIV-positive Children
  Miss Lestor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidelines have been issued to establishments under his control about the admission of children who are HIV positive.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The Department manages two youth treatment centres which look after adolescent boys and girls. Testing for HIV antibodies is not carried out routinely.

  The centres have been advised that a young person infected with HIV antibodies could be managed satisfactorily and in the normal way until or unless the need for specialised medical treatment or nursing care became necessary. They have been further advised that the best protection for people working and living there is to adhere scrupulously to sensible and basic standards of hygiene, to ensure the close supervision of the young residents and to provide them with planned sex education curricula within their broader health education. In addition, the centres have been asked to provide staff training directed towards the understanding of infections such as AIDS and hepatitis B and their prevention.

  Adoptions
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children from overseas countries have been adopted by British citizens during each of the last five years; and, of this number, how many were from countries which do not operate similar adoption procedures to the United Kingdom.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  This information is not available.

  Airports (Public Health)
  Mr. Wilshire
  To ask the Secretary of State for Heath what steps are being taken to strengthen public health regulations at Britain's international airports to reduce the risk of diseases being brought into the United Kingdom on aircraft; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  The Public Health (Aircraft) Regulations 1979 relate to incoming and outgoing aircraft and authorise measures to be taken to prevent danger to public health and the spread of infection. They are being considered within the review of the law on infectious disease control in England and Wales currently being conducted by the Department as I announced on 24 October 1989 in a reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Burns) at columns 411–12.

  Doctors
  Mr. Galbraith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Heath if he will give for each year since 1959 the number of doctors employed by the National Health Service, with each year also expressed as a percentage change of the previous year.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Comparable data are not available prior to 1971. Informtion from 1971 is as shown in the table. Prior to 1975 comparable community health service medical staff figures are not available and are therefore not included.

  Year

  All doctors1

  Percentage change

  1971

  44,950

  1972

  46,498

  3·4

  1973

  48,110

  3·5

  1974

  49,107

  2·1

  1975

  55,629

  1976

  57,167

  2·8

  1977

  58,502

  2·3

  1978

  60,001

  2·6

  1979

  61,554

  2·6

  1980

  63,130

  2·6

  1981

  64,612

  2·3

  1982

  65,591

  1·5

  1983

  66,910

  2·0

  1984

  67,282

  0·6

  1985

  68,194

  1·4

  1986

  68,839

  0·9

  1987

  69,532

  1·0

  1988

  270,995

  2·1

  1Includes permanent paid and honorary staff; excludes locum staff, hospital practitioners and clinical assistants in the hospital and community health services. Includes general medical practitioners

  2 Includes 129 additional posts not shown in the main census, which have been returned late by regions.

  Abortion
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many representations he has received from(a) men and (b) women regarding abortion, in the past six months; how many of each of those categories were (i) for and (ii) against; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  It is not always possible to tell from a signature who wrote the letters or to distinguish between those in favour of a lower time limit or against abortion.

  Research Data
  Mr. John Townend
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he will make an assessment as to the ownership of anonymised data for research purposes produced by general practitioners on computers provided by third parties.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Torridge and Devon, West (Miss Nicholson) on 13 December at column 681.

  Amniocentesis Tests
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information he has as to the rate of miscarriage in pregnant women as a result of receiving an amniocentesis; and if he will give the source of his information.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  A recent report from the Royal College of Physicians states that the best studies suggest a 1 per cent. excess risk of spontaneous abortion following amniocentesis. (Source:Prenatal diagnosis and genetic screening. Royal College of Physicians, September 1989, paragraphs 2·33–2·35.)

  Conductive Education
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much money the Government have put into Peto clinic-style rehabilitation in each of the years since 1979 at constant prices; and what additional funding his Department has put aside for local authorities to assist such treatment over the same period.

  Mr. Freeman
  Information is not available in the form requested. Health authorities provide a wide range of treatment and rehabilitation services for disabled children. It is for individual authorities to allocate resources to these services in the light of their own circumstances.

  Hospices
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will obtain a copy of the proceedings of the annual conference of "Help the Hospices" regarding current funding for his departmental library.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Yes.

  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what funding his Department gives to the Nottingham hospice of 384 Woodborough road, Nottingham NG3 4JF.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  None. I understand that the project is funded by a trust and a contribution from local finance.
  376
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to bring funding arrangements for hospices in England into line with those in Scotland.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Mr. Baldry) on 15 December at columns 846–47.

  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations he has had from(a) the Nottingham hospice and (b) the Nottingham district health authority regarding the funding of the hospice; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  We have received no representations from the Nottingham hospice and the district health authority regarding funding of the hospice. I understand that the health authority provides some 25 hospice beds and has given the Nottinghamshire hospice some funds until April 1990.

  Midwives
  Mr. Alexander
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations he has received about the grading of those post-registration midwives whose courses began prior to 1 April 1988; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  We have received a number of representations since the staff and management sides of the Nursing and Midwifery Staffs Negotiating Council agreed in October 1988 on a new provision for staff who entered training after 1 April 1988.

  The Government have made their position clear in their response to the fourth report from the Social Services Committee 1988–89 "Resourcing the National Health Service: Midwives' Regrading 1988–89".

  Elderly People
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information is available to him on services currently being provided under section 45 of the Health Services and Public Health Act 1968 which could not be provided under other legislation; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  We do not collect information in this form.

  Ambulance Dispute
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the cost of(a) board and lodgings for military personnel, (b) use of military petrol and vehicles, (c) police overtime, (d) payments to St. John Ambulance and (e) payments to the Red Cross Society so far incurred in the ambulance dispute.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Information is not available centrally of the costs of police overtime or of payments to St. John Ambulance and the Red Cross Society incurred so far in the ambulance dispute. It is understood that extra costs have been incurred by the armed forces of £0·792 million up to 30 November 1989.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.
  377
  Mr. Freeman
  Information is not available in the form requested.

  Emergency Calls
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many ambulance personnel have been(a) killed, (b) seriously injured and (c) slightly injured in each of the past 10 years (i) in accidents while proceeding to an emergency call and (ii) while at the scene of an emergency call.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  This information is not held centrally.

  Vaccination Leaflet
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health why the Health Education Authority has withdrawn the leaflet MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella) vaccination reference 1D19 ISBNI 85448 050 2 printed by Graphoprint 8/88 and replaced it with an edition which is identical save for the photograph of the child on the cover; how many copies were printed of the 1988 edition; how many remained in stock at the time of its replacement by the 1989 edition; how many copies of the 1989 edition have been printed; what was the reason for the replacement of the original photograph by the new one on the front of the 1989 edition; what was the cost of the 1988 and 1989 editions; and what was the cost of changing the photograph.

  Mr. Freeman
  A new edition of the MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella) vaccination leaflet (ID19) was produced only after all stocks of the original leaflet were used. A new photograph was used after Health Education Authority research indicated that the original had limited appeal.

  The original leaflet cost £16,198 for 1.279,000 copies, and a reprint cost £6,095 for a further 400,000 leaflets. The new printing cost £9.785 for 850,000 leaflets, plus £400 for the new photograph.

  Region

  All

  Haemophiliacs

  Non-Haemophiliac Recipients of blood or blood products

  HIV+ (i)

  AIDS cases (ii)

  AIDS deaths (iii)

  HIV+ (iv)

  AIDS cases (v)

  AIDS deaths (vi)

  HIV+ (vii)

  AIDS cases (viii)

  AIDS deaths (ix)

  Northern

  305

  54

  33

  89

  17

  13

  *

  *

  *

  Yorkshire

  323

  66

  37

  65

  19

  10

  *

  *

  *

  Trent

  283

  51

  27

  63

  *

  *

  *

  *

  0

  East Anglia

  171

  32

  18

  39

  *

  *

  *

  0

  0

  North West Thames

  3,089

  1,063

  499

  33

  *

  *

  17

  *

  *

  North East Thames

  2,048

  497

  265

  163

  27

  18

  29

  *

  *

  South East Thames

  979

  271

  154

  113

  19

  *

  *

  *

  *

  South West Thames

  303

  92

  54

  22

  *

  *

  10

  *

  *

  Wessex

  251

  57

  32

  27

  *

  *

  *

  *

  0

  Oxford

  349

  52

  30

  115

  14

  *

  *

  *

  *

  South Western

  259

  55

  31

  36

  *

  *

  *

  *

  *

  West Midlands

  375

  56

  27

  147

  *

  *

  *

  0

  0

  Mersey

  162

  34

  24

  46

  *

  *

  *

  *

  *

  North Western

  388

  93

  59

  28

  *

  *

  *

  *

  *

  Channel Islands

  20

  *

  *

  *

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Wales

  144

  43

  29

  18

  *

  *

  *

  *

  *

  Northern Ireland

  62

  13

  *

  16

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Scotland

  1,707

  118

  58

  76

  *

  *

  12

  *

  *

  Total

  11,218

  2,649

  1,388

  1,097

  161

  102

  110

  44

  32

  Self-governing Hospitals
  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what central funding is being made available for feasibility studies by hospitals considering self-governing status.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  No central funds have been allocated specifically for work on feasibility studies by hospitals which have expressed an interest in NHS trust status.

  AIDS
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list (i) the numbers of HIV positive persons. (ii) the numbers of AIDS patients and (iii) the number of deaths from AIDS, in each standard region and in the United Kingdom since the AIDS epidemic began; and if he will show(a) the numbers of haemophiliacs so affected and (b) the numbers of non-haemophiliacs so affected as a consequence of infected blood products.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  [holding answer 29 November 1989]: The table shows the total numbers of HIV positive reports, AIDS cases and deaths of people with AIDS reported to the communicable disease surveillance centre and the communicable diseases (Scotland) unit to the end of September 1989, the numbers of those who were haemophiliacs, and the numbers of non-haemophiliacs thought to have been infected through receipt of blood or blood products in the United Kingdom or abroad.

  The regional breakdown is by regional health authority rather than standard regions as requested. All numbers in the tables which are fewer than 10 are represented by an asterisk to safeguard confidentiality, in line with the procedure followed in reports under the AIDS (Control) Act.

  Speech Therapists
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if he will list the independent experts which have been called in to advise at the Department of Health—National Health Service manpower planning advisory group on the recruitment and retention of speech therapists;

  (2) on what dates discussions have taken place on recruitment and retention rates of speech therapists at the Department of Health—National Health Service manpower planning advisory group;

  (3) over what period and in which authorities area data collection took place to inform the Department of Health —National Health Service manpower planning advisory group on recruitment and retention rates of speech therapists;

  (4) when the Department of Health—National Health Service manpower planning advisory group decided to study recruitment and retention rates of speech therapists;

  (5) which areas of speech therapy have been examined in the Department of Health—National Health Service manpower planning advisory group on recruitment and retention patterns of speech therapists.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  [holding answer 29 November 1989]: Work on the recruitment and retention of speech therapists is being undertaken as part of the national professional manpower initiative. This is a joint initiative launched in December 1987 between the Departments of Health, the manpower planning advisory group and the professional bodies concerned. The aim is to improve the quality and flow of information between the service, the professions and the Health Departments. This will enable the more informed analysis of, for example, recruitment and retention issues. For those staff groups covered by the pay review body for the professions allied to medicine, the aim is also to provide improved manpower information for the review body. The initiative covers all health authorities.

  The initiative has been discussed with representatives of speech therapy including a nominee from the College of Speech Therapists acting as the formal link between the college and the Department.

  Benzodiazepines
  Mr. Fearn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to promote alternatives to treatment by benzodiazepine drugs in future.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: That some patients can become addicted to benzodiazepine drugs is well known in the medical profession. This is one of the factors that doctors bear in mind when considering alternative treatment possibilities for their patients, such as counselling. What form of treatment will be more effective for particular patients is a matter for the clinical judgment of their doctors. Ministers would not wish to seek to promote particular forms of treatment, either generally or for particular groups of patients.

DEFENCE

  Nuclear Test Veterans
  Mr. Haynes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations he has received about providing compensation for ex-service personnel who took part in the nuclear testing programme.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  A number of representations have been made by right hon. and hon. Members and by others regarding compensation for participants in the United Kingdom's nuclear weapons test programme. As the Government have made clear on many occasions, we would be ready to pay compensation wherever the Crown's legal liability was established and where there was firm evidence to show that, on a balance of probabilities, ex-service personnel had suffered ill health as a result of exposure to radiation during the course of their duties as members of the armed forces.

  British Forces, Germany
  Mr. Harry Barnes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether there are any proposals to change the level of British armed forces based in Germany.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Conventional arms control discussions underway in Vienna concern certain categories of equipment held by the British armed forces. It is too early, however, to assess the impact of a CFE agreement on British forces in the Federal Republic of Germany.

  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the current manpower of(a) the Berlin Brigade, (b) the Royal Air Force in Germany and (c) the British Army of the Rhine.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The current peacetime establishment figures are as follows:

  (a) Berlin Brigade—a little under 3.000

  (b) the Royal Air Force in Germany—12,182 and

  (c) the British Army of the Rhine—55,200.

  Low Flying
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will review the amount of low flying carried out by the Royal Air Force.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  My right hon. Friend has no plans to do so.

  Defence Establishments (Security)
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what measures he is taking to improve security at his Department's establishments in West Germany; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  It would not be appropriate to comment on individual security measures. However, a wide range of new security measures have been implemented recently in West Germany and further major measures are in prospect. Close liaison is also maintained with the Federal Republic of Germany authorities, which have primary responsibility for the prevention of terrorist crimes outside United Kingdom bases.

  RAF Installation (Aird Uig)
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the former Royal Air Force installation at Aird Uig, Isle of Lewis, was disposed of and to whom; and what was the price paid.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The NATO communications installation at Aird Uig, which is operated by the RAF, remains in use. Only the adjoining domestic accommodation area amounting to some 12 acres was sold to a private individual in March 1973, but it is known that the site has been resold several times since then. It is not our practice to disclose details of commercial transactions.

  Amphibious Warfare
  Mr. Trotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he is taking to implement the Royal Navy's requirement for vessels to maintain its amphibian warfare capability.

  Mr Neubert
  The Government are committed to maintaining the Royal Navy amphibious capability in the longer term. To this end, we are currently examing the results of studies into replacing the capability offered by HMS Fearless and HMS Intrepid, either by extending their planned lives or by new build. A decision will be made in good time before these ships reach the end of their current useful lives. We are also evaluating the tenders we received earlier this year for the aviation support ship. We hope to be in a position to place an order during 1990. We will continue to maintain our force of landing ships logistic.

  Crown Immunity
  Mr Ashley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many section 10 certificates have been issued since 1979 in respect of members of the services, excluding those who were nuclear test veterans.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  My right hon. Friend's responsibilities are limited to issuing certificates, under section 10(3) of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947, confirming the duty status of a member of the armed forces on any particular occasion. It is not possible to provide full details of all section 10(3) certificates issued since 1979, as these have not been kept. However, our records show that 11 such certificates have been issued in the four years from 1986 to date; of these, one related to a nuclear test veteran.

  Pirbright Ranges
  Mr. Onslow
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence why it is proposed to extend the danger area at Pirbright ranges; what land clearance has been undertaken in preparation; whether the Nature Conservancy Council has been consulted; why Pirbright parish council has not been notified of these proposals; and if he will now take steps to ensure that local residents are fully informed.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  There are no plans to extend the danger area of the Pirbright ranges in the foreseeable future.

  Armed Forces (Fatalities)
  Mr. Churchill
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of Her Majesty's forces have been killed in each of the past five calendar years(a) as a result of terrorist action and (b) in other ways in the course of their duty; and what would have been the cost to the Exchequer if those killed, in each category, had been guaranteed a mimimum payment to their next of kin by the Ministry of Defence equivalent to one year's salary.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  My noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces will write to my hon. Friend.

  Tanks
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence further to his answer to the hon. Member for Leeds, Central of 14 December,Official Report, column 822, if he will list the matters relating to tanks discussed between General Dynamics and his officials.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  The details of meetings between General Dynamics and my officials to discuss possible future orders for tanks for the British Army are commercially confidential.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mr. Neubert
  I am not aware of any expenditure made by my Department on either the arts or design as such during the last financial year. To research the matter fully would incur disproportionate costs.

  Reservists
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will give details of the steps being taken in his Department towards expanding the size and role of reservists in British military capability; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Since 1979 the Ministry of Defence has set in hand measures to increase all volunteer reserve services. The Royal Naval Reserve has 11 new fleet minesweepers and has increased the numbers of communications and medical staffs. The role of the Royal Naval Auxiliary Service has been expanded to include participation in the defence of ports and anchorages. Two new detachments of the Royal Marines Reserve have been formed to enhance and support 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines and to undertake home defence tasks. Measures affecting the TA have included the raising of six new TA infantry battalions, an air defence regiment and five batteries, and eight airfield damage repair units. The Home Service Force has been established and 43 companies have now been raised. Seven new auxiliary field squadrons of the Royal Auxiliary Air Force have been formed to defend airfields, together with an auxiliary air movements squadron and an auxiliary aeromedical evacuation squadron. Some additional small measures are also under consideration.
  383
  Action continues to recruit volunteers for these services and to improve retention. Response from employers to the campaign to provide support for the Volunteer Reserves has been most encouraging.

  Home Defence
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the study of logistic sustainability of home defence being conducted by his Department.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The logistic requirements of our military home defence plans are reviewed periodically. Such a review is currently in progress, but it is not our practice to comment in detail on matters of this kind.

  Garrison Stables (Berlin)
  Mr. Marlow
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many military personnel are employed in the garrison stables in Berlin; how many horses are stabled there; how many of these horses are owned by his Department; and how many by private individuals.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The British garrison stables in Berlin have three horses owned by the Ministry of Defence, nine ponies and 10 horses of the saddle club and 10 horses at livery owned by private individuals. Four soldier grooms are employed there.

  Sea Wolf
  Mr. Stern
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has any plans for further development of vertical launched Sea Wolf.

  Mr. Neubert
  Pre-feasibility studies have been completed and feasibility studies are expected to start shortly to examine the possibilities of updating all versions of the Sea Wolf point defence missile system.

  FMC Company, USA
  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if his Department has had any discussions about defence contracts with or involving the FMC company of the United States of America.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  My Department has had some discussions with the FMC Company of the United States of America concerning the possible purchase of equipment for the MLRS programme. Our purchases, however, have been made through Prime Contractors, LTV and EPG.

  The United Kingdom arm of the company, FMC Corporation UK, is on the defence contractors list. There is no record of any current contract with the company.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Race Relations
  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will provide estimates showing for each financial year from 1987–88 to 1990–91 the amount of actual or planned expenditure on section 11 grant.

  Mr. John Patten
  The amount of grant paid, or estimated to be paid under section 11 of the Local 384
  Government Act 1966 for the years in question is set as follows. This represents the Home Office element (75 per cent.) of the total expenditure, the remainder being the local authority contribution.

  Financial year

  Grant £ million

  1987–88

  93

  1988–89

  89

  1989–90

  115

  1990–91

  110

  The figure for the current year includes anticipated payments in respect of earlier years.

  Sports Grounds
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he intends to amend the Public Order Act, section 5, in the light of recent reports on crowd safety and control at sports grounds.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  We have no plans to do so.

  Security
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the powers that regulate and control(a) non-Home Office police in the public sector and (b) private security firms performing a policing role; and if he will list all groups falling within category (a).

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The main non-Home Office police forces in the public sector are the British Transport police, the Ministry of Defence police, the Royal Parks constabulary and the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority constabulary; statutory responsibility for these forces and for legislation or regulation governing them rests with my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Transport, for Defence, for the Environment and for Energy.

  There are also some small bodies of constables operating on private property which are established under private legislation, which arc not directly answerable to a Minister, and on which information is not held centrally. We know of one case (at Parkeston quay) where members of a security force, sworn in as special constables under such legislation, were provided under contract to the harbour authority by a private security firm. The accountability of the members of such a force lies to the law and to the courts and to the statutory harbour authority.

  Police officers in the main non-Home Office police forces and some of the smaller forces are required to comply with the provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the codes of practice within the area of their jurisdiction, by agreements made under section 96 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

  The Government look to the private security industry to provide self-regulation. Considerable progress has been made by trade associations and regulatory bodies within the industry. We are currently considering, in the light of the report of a Home Office working group, whether there is scope for further improvement in self-regulation.

  Television Licence Fees
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many convictions have been obtained concerning television licence fee evasion for each year of the past 10 years; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. John Patten
  The following information has been supplied by the national television licence records office. Provision of details for earlier years would involve disproportionate cost.

  Offenders found guilty of television licence fee evasion

  United Kingdom

  Financial year

  Number of convictions

  1984–85

  110,042

  1985–86

  123,122

  1986–87

  174,509

  1987–88

  158,182

  1988–89

  172,604

  The increase in recent years results from improvements in the detection rate.

  People who find the licence fee hard to pay in one lump sum can now take advantage of the new budget payments scheme. This enables colour licence payers to obtain a licence on payment of the first of four quarterly direct debit instalments.

  Prison Officers' Quarters
  Mr. Wilshire
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prison officers have been allocated a second quarter while still registered as having a quarter in each of the past five years.

  Mr. Mellor
  This information could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost. However, I am aware of only two cases where a second quarter has been allocated to a prison officer before surrender of the original quarter with vacant possession.

  Police Disciplinary Codes
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will set out the sections of police disciplinary codes that relate to giving misleading evidence in court.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Depending on the circumstances in which the offence takes place, such behaviour may fall within any one of a number of sections of the discipline code, including those relating to discreditable conduct (section 1), disobedience (section 3), falsehood or prevarication (section 5) or criminal conduct (section 16).

  Game Licences
  Mr. Onslow
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the total net product of the sale of game licences in each of the past 10 years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The face value of game licences sold in England and Wales since 1981 is given in the table. Information on previous years is not readily to hand.
  386

  Year

  £

  1981–82

  191,210

  1982–83

  199,354

  1983–84

  204,370

  1984–85

  201,154

  1985–86

  196,146

  1986–87

  192,940

  1987–88

  205,114

  1988–89

  210,310

  Birmingham Pub Bombings
  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, further to his answer of 14 December,Official Report, columns 785–86, if he will specify the offence and the sentence of the only IRA member on category B, apart from the men convicted of the Birmingham bombings.

  Mr. Mellor
  The prisoner was convicted on 12 counts of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment on each count. Concurrent sentences of 20 years and five years imprisonment, together with a consecutive sentence of 10 years imprisonment, were also imposed for three convictions for causing explosions likely to endanger life and property.

  Irish Foreign Minister
  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he last met the Foreign Minister of Ireland; what was discussed; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. John Patten
  My right hon. and learned Friend has not yet met the Irish Foreign Minister. My right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr. Hurd) last met him as Home Secretary on 13 September 1989. They discussed matters of common concern to both Governments.

  Immigration
  Mr. Churchill
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what has been the total number of immigrants from New Commonwealth, or previously New Commonwealth countries(a) admitted for settlement in the United Kingdom or (b) admitted on such a basis as may eventually entitle them to United Kingdom citizenship with right of abode.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The number of persons from the new commonwealth and Pakistan accepted for settlement in the United Kingdom in the years 1980–88 is published in table 22 of the annual Home Office volume "Control of Immigration: Statistics, United Kingdom 1998" (Cm 726).

  Under the British Nationality Act 1981 British dependent territory citizens, British nationals (overseas), British overseas citizens, British subjects and British' protected persons who have been accepted for settlement in the United Kingdom, and fulfil the other conditions of section 4(2) of the Act are entitled to British citizenship. There is now no entitlement to citizenship for other adults, though those who have been accepted for settlement and fulfil the other relevant conditions of the Act may apply for citizenship by naturalisation, which is at the Home Secretary's discretion.

  The numbers of British dependent territory citizens from Hong Kong (including British nationals (overseas))

  387
  and of British overseas citizens, accepted for settlement in recent years is also shown in the aforementioned table 22. The numbers of acceptances for settlement of British dependent territory citizens other than from Hong Kong, of British subjects and of British protected persons are not separately identified in the settlement figures. However, information on grants of British citizenship in 1988 for most of these categories is shown in table 4 of Home Office Statistical Bulletin Issue 9/89 "Citizenship Statistics, United Kingdom 1988"

  Copies of both these publications are in the Library.

  Gun Clubs
  Mr. Paice
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representation he has received concerning his proposals for the control of gun clubs; and if he will ensure that his proposals do not prohibit the practice of day membership for visitors or novices.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  We have received a number of representations from right hon. and hon. Members, shooting organisations, individual clubs, and members of the public. We shall give careful consideration to the practice of day membership in the light of these and the advice of the firearms consultative committee.

  Police Officers (Housing Allowance)
  Mr. Shersby
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to alleviate the difficulties facing police officers who have moved or will move to other forces before 1 April 1990 who cannot sell their houses in the depressed housing market and who will lose personal protection under the proposed replacement of rent allowance by housing allowance; if he will make it his policy to continue protection whilst present conditions persist; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  My right hon. and learned Friend has already made it clear that he does not wish to see any officer receiving less by way of allowance after 31 March 1990 than he or she was receiving by way of rent allowance on that date. He is not clear that more than this could be justified. He will, however, consider my hon. Friend's point before reaching any final decision.

  Mr. Shersby
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to ensure that police officers continue to be motivated to apply for senior positions in forces other than the one in which they are now serving, in view of the loss of personal protection known as red circling under the proposed replacement of rent allowance by housing allowance.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  My right hon. and learned Friend hopes to be receiving shortly the recommendations of the Police negotiating board on rent allowance. In coming to his decisions he will bear in mind the need to ensure that senior police officers continue to be motivated to apply for senior positions.

  Emergency Calls
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many firemen have been(a) killed, (b) seriously injured and (c) slightly injured in the past 10 years (i) in accidents while proceeding to an emergency call and (ii) while at the scene of an emergency call.
  388
  Mr. John Patten
  During 1979–1988 fire brigades in England and Wales reported firefighters killed and injured in the course of duty as follows:

  Killed in the course of operational duty

  as a result of firefighting or a special ser vice call

  as a result of a road accident

  Injured at an incident causing prolonged absence from duty

  1979

  2

  297

  1980

  3

  1

  341

  1981

  2

  0

  264

  1982

  4

  2

  270

  1983

  5

  0

  311

  1984

  3

  0

  249

  1985

  1

  4

  312

  1986

  0

  1

  303

  1987

  4

  3

  301

  1988

  0

  0

  327

  Totals

  23

  13

  2,975

  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers have been(a) killed, (b) seriously injured and (c) slightly injured in each of the past 10 years in (i) accidents while proceeding to an emergency call and (ii) the execution of their duty.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The information is not available in the form requested. However, the following table sets out the number of deaths of police officers on duty during the years 1979 to 1988 inclusive, divided between homicides and other deaths, including accidental deaths.

  Homicides

  Other deaths

  Total

  1979

  1

  9

  10

  1980

  1

  4

  5

  1981

  1

  9

  10

  1982

  5

  10

  15

  1983

  4

  12

  16

  1984

  3

  12

  15

  1985

  1

  6

  7

  1986

  0

  9

  9

  1987

  2

  9

  11

  1988

  2

  1

  3

  Details of the circumstances surrounding these deaths are not held centrally. It is therefore not possible to determine whether deaths occurred in response to an emergency call, or, in the case of deaths not due to homicide whether death was accidental or due to negligence on the part of a person involved in the incident. Details of officers injured on duty are not held centrally.

  Elections (Candidates' Expenses)
  Sir Hal Miller
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on progress on the proposed review of the system of controls on candidates' expenses at elections, announced on 21 June,Official Report, columns 131–33.

  Mr. Waddington
  I have placed in the Library copies of a consultation paper on candidates' election expenses, which the Home Departments are issuing today to representatives of the main political parties and local authorities. The paper briefly sets out the main issues which arise and indicates possible ways forward. Views are invited from any interested individuals or organisations,
  389
  and copies of the consultation paper can be obtained free of charge from D Division, room 739, Home Office, Queen Anne's gate, London SW1H 9AT; or Division IIA, room 227B, Scottish Home and Health Department, St. Andrew's house, Edinburgh EH1 3DE; or CPL Division, Northern Ireland Office, Whitehall, London SW1A 2AZ.

  Radio Authority
  Mr. Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to establish the Radio Authority.

  Mr. Waddington
  I am setting up the Radio Authority in shadow form on I January 1990. The appointment of Lord Chalfont as chairman has already been announced. I have today appointed the following to become members on 1 January:

  Mr. John Grant

  Mr. Richard Hooper

  Mrs. Jill McIvor

  Mr. Ranjit Sondhi

  One further appointment will be made in due course. Subject to parliamentary approval of the Broadcasting Bill, I intend to establish the authority with its full statutory powers on 1 January 1991.

  Independent Television Commission
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to establish the Independent Television Commission.

  Mr. Waddington
  I am setting up the Independent Television Commission (ITC) in shadow form on 1 January 1990. The appointments of Mr. George Russell as chairman and Lord Chalfont as a member have already been announced. I have today appointed Lady Popplewell and Professor James Ring to become members on 1 January. Further appointments will be made in due course. Subject to parliamentary approval of the Broadcasting Bill, I intend to establish the ITC with its full statutory powers on 1 January 1991.

  Visas (Indian Sub-Continent)
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the refusal rate for queues 1, 2, 3 and 4 at each British post on the Indian sub-continent in 1989; and what were the comparable figures for 1988, 1987 and 1986.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: The information requested is not available centrally.

  Perjury
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the number of people convicted of the offence of perjury in 1986, 1987, 1988 and in 1989; and what is the average length of the sentences.

  Mr. John Patten
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: The information requested is given in the table. Data for 1989 are not yet available.
  390

  Offenders convicted of perjury and average sentence lengths

  England and Wales

  1986

  1987

  1988

  Convictions

  124

  167

  205

  Numbers sentenced to immediate custody

  61

  52

  77

  Average sentence lengths (months)

  9

  11

  8

  Diplomatic Bags
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what discussions he has had with his counterparts in other European Community countries to ensure that diplomatic bags are subject to non-intrusive searches;

  (2) what plans he has to require the non-intrusive searching of diplomatic bags entering and leaving the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  I have been asked to reply.

  None.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Accountancy Firms
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether accountancy firms who enjoy a monopoly of the external audit function are required to publish their financial statements.

  Mr. Redwood
  Under section 389(6)(c) of the Companies Act 1985, a body corporate is not qualified for appointment as auditor of a company. Accountancy practices which undertake statutory audit of companies are established as sole traders or partnerships and, as such, are not required to publish accounts. The Companies Act 1989 removes the prohibition on the appointment of a body corporate as auditors and, once section 25 of the Act is brought into force, it will be open to accountants conducting statutory audits to incorporate if they so wish, in which case they will be subject to the statutory duties and responsibilities of companies.

  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) if he will provide a list of the auditing firms which his Department has criticised since June 1979 that have been allowed to make auditing policy through their membership of the auditing practices committee and its working parties;

  (2) whether any Arthur Andersen personnel have representatives on the accounting standards committee or its working parties, and on the auditing practices committee;

  (3) whether since 1979 any individuals appointed to the auditing practices committee and its working parties have come from (a) firms criticised by his Department's inspectors and (b) firms sued for negligence by the Government.

  Mr. Redwood
  As I explained in the replies I gave on 27 November at columns 92–93, on 13 December at column 702 and on 18 December at column 22 to questions by the hon. Member, membership of the Accounting Standards Committee and the Auditing Practices Committee is a matter for the Consultative Committee of Accountancy

  391
  Bodies, which has made clear that voting members of those committees are appointed on a personal basis and are not to regard themselves as delegates of sectional interests.

  Auditors
  Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether the register of auditors which the recognised supervisory bodies are required to maintain under the Companies Act 1989 includes information relating to(a) criticisms of the firm by Department of Trade and Industry inspectors and (b) criticisms of firms by any disciplinary committee of the profession.

  Mr. Redwood
  No.

  Corporate Insolvencies
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the number of corporate insolvencies in 1988 and 1989, to date, in Britain; and in how many of those cases the companies in question received a going concern qualification in their last accounts prior to going into receivership.

  Mr. Redwood
  The chief executive of Companies house tells me that in Great Britain in the financial year 1988–89, and up to 30 November in the current year, 1,252 and 1,367 companies were placed in receivership, and 13,900 and 9,056 in liquidation respectively.

  No information is available on the number of companies who, in their last accounts prior to receivership or liquidation, received a going concern qualification from their auditors.

  Richards Shipbuilders Ltd.
  Mr. Carttiss
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement about an application from Richards Shipbuilders Ltd. for assistance from the shipbuilding intervention fund.

  Mr. Andrew Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement about an application from Richards Shipbuilders Ltd. for assistance from the shipbuilding intervention fund.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I am pleased to announce that I have approved in principle a grant from the shipbuilding intervention fund which will enable Richards Shipbuilders Ltd. confirm an order for a tug which will be constructed at its Great Yarmouth yard for the Alexandra Towing Co. Ltd. This order will maintain employment at this yard.

  Credit Cards
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he intends to abolish the no discrimination rule imposed by credit card companies in the light of the Monopolies and Mergers report; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Ridley
  On 22 August, I published the report by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission on the supply of credit card services in the United Kingdom. I announced that I would welcome the views of all interested parties on the MMC's recommendation to end the "no discrimination" rule in the United Kingdom. Under this rule,392
  imposed by the credit card companies, traders are required to charge the same price for purchases made with Visa or Mastercard/Eurocard (which includes Access) credit cards as for those paid for by cash or other means.

  I have received representations on this issue from a wide range of people including members of the credit card organisations, retailers and the general public. I have considered carefully, the views they expressed. In accordance with the advice of the Director General of Fair Trading, I have concluded that the no discrimination rule is anti-competitive. It restricts the freedom of retailers to set their own prices. This is a serious restriction on competition. Credit card purchases amounted to over £16 billion last year. Therefore I have decided that the rule should be brought to an end. I am asking the Director General of Fair Trading to seek the necessary undertakings. In the meantime, application of the rule remains a matter for the credit card companies.

  The effect of ending the rule will be to give retailers the freedom to choose whether or not to charge the same whether payment is made by credit card or cash. It will be for retailers to decide whether to offer different prices. They will not be obliged to do so. I intend, subject to the statutory consultation procedures, to bring in regulations under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 to require that any price indication makes clear whether differential pricing applies.

  Whether retailers find it attractive to take advantage of this new freedom will depend in part on the charges they themselves pay to the credit card companies. The MMC concluded that the level of profitability of five credit card companies accounting for some 80 per cent. of credit card lending last year was sufficiently above that which might have been expected in conditions of normal competition to be against the public interest. The MMC did not make any specific recommendations because of the prospect of increased competition. However, during the recent consultation period, considerable concern was expressed about the charges to retailers, including the interchange fee.

  I have therefore decided to go further than the MMC recommended by taking steps to increase competition in this area. Credit card companies will have to provide the Director General of Fair Trading with information on the range of charges to retailers and the interchange fees which they have been making and to publish similar information on their current charges. As well as enabling the director general to keep the position under review, this should act as a spur to competition and should strengthen retailers' ability to negotiate the level of charges with them. I intend to discuss these additional remedies with the credit card organisations and their members before initiating the statutory consultation procedure that is required before making orders under the Fair Trading Act.

  I announced last autumn that I was accepting the Commission's recommendation that the two credit card organisations, Visa and Mastercard-Eurocard should no longer restrict the freedom of issuers of their cards in the United Kingdom to act as merchant acquirers, recruiting traders to take credit cards and handling the subsequent transactions. The Director General of Fair Trading is seeking appropriate undertakings from these organisations. These measures in combination with increasing competition should remedy the adverse effects identified by the Commission in its report. Nevertheless, with the

  393
  Director General of Fair Trading, I will watch developments closely. If necessary, I will consider taking further action.

  Mr. Shersby
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement indicating his preferred option for insurance cover connected with the use of credit cards in the retail sector.

  Mr. Forth
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: In August my Department issued a consultation document which proposed that where credit payment insurance and other ancillary services are offered as optional additions under a credit agreement, acceptance of the option should require a positive expression of acceptance by the borrower, such as the ticking of a box. A number of representations on this proposal have been received and are now under consideration.

  Post Office (Procurement Activities)
  Mr. Harris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made by the Post Office in the implementation of the recommendations made in the Monopolies and Mergers Commission's report on the Post Office's procurement activities.

  Mr. Forth
  The Monopolies and Mergers Commission reported on the Post Office's procurement activities in October 1986. The Post Office's initial response, produced in January 1987, partially rejected one and accepted the remainder of the report's 49 recommendations. A report on progress to October 1987 was placed in the Library in December 1987. Nearly half the MMC's recommendations had been implemented by that time.

  I have now received the Post Office's report on progress to October 1989, which I am placing in the Libraries. It indicates that considerable further progress has been made and all but one of the recommendations (relating to the introduction of productivity schemes in supplies department depots) have now been implemented. My Department will continue to monitor the Post Office's progress in implementing this recommendation.

  Telecommunications Council
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the outcome of the Telecommunications Council on 7 December.

  Mr. Forth
  The principal items for discussion were a proposed Commission directive under Article 90 of the treaty of Rome aimed at introducing competition into the Community market for telecommunication services and a related Council directive on a framework for open network provision (ONP) of telecommunication services.

  The Council agreed the policy content of the Commission directive with a number of amendments designed to ensure that the introduction of competition would not interfere with the general availability of packet and circuit switched data services in each member state. The Council also agreed amendments on ONP which may be expected to lead to a common position on the proposed framework directive, probably before the end of this year.

  The Government believe that this outcome was the best that could be achieved. In particular the essential market opening provisions of the article 90 directive have been retained. While the scope of the ONP directive will be
  394
  more extensive than we had proposed, it should not impede our objective of enabling competition to develop without the constraint of unnecessary harmonisation.

  Deregulation Reviews
  Mr. Arbuthnot
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made under the rolling programme of deregulation reviews announced on 31 January by the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs.

  Mr. Redwood
  Of the 22 reviews announced in January all are complete or nearing completion. They have already resulted in a wide range of benefits to business. In some cases it has proved possible to eliminate requirements altogether, in others to update and streamline controls. Quantifiable savings to business from these completed reviews should exceed £10 million per annum. Government communications with business have also been improved through the consultations which have taken place, as has the service provided by Departments.

  Our prime aim remains to remove the time loss and frustration caused to business by out-of-date or cumbersome requirements. We are therefore bringing forward consideration of a number of wider issues which have an impact particularly on the development of smaller businesses, together with reviews designed to identify regulatory barriers to building new businesses in various sectors.

  The full list of new departmental reviews is as follows:

  C & E—

  (i) Industrial oils reliefs; and

  (ii) Methylated spirits reliefs Review the burden placed on businesses by current administrative procedures, and consider whether the records required to be kept by users can be simplified.

  (iii) Production and dissemination of information to the trade and public Review will include the provision of VAT advice to business and the effectiveness of communications with new business.

  DH—Review of CAPRICODE guidance
  Review the procedures governing accountability in the NHS Building Programme (CAPRICODE) to ensure that no unnecessary restrictions are placed on the construction industry.

  DSS—Service to business in the new National Insurance Contributions Unit
  Review those areas of the Unit's work which provide a service to business and make recommendations on how these can be improved and burdens reduced.

  DTI—

  (i) Company law exemptions for private companies Review the provisions for their impact on non-public companies.

  (ii) Regulations made under Part II of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 Review the need for regulations in the light of the development of industry standards.

  (iii) CB radio licensing Review various options for improving the present system of CB licensing.

  (iv) Fixed-link radio user access system Introduce a user accessible database for radio fixed links.

  DTp—Type approval procedures for equipment on merchant ships.
  Review scope for changing procedures in order to reduce costs of UK ship-owners.

  HO—Betting-shop hours of opening
  Consider an extension of the permitted opening hours beyond the existing statutory closing time.
  395
  HSC—Strategy for negotiating EC health and safety Directives
  Assess general lessons for present and future regulatory policy based on experience of negotiating EC health and safety Directives.

  IR—P11D's
  Review the P11D form and procedures with a view to reducing the burden they impose on employers.

  MAFF—Export Refunds and Monetary Compensatory Amounts
  Enquiry into product classification for which exports refunds and Monetary Compensatory Amounts are fixed, and the differentiation of refund rates by destination.

  SO—

  (i) The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982. Review the working of the Act, with particular reference to the scope for reducing inconsistencies in optional business licensing powers of local authorities.

  (ii) Registration and inspection of independent schools in Scotland. Review procedures to assess whether the system is burdensome for school proprietors and what scope exists for simplification.

  EDU—Faster and simpler business licensing
  Review feasibility of developing a cross-departmental public database to enable business to indentify quickly and clearly requirements to be met.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The information is as follows:

  (a) nil,

  (b) £13,874,000.

  Grants
  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will provide estimates showing for each financial year from 1987–88 to 1990–91 the amount of actual or planned expenditure on(a) regional selective assistance, (b) English Estates and (c) inner city task forces.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  Actual expenditure in England on regional selective assistance, English Estates and inner city task forces for 1987–88 and 1988–89 and planned expenditure for 1989–90 is as follows:

  £ million

  1987–88

  1988–89

  1989–901

  Regional Selective Assistance2

  122·7

  134·9

  147·3

  English Estates

  47·0

  45·5

  50·0

  Inner City Task Forces

  35·5

  16·4

  19·2

  1 Figures contained in the 1989-90 Supply Estimates·

  2 Regional Selective Assistance includes the Business Improvement Services and Exchange Risk Guarantee schemes as well as the main RSA project grants·

  3 DTI expenditure from November 1987 to end March 1988· Prior to November 1987 the Inner Cities Unit was located in the Department of Employment and therefore details of expenditure are not readily available to DTI·

  Expenditure plans for 1990–91 will be published in the Public Expenditure White Paper in January.

  Telephone Information Services
  Mr. Lewis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what has been the level of funding of the independent committee for the supervision of standards of telephone information services in each year since its establishment;

  (2) what have been the sources of the finding of the independent committee for the supervision of standards of telephone information services, in each year since its establishment;

  (3) what is the total number of persons currently employed by the independent committee for the supervision of standards of telephone information services;

  (4) what are the current funding arrangements for the independent committee for the supervision of standards of telephone information services.

  Mr. Forth
  These are matters for the independent committee for the supervision of standards of telephone information services (ICSTIS). No Governmnt funding has been provided to ICSTIS. The hon. Member may wish to write to the chairman, Louis Blom-Cooper, QC, ICSTIS, 67–69 Whitfield street, London WIP 5RL.

  Export Credits Guarantee
  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will list the countries with which trade is not supported by export credits guarantee.

  Mr. Ridley
  Libya and Zambia are the only countries for which ECGD export credit support is currently not available

  Export Credits Guarantee Department
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make it his policy that the introduction of private capital into the insurance services group of the Export Credits Guarantee Department will not precede the abolition of comparable state-owned agencies in France, Germany, Italy and Spain.

  Mr. Ridley
  I refer to the written answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart) on 18 December 1989 at columns 23–24.

  It is the Government's intention that private capital be introduced into the company created from ECGD's insurance services group quickly after its incorporation. The early completion of these changes is in the best interest of ECGD, insurance services, the staff of both organisations, their customers and United Kingdom exporters.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make it his policy that the headquarters of the insurance services group of the Export Credits Guarantee Department will remain in Cardiff subsequent to any introduction of private capital into the ownership of the agency.

  Mr. Ridley
  The location of the new company once privatised will be a matter for decision for the management and shareholder(s).

  Mr Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what arrangements the Export Credits
  397
  Guarantee Department, insurance services group, Cardiff, have made with the Property Services Agency to occupy a new office building subsequent to ceasing to be a Government Department.

  Mr. Ridley
  Discussions have already been held with the Property Services Agency about possible future accommodation arrangements. No decisions have yet been taken.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proportion of staff at the Export Credits Guarantee Department, insurance services group, Cardiff, have worked at projects group, London, during the past five years and vice versa.

  Mr Ridley
  The proportion of staff in the insurance services group, Cardiff, who have worked in the project group, London, during the last five years is about 0·15 per cent. and the proportion of staff in the project group who have worked in insurance services group is about 2 per cent.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proportion of the work done by the Export Credits Guarantee Department computer centre at Llanishen arises from insurance services group, Cardiff, and how much arises from projects group, Cardiff.

  Mr. Ridley
  The Export Credits Guarantee Department computer centre at Llanishen currently provides services to the two business units in the following proportions:

  Insurance Services Group—75 per cent.

  Project Group—25 per cent.

  It is expected that this will have changed by 1 April 1991 to give the following proportions:

  Insurance Services Group—80 per cent.

  Project Group—20 per cent.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make any future introduction of private capital into the insurance services group of Export Credits Guarantee Department conditional on satisfactory arrangements being made for future employment for the employees of the group.

  Mr. Ridley
  Any new employer will be bound by existing legislation which provides protection for the employees when the change of ownership takes place. Employment can best be safeguarded by growth in business. The changes I have announced will provide the best basis for such growth.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to his written answer of 18 December to the hon. Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart), if he will make it his policy to give preference to the introduction of private capital into Export Credits Guarantee Department, insurance service group, only where due consideration has been given to the need to safeguard employment in the financial services industry in south-east Wales.

  Mr. Ridley
  Any new employer will be bound by existing legislation which provides protection for the employees when the change of ownership takes place. Employment can best be safeguarded by growth in business. The changes I have announced will provide the best basis for such growth.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether the lease held by the Export Credits 398
  Guarantee Department, insurance services group, on the Crown buildings, Cathays park, Cardiff, precludes occupation by other than a Government Department or a charity.

  Mr. Ridley
  The lease on the Crown building land does include covenants about commercial activities and the implications of these are being examined by the Export Credits Guarantee Department and the Property Services Agency.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what is his most up-to-date estimate of the effect on employment at the Export Credits Guarantee Department, insurance group services, of the change of status and ownership announced by him in his written answer of 18 December to the hon. Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart);

  (2) what is his most up-to-date estimate of the effect on total employment at Export Credits Guarantee Department in the Cardiff area of the change of status and ownership announced by him in a written answer to the hon. Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart) on 18 December.

  Mr. Ridley
  I see no reason why there should be any significant effect on employment. I believe the changes I have announced offer the best prospect of securing jobs for the future.

  Toys
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what steps he will take to protect the viability of craft toymakers from the financial costs of adhering to the European Community toy safety regulations;

  (2) what representations he has had from craft industries involved in toy making about the financial implications of the European Community toy safety regulations; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  I have received a number of representations from craft toy-makers about the financial implications of complying with the Toys (Safety) Regulations 1989. The new regulations will require toys to comply with common European safety standards and bear a CE mark as a declaration of conformity. However, where applicable they will replace regulations and requirements dealing with the safety of toys, including those produced by craft toymakers, that have been in force in the United Kingdom for some 15 years. I have explained that where a toy has been manufactured in accordance with the common standards the toymaker will be able to self-certify the toy as conforming and the toy will qualify to bear the CE mark.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proposals he has to seek to exempt craft toymakers from European community toy safety regulations.

  Mr. Forth
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: The EC directive on the safety of toys is a treaty obligation and we are required to implement it in full. Although the directive, and thus the United Kingdom implementing regulations, does include exemptions for certain products which might otherwise be thought of as toys, there are no exemptions for particular categories of toy manufacturer.

  Regional Assistance
  Mr. Gordon Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will list for each region, Scotland and Wales payments of regional development grants, regional selective assistance, regionalinvestment grants and regional innovation grants for this financial year and,

  Regional Development Grants

  Regional Selective Assistance1

  Regional Investment Grants2

  Regional Innovation Grants2

  (£ million)

  (£ million)

  (£ thousand)

  (£ thousand)

  1988–89

  East Midlands

  7·9

  1·0

  l0

  nil

  North East

  78·7

  33·5

  234

  32

  North West

  49·6

  22·0

  299

  118

  South West

  6·6

  4·9

  61

  13

  West Midlands

  nil

  24·0

  3 n/a

  3 n/a

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  19·3

  21·1

  108

  44

  Scotland

  76·6

  37·7

  231

  51

  Wales

  58·6

  36·2

  182

  36

  1989–904

  East Midlands

  6·9

  0·5

  117

  50

  North East

  28·0

  18·6

  917

  311

  North West

  17·9

  14·9

  762

  99

  South West

  1·8

  2·1

  185

  41

  West Midlands

  nil

  13·5

  3n/a

  3n/a

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  8·0

  7·0

  629

  120

  Scotland

  41·0

  19·5

  448

  436

  Wales

  15·9

  17·8

  307

  172

  1 Industrial and training grants only. Further payments of £2·9 million and £0·6 million which cannot be allocated to a specific region were made in 1988–89 and 1989–90 respectively.

  2 These grants, which make up the Regional Enterprise Grants scheme, are applicable only in Development Areas and the Intermediate Areas in South Yorkshire designated under the EC RESIDER programme.

  3 No designated areas in this region.

  4 To end November 1989.

  Expenditure plans for 1990–91 and 1991–92 will be published in the public expenditure White Paper in January.

  Deflators for part-years are not readily available. It would be inappropriate to use the deflator for 1989–90 as a whole to convert the outturn figures for the first eight months of the year only.

  Accounting Procedures
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether in the last 10 years he or his predecessors, either by direction or informally, secured changes in the accounting conventions followed by British Telecom, Cable and Wireless, British Steel, Jaguar, Rover, Rolls-Royce or British Aerospace, respectively; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: When these companies were in the public sector, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry had powers to direct, with Treasury approval, the methods and principles according to which their statements of accounts were prepared. Details of when such directions were issued are not readily available and could be assembled only at disappropriate cost. Since privatisation, the accounting conventions used have been a matter for the chairman and board of each company in consultation with its auditors.
  400
  where relevant, for 1988–89, and with his projections for 1990–91 and 1991–92; and if he will also express the figures in real terms at 1988–89 prices.

  Mr. Ridley
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: The requested information, with regard to expenditure in 1988–89 and 1989–90 (to end November), in respect of the listed schemes of assistance is as follows:

  Product Labelling
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what level of resources his Department is currently committing to the promotion of multilingual product labelling in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Forth
  [holding answer 12 December 1989]: It is vital for products to be labelled in a language which the customer understands, and this message forms part of my Department's general single market campaign. However, there are no departmental resources devoted specifically to multilingual product labelling: the costs of such labelling should properly be borne by United Kingdom firms themselves.

  ERDF Aid
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what is his best estimate of the level of European regional development fund aid commitments to all eligible public bodies in each of the last five years in(a) Bradford, (b) the west midlands and (c) South Yorkshire;

  (2) what is his most up-to-date estimate of the total amounts of European regional development fund aid commitments to all eligible public bodies in 1989 and in 1990 in (a) Bradford, (b) the west midlands and (c) South Yorkshire.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: The information is as follows:
  401

  £ million

  Bradford

  West Midlands

  South Yorkshire

  1984

  4

  18

  21

  1985

  3

  45

  10

  1986

  10

  43

  19

  1987

  2

  63

  17

  1988

  0

  21

  3

  1989

  19

  10

  121

  1990

  2

  2

  2

  1 estimates

  2 estimates not yet available

  Footwear Imports
  Mr. Latham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will list the reasons why the United Kingdom representative failed to give a firm response at the consultation meeting between the European Community Commission and member states in committee 288 on 5 December regarding the Commission's inquiry into footwear imports from South Korea and Taiwan; and what advice his Department subsequently gave to the Commission by the stated target date for comments of 15 December.

  Mr. Redwood
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: My noble Friend the Minister for Trade had been carefully considering the views expressed by the industry and other member states before reaching a final decision on how the United Kingdom should respond to the Commission's report following its inquiry into imports of footwear from South Korea and Taiwan. He has concluded that the report does not make out an economic case for restrictions on imports of footwear from Taiwan and South Korea. The Commission has been told that consistently with our general approach on trade policy issues the United Kingdom Government are therefore opposed to such safeguard action on imports of footwear from South Korea and Taiwan. We have, however, suggested to the Commission that if they were to propose some form of surveillance licensing we would give this sympathetic consideration.

  Babcock Fata
  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what grants for research, development and investment in equipment were made to Babcock Fata or related companies from 1984 to date.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: Payments totalling £61,795 have been made to Babcock Fata Ltd under the support for innovation scheme. This scheme closed in January 1988. No other grants have been made.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Unemployed People
  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will provide estimates by sex for the number of claimants who will be removed from the unemployment count as a result of the introduction of the Social Security (Unemployment, Sickness and Invalidity Benefit) (Amendment) (No. 3) Regulations 1989; and if he will 402
  further break down these figures by sex into (a) part-time workers, (b) part-time and temporary workers and (c) short-time workers.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  I regret that figures are not available in the form requested; overall, we estimate that this measure will have no significant effect on the unemployment count.

  Residential Care
  Mr. Andrew Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many boarders were paid by each Scottish local office in March for those in residential care on grounds of(a) old age, (b) very dependent elderly, (c) mental disorder, (d) drug or alcohol dependency, (e) mental handicap, (f) physical disability, under pension age, (g) physical disability over pension age and (h) others; and for those in nursing homes on the grounds of (i) mental disorder, (ii) drug or alcohol dependency, (iii) mental handicap, (iv) terminal illness, (v) physical disability under pension age, (vi) physical disability over pension age, and (vii) others;

  (2) what is the number of boarders in nursing homes for Scotland, England and Wales by Department of Social Security region in the years from 1982;

  (3) what is the number of boarders in residential care accommodation in Scotland by Department of Social Security local office during the last financial year;

  (4) what is the number of boarders in residential care accommodation for Scotland, England and Wales by Department of Social Security region in the years from 1982.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him by my right hon. Friend on 5 December at columns 157–58.

  Miss Jane Brown
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement of the findings by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration on the results of his investigation under the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 into a complaint made by Miss Jane Brown, 31 Moray road, Port Glasgow, (C850/88).

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  No. The hon. Member has had a full report from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration who considered that his investigation had reached a satisfactory conclusion.

  Unemployment Benefit
  Mr Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many claimants of unemployment benefit will be denied benefit in the travel-to-work areas in the constituency of Roxburgh and Berwickshire by imposition of the £43 weekly earnings rule;

  (2) if he will list the proportion of claimants of unemployment benefit in each travel-to-work area in the United Kingdom who will be denied unemployment benefit by the new £43 weekly earnings rule.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  I regret that the information requested is not available.

  Mr Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the number of people who will be excluded from unemployment benefit by the new £43 weekly earnings rule.
  403
  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  It is estimated that, in any one week, around 5,000 people declare earnings in excess of £43 and will lose unemployment benefit.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will undertake a full review of benefits available to claimants of unemployment benefit to include the implications of new patterns of work for those claiming benefit.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  We have no plans to undertake a full review of unemployment benefit. We have recently introduced a number of changes to make the benefit more relevant to current needs. We are of course monitoring the effects of those changes.

  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will contact each of the people who lost their entitlement to unemployment benefit on 1 January 1989 to inform them that they are entitled to reclaim that benefit in line with section 16(1)(c) of the Interpretation Act 1978 and the previous decision of the Social Security Commissioner in paragraph 5 of case CG/069/1988 and in case Z/10/4811/Norwich.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  An appeal has been lodged with the Social Security Commissioner against the social security appeal tribunal's decision. It would not be appropriate to anticipate the outcome.

  Christmas Bonus
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what would have been the present amount of the pensioners' Christmas bonus if it had maintained its 1979 real value.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  The present amount of the Christmas bonus had it been raised by increases in prices since 1979 would have been £18.70.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  Discretion to make small-scale purchases of items of art is devolved to local managers and some initiatives for the commissioning of larger-scale murals for public waiting areas have taken place. The extent of expenditure and sponsorship in this and other areas of the arts is not normally separately identified, but our Newcastle central office carried out a special exercise and expenditure last year amounted to £4,359.

  Personal Pension Plans
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what steps he is taking to provide, under social security legislation, for special disclosure requirements by plan managers to those investing in unit-linked personal pension plans.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  As part of our response to the Occupational Pensions Board report we intend to review the disclosure requirements for occupational and personal pension schemes. This review will include information required by those investing in unit-linked personal pension plans.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what are his assumptions for low community charge calculations of the level of income of a couple, one of whom is in work and who have no dependent children or other dependants, below which they may be eligible for rebate on their community charge.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  The information requested is shown in the table.

  Assumed community charge per percent (£)

  Level of income per week (£)

  100

  84·72

  150

  94·95

  200

  105·17

  250

  115·40

  Notes:

  1. The income figure is the level at which the minimum Community Charge Benefit of 50p a week will be payable for a couple under pension age, one of whom is working, neither of whom is disabled, who have no dependants, and who have savings of less than £3,000.

  2. 1990–91 benefit rates have been used.

  Personal Injuries
  Mr. Colin Shepherd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security from what date the recovery scheme in section 22 of the Social Security Act 1989 will apply to compensation payments made for personal injuries; what amount is to be set for the lower limit of compensation payments below which offsetting will apply instead of recovery; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  The scheme will apply to any compensation payment made on or after 3 September 1990 where the injury occurred on or after 1 January 1989. The lower limit of compensation payments to which recovery will apply is £2,500 gross—that is before benefits have been deducted. This amount is substantially more than the figure suggested by Touche Ross and will reduce the number of cases to be dealt with by around 37 per cent. It recognises the representations made by the Association of British Insurers, the CBI, TUC and others about the lower limit. We expect to lay affirmative regulations before Parliament soon setting out the administrative details of the scheme.

  Computerisation
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security to what extent his Department's(a) budget and (b) staffing level has been cut for the year 1989–90 in the light of anticipated savings to be achieved through computerisation.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  The Department's administration budget for 1989–90 was settled during the 1988 public expenditure survey and published in the 1989 public expenditure Whie Paper (Cm 615). It reflected the wide range of the Department's activities, including its computerisation programme. If this programme had not been undertaken it is estimated that in the year 1989–90 the Department would have required 4,000 additional staff at a cost of some £42 million.

  Sick Pay
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his estimate of the number of people who would become eligible for(a) statutory sick pay and (b) sickness benefit if they were paid for the first three days of illness, and the cost of making such payments.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  I regret that the information requested is not available.

  Executive Agencies
  Mr Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what progress his Department has made towards establishing executive agencies; and what is the timetable for completion of each agency.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  The Resettlement Units Executive Agency was established in May 1989. We have also made a good deal of progress towards establishing the Information Technology Services Agency (ITSA) and National Insurance Contributions Unit (NICU), both of which are scheduled to commence in April 1990. The Social Security Benefits Agency is scheduled to commence in April 1991. Staff have been informed of progress.

  We expect the agencies to develop further after their launch as they gain experience and adjust their approach to management in line with the needs of their business. Establishment of the agencies is just the first step in improving service to the public and the cost-effectiveness of social security administration.

  Adoption
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many instances of complaint against local social security services he has received during the last five years from British citizens who have felt their efforts to adopt children from overseas have been hindered by lack of co-operation from social services staff.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  I have been asked to reply.

  The Department receives representations from time to time from people who find that local authorities are unable to provide advice and services in connection with the proposed adoption of children from overseas. People who contemplate this very serious step are especially in need of skilled advice and counselling. We would hope that this would be available from local authorities, bearing in mind the guidance issued by the Department in 1987 to introduce the comprehensive adoption service: the guidance stated that counselling of prospective adopters, including those who seek to adopt from overseas, should be provided as part of the service. It is particularly important that such people should know that arrangements to adopt a child from overseas should be made only through properly authorised agencies or charitable organisations.

WALES

  Natural Heritage
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list all those representations he has received from voluntary organisations in Wales in response to his 406
  proposed merger of the Countryside Commission and Nature Conservancy Council, indicating those which are opposed and those in favour.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  We have received 13 representations from voluntary organiisations in Wales on the general proposals. It is not possible clearly to state in all cases that particular organisations are opposed or in favour. A number of organisations have raised questions and made some criticisms but I am delighted that many other organisations, including the chairmen and chief officers of the national parks in Wales, the National Farmers Union committee for Wales, the advisory committees for Wales of the Nature Conservancy Council and the Countryside Commission, have all welcomed the proposals.

  Motor Neurone Disorders
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will establish a centre for the education of children with motor neurone disorders such as cerebral palsy; if he will visit the Peto Institute in Hungary; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Grist
  My hon. Friend the Minister of State responsible for the disabled announced on 15 December a Government contribution towards the establishment of a new international Peto institute. The Welsh Office has been associated with the discussions leading to that announcement. Subject to the detailed negotiations, Welsh children, along with others from the United Kingdom, will have access to available places at the institute.

  The Department is keeping in close touch with progress on the pilot conductive education project in Birmingham. Neither my right hon. Friend nor I have any current plans to visit Hungary but we are aware of the work of the Peto institute from reports of visits by other Government Ministers.

  Roads
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the amounts for road building in north Wales which encompasses the use of European Economic Community money.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  In 1988, £14 million was committed from the European regional development fund for road building projects in the counties of Gwynedd and Clwyd.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the new money for road schemes announced in his publication "A55: the Road to Opportunity".

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  The schemes to dual the A5 across Anglesey are being added to the trunk road improvement programme. Firm information on likely costs is not yet available. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answers I gave him on Thursday 7 December and Thursday 14 December regarding the A548 Dee crossing scheme.

  Schools (Ministerial Visits)
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the number of visits made this year, by county, to(a) nursery, primary and junior schools and (b) secondary schools by (i) the Secretary of State for Wales and (ii) the Minister of State, Welsh Office; and if he will name the schools involved.
  407
  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  During 1989 my right hon. Friend visited one comprehensive school and one independent school with an age range of seven to 18. In the same period I visited seven primary schools and six secondary schools. A summary of these visits shown in the following table:

  School

  Date

  Schools visits undertaken in 1989 by the Secretary of State for Wales

  Abersychan comprehensive school, Gwent

  27 June 1989

  Howells independent school for girls ( age range 7 to 18), South Glamorgan

  21 November 1989

  School visits undertaken in 1989 by the Minister of State for Wales

  Ysgol Morfa Rhiannedd (county primary), Gwynedd

  13 January 1989

  Ysgol Dyffryn Conwy secondary school, Gwynedd

  13 January 1989

  Kitchener county primary school, South , Glamorgan

  26 January 1989

  Fitzalan high school, South Glamorgan

  26 January 1989

  Glyncorrwg county primary school, West Glamorgan

  3 February 1989

  Cwm Tawe comprehensive school, West Glamorgan

  3 February 1989

  Ysgol Teilo Sant (county primary), Dyfed

  17 February 1989

  Ysgol Gyfun Bro Myrddin (secondary school), Dyfed

  28 April 1989

  Coed Cae comprehensive school, Dyfed

  17 February 1989

  Penywaun infant and junior schools, Mid Glamorgan

  24 February 1989

  Treorchy comprehensive school, Mid Glamorgan

  24 February 1989

  Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhymni (comprehensive), Mid Glamorgan

  31 November 1989

  Rhosgoch primary school, Powys

  1 December 1989

  Isle of Anglesey Road
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what proportion of money for dualling the Isle of Anglesey road will come from(a) the European Economic Community, (b) the local authority and (c) central government.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  The A5 across Anglesey is a trunk road and duelling will be funded by central Government. At present there are no proposals to apply for EC funding.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales on what basis of assumed expenditure was his estimate made regarding the likely levels of community charge in the Arfon borough council and Cyngor Dosbarth Dwyfor areas for 1990–1991.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  The assumed expenditure levels (consistent with standard spending assessments) of £6·002 million for Arfon and £3·544 million for Dwyfor are based on 1989–90 budgets, adjusted for changes in functions and funding arrangements and inflated to 1990–91 levels.

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assumption he made of the amount of income that(a) Arfon borough council and (b) Cyngor Dosbarth Dwyfor, would receive from the distribution of business rate when he assessed that their personal community charge per capita would amount to £156 and £155 respectively.
  408
  Mr. Peter Walker
  My provisional community charge estimates of £156 for the Arfon area and £155 for the Dwyfor area assumed:

  (a) £1,361,000 and

  (b) £758,000

  These figures were updated by my statement to the House on 18 December 1989 to:

  (a) £1,347,000 and

  (b) £733,000

  I now estimate community charge for 1990–91 to be £153 in the Arfon area and £149 in the Dwyfor area if councils spend in line with my assumptions.

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his estimate of the maximum charge per annum on community charge payers in Wales arising from the charge levied on account of the expenditure of a community council.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  I have made no such estimate.

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the relationship between those areas, which have been granted transitional relief for the community charge for 1990–91, and the levels of per capita household incomes, and the indices for deprivation for such areas; and whether any area of the Dwyfor district has met the criteria to be granted such transitional relief.

  Mr Peter Walker
  Transitional relief is calculated by comparing average rate bills for 1989–90 in community areas with my estimates of community charge levels. As such the scheme is intended to moderate the increases community chargepayers would otherwise face in moving from the domestic rating system. Income levels and indices of deprivation are thus not relevant to the operation of these transitional arrangements.

  Provisional details of those communities who may be entitled to transitional relief were placed in the Library on 18 December 1989. No communities in Dwyfor were shown as receiving relief.

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what proportion of community charge payers in Wales live in those communities eligible for transitional relief by way of additional grant; what is the total number of such people; and what is the maximum increase that will be made by way of individuals payment in such communities, on the basis of his statement to the House of 10 December.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to my statement to the House on 18 December. Provisional details of communities which may be entitled to transitional relief have been placed in the Library.

  No community area will face a charge more than a threshold amount (about £20) above the average domestic rate bill per adult in 1989–90 (assuming that councils spend in line with the settlement).

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what will be the total payment to be made by non-domestic ratepayers in Wales in 1990–91; and what is the total payment to be made by these ratepayers in 1989–90.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  The total payment to be made by non-domestic ratepayers in Wales in 1990–91 is estimated to be £446 million, of which £3 million will be retained by charging authorities to meet the costs of collection. No
  409
  direct comparison can be made with the 1989–90 payment because of changes in the structure of exemptions and reliefs, and different arrangements for empty property rating, all of which take effect for the first time in 1990–91. The Welsh national non-domestic rating multiplier has been set such that the average business ratepayer will pay broadly the same in 1990–91, in real terms, as in 1989–90.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  These are the responsibility of the Welsh Arts Council and Design Council respectively, neither of which is funded by the Welsh Office.

  Regional Selective Assistance
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will give details of(a) the total amount of regional selective assistance paid out by his Department since its introduction and (b) the average sum granted for each project; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  Expenditure on regional selective assistance' in Wales from the inception of the scheme to 31 March 1989 was £306 million. The average grant value2 was almost £200,000.

  1The expenditure quoted comprises payments of grants and loans (until 1979–80) under section 7 of the Industrial Development Act 1982, exchange risk losses on European loans (since 1981–82) and payments under the in-plant training scheme (since 1984–85) and the business improvement services scheme (since 1983–84).

  1 Based on the cumulative number and value of offers of section 7 assistance accepted to 31 March 1989 published in appendix 6, table 3 of the Industrial Development Act annual report for 1988–89.

  Initiatives
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will consider a similar initiative for west Wales to that in operation in the valleys and proposed for north Wales.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  The Welsh Office, the Welsh Development Agency, the Development Board for Rural Wales, the Wales Tourist Board, the local authorities and many others are all working together with the private sector further to develop the economy of west Wales. I am glad to say that unemployment in Dyfed has fallen by 45 per cent. since the last general election.

  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will give details of the amount of development rural initiative venture and enterprise grant paid out by his Department in each year since its introduction; and if he will make a statement as to the future of the grant.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  The development of rural initiative venture and enterprise grant scheme is operated by the Welsh Development Agency (WDA) and the Development Board for Rural Wales (DBRW) in their respective territories. Since its introduction initially on an experimental basis, in March 1986, these bodies have made grant payments shown in the following tables:
  410
  Following an independent evaluation of the experimental scheme it was reintroduced in September 1989. I refer my hon. Friend to answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (Mr. Raffan) on 27 July 1989 for further details.

  WDA£

  DBRW£

  1986–87

  250,000

  32,361

  1987–88

  420,000

  91,938

  1988–89

  430,000

  117,288

  Rural Conversion Grant
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will give details of the amount of rural conversion grant paid out by his Department each year since its introduction; and if he will make a statement as to the future of the grant.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  The rural conversion grant scheme is operated by the Welsh Development Agency (WDA) and the Development Board of Rural Wales (DBRW) in their respective territories. Since the scheme's inception these bodies have made grant payments shown in the following table:

  WDA

  DBRW

  £

  £

  1983–84

  —

  18,900

  1984–85

  —

  17,780

  1985–86

  163,000

  39,500

  1986–87

  230,000

  21,655

  1987–88

  366,000

  15,612

  1988–89

  967,000

  86,784

  Urban Investment Grant
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will give details of the urban investment grant paid out by his Department since its introduction; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  Since the introduction of UIG in April 1989, 10 projects have been approved with a total grant award of nearly £2·8 million. This is expected to bring forward over £10·3 million of private sector investment and to create over 600 permanent and nearly 270 temporary construction jobs.

  Cardiff Bay
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State of Wales (1) if he will place a copy in the Library of letters of warning sent by him in 1989, to the chairman of the board of Cardiff Bay development corporation about development in the Cardiff Bay development corporation designated area;

  (2) if he will publish his correspondende with the chairman of the board of Cardiff Bay development corporation asking the corpoartion to expedite development in the bay area;

  (3) what requests have been sent by him to the chairman of the board of Cardiff Bay development corporation to expedite development in the Cardiff Bay development corporation.
  411
  Mr. Peter Walker
  I have not made such a request. I am delighted with the progress that is being made to the benefit of Cardiff and of Wales, progress that should have the support of all Welsh Members of Parliament.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his most up to date estimate of total jobs lost to the Cardiff bay area subsequent to the breakdown of negotiations between developers and the Cardiff Bay development corporation in(a) 1988 and (b)

  Mr. Peter Walker
  Negotiations between developers and the Cardiff Bay development corporation are entirely a matter for the corporation. The development of the Cardiff bay area will create many thousands of jobs over the coming years and splendid progress has been made to see that this objective is achieved.

  Urban Programme
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list concerning the urban programme the(a) community and social provision and (b) voluntary and independent schemes grants and projects in each of the boroughs and districts of each of the counties of Wales giving their cash backing, employment consequences and objectives for 1988 and 1989.

  Mr. Grist
  This information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the Clwyd urban programme and urban development moneys and schemes for 1988 and 1989; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Grist
  The information as requested is shown in the following tables:

  Urban Programme 1988–89

  Approved costs

  Local authority and scheme

  Capital £

  Revenue £

  Clwyd County Council

  Welfare Benefits Advice Centre

  0

  50,000

  Rhyl and District Community Action Team

  0

  50,000

  Greenfield Valley Youth Centre

  0

  55,850

  Wrexham Technology Park

  27,500

  0

  Deeside Women's Aid

  0

  501

  IT Social Worker-Rhuddlan

  0

  4,597

  Rhyl and District Women's Aid

  0

  1,665

  Delyn Community Agency

  0

  120,167

  Employment of Family Support Worker, Wrexham

  0

  12,181

  Community Development and Local Authority Partnership Project

  0

  83,600

  Employment of Adult Worker, Youth Worker and an Education Home Adviser in the Holywell/Bagillt and Peulwys/Mochdre areas

  0

  27,693

  Employment of 2 Basic Education Co-ordinators for adults

  0

  34,485

  Holiday Projects

  0

  29,500

  Alyn Deeside District Council

  Former Catheralls Brickworks, Pinfold Lane, Buckley, Refurbishment and Redevelopment (Phase 1)

  200,000

  0

  Conversion of Infirmary wing to elderly and bedridden accommodation at Poor Clare Collentine Monastery, Hawarden

  16,000

  0

  Employment of full-time worker at Deeside Women's Aid

  0

  13,627

  412

  Approved costs

  Local authority and scheme

  Capital £

  Revenue £

  Environmental Improvements at River Lane, Saltney (capital slippage)

  40,000

  0

  Holiday projects

  0

  10,000

  Colwyn Borough Council

  Colwyn Community Environmental Improvement Scheme

  0

  10,920

  Community Development Programme

  0

  19,238

  Holiday Projects

  0

  4,000

  Delyn Borough Council

  Further Development of Delyn Enterprise Zone at Greenfield Park

  250,000

  0

  Greenfield Valley Youth Enterprise Centre

  0

  55,850

  Delyn Community Environmental Improvement Scheme

  0

  44,440

  Delyn Women's Aid Support Worker

  0

  13,561

  Expansion of Delyn Enterprise Agency

  0

  45,536

  Assistant Development Officer, Greenfield Valley

  0

  17,465

  Greenfield Valley Development Team

  0

  13,993

  Holiday Projects

  0

  8,500

  Glyndwr District Council

  Contact Warden Scheme, Llangollen

  0

  8,500

  Establishment of an Emergency Alarm and Contact Warden System, Trevor

  0

  7,820

  Rhuddland Borough Council

  Land Preparation for Industrial Development at Prestatyn (Capital Slippage)

  10,000

  0

  Rhyl and District Women's Aid Support Team

  0

  11,184

  Rhuddlan Environmental Improvement Scheme

  0

  31,350

  Wrexham Maelor Borough Council

  Redwither Industrial Estate— refurbishment and infrastructure works

  275,000

  0

  Wrexham Adventure Playground Association—Employment of Play Development staff.

  0

  11,000

  Wrexham Adventure Playground Association—Employment of Assistant Organiser

  0

  12,600

  Wrexham Free Church Federal Council.

  0

  1,722

  Wrexham Citizens Advice Bureau.

  0

  40,107

  Wrexham Housing Aid Centre

  0

  30,322

  Wrexham Adventure Playground Association.

  0

  22,572

  Community Litter Abatement Scheme

  0

  29,072

  Rhosymedre Pre-start and Training Workshop

  0

  54,246

  Holiday Projects

  0

  10,500

  Urban Programme 1989–90

  Clwyd County Council

  Shotton and Connah's Quay Business Enterprise Centre

  200,000

  0

  Delyn Community Agency

  0

  100,000

  Provision of a Centre for the Elderly at Rhosllanerchrugog

  200,000

  0

  Business Information Network

  0

  18,500

  Family Support Worker Wrexham

  0

  13,257

  Community Development and Local Authority Partnership Project

  0

  91,350

  413

  Approved costs

  Local authority and scheme

  Capital £

  Revenue £

  Employment of Adult Worker, Youth Worker and an Education Home Adviser in the Holywell/Bagillt and Peulwys/Mochdre areas

  0

  29,078

  Employment of 2 basic Education Co-ordinators for adults

  0

  38,672

  Welfare Benefits Advice Centre

  0

  54,600

  Rhyl and District Community Action Team

  0

  54,600

  Greenfield Valley Youth Enterprise Centre

  0

  60,743

  Wrexham Technology Park (Capital Slippage)

  135,000

  0

  Holiday Projects

  0

  29,500

  Alyn and Deeside District Council

  Refurbishment and Redevelopment of former Catheralls Brickworks

  250,000

  0

  Holiday Projects

  0

  10,000

  Colwyn Borough Council

  Crossroads Care Attendant Scheme

  750

  20,000

  Community Development Programme

  0

  20,200

  Holiday Projects

  0

  4,000

  Delyn Borough Council

  Further Development of Delyn Enterprise Zone and Greenfield Park

  450,000

  0

  Assistant Development Officer, Greenfield Valley

  0

  13,991

  Greenfield Valley Development Team

  0

  14,693

  Delyn Community Environmental Improvement Scheme

  0

  51,149

  Delyn Women's Aid Support worker

  0

  14,239

  Greenfield Youth Enterprise Centre

  0

  69,861

  Holiday Projects

  0

  8,500

  Glyndwr District Council

  Contact Warden Scheme, Llangollen

  0

  8,448

  Rhuddlan Borough Council

  St. Asaph Business Park

  200,000

  0

  Rhuddlan Environmental improvement Scheme

  0

  32,918

  Rhyl and District Women's Aid Support Team

  0

  12,227

  Holiday Projects

  0

  4,200

  Wrexham Maelor Borough Council

  Redwither Industrial Estate

  250,000

  0

  Refurbishment to Kingsmill Centre

  50,000

  0

  Shelter Wales Housing Aid Service

  0

  30,322

  Wrexham Citizens Advice Bureau

  0

  40,107

  Wrexham Adventure Playground Association

  0

  6,300

  Night Shelter for the single homeless

  0

  1,491

  Wrexham Adventure Playgroup Association

  0

  26,565

  Community Litter Abatement Scheme

  0

  31,289

  Rhosymedre Pre-Start and Training Workshop

  0

  60,353

  Wrexham Adventure Playground Association-Play Development Staff

  0

  12,915

  Holiday Projects

  0

  11,500

  414

  Urban Development Grant

  Project

  Total UDG awarded

  Spend 1988–89

  Spend 1989–90

  £ million

  £ million

  £ million

  Supermarket and Car Park Development at Connah's Quay

  0·325

  0·041

  —

  Factory Units at Broncoed Industrial Estate, Mold

  0·132

  0·132

  —

  Shops and Office Development at Earl Road, Mold

  0·104

  0·079

  0·025

  Industrial Units at Aber Park, Flint

  0·085

  0·021

  —

  Engineering Park at Sandycroft

  0·227

  —

  0·215

  Second Homes
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on second homes in Wales.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given on 26 May by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State.

  Roadbuilding
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is(a) the amount of transport supplementary grant he is making available to county councils in local roadbuilding, (b) the amount estimated by his Department to be used in local roadholding from revenue support grant, (c) the amount for local roadbuilding from capital receipts and (d) the amount for local roadbuilding from the community charge; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  Transport grant support is given only to eligible (over £5 million) schemes. The amount of grant to be paid in 1990–91 is £26·8 million. The £86·6 million gross capital for roads and transport for 1990–91 which my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State announced on 29 November assumes that authorities will spend £0·6 million of their capital receipts. Revenue support grant is unhypothecated and it is for local authorities to decide their own spending priorities: similarly no estimate is available of the amount for local roadbuilding from the community charge.

  Council House Building
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what measures he will take to encourage council house building for 1990.

  Mr. Grist
  It is for local authorities to decide about housing priorities, taking account of local needs and achieving value for money.

  Housebuilding
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the number of private housebuilding starts for 1987, 1988 and 1989; what is the predicted start number for 1990; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Grist
  Private housebuilding starts in Wales were:
  415

  Number

  1987

  8,741

  1988

  10,892

  Figures are not yet available for 1989 as the year has not yet ended but 8,084 were started in the first nine months. Forecasts for 1990 are a matter for the private housebuilding industry.

  Salmonella
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to hold a public inquiry allowing tests at public health laboratories in the wake of the Clwyd salmonella outbreak.

  Mr. Grist
  I have already announced that the Department is conducting an internal review.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he proposes to publish his findings following his internal inquiry into the Clwyd salmonella outbreak.

  Mr. Grist
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave him on 20 December.

  Housing Revenue Accounts Subsidy
  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he will announce his initial housing revenue account subsidy determinations for 1990–91.

  Mr. Grist
  The housing revenue account subsidy determinations for 1990–91 have been made today. Every local housing authority in Wales has been sent a copy of the determinations together with provisional figures on which its subsidy entitlement will he based. The figures for each individual authority are subject to change in the light of new information supplied by the authority itself. Copies of the determinations and of the provisional figures for all authorities are being placed in the Library and the Vote Office.

  The new housing revenue account subsidy was introduced by the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. It replaces the existing main housing subsidy, the rent rebate element in housing benefit subsidy and the element in rate support grant related to authorities' own housing costs.

  Each authority's subsidy will he determined in accordance with the formulae prescribed in the determinations. For 1990–91, the formula assumes that there will be a national increase of 2 per cent. in gross rent income together with an allowance of 5 per cent. for inflation. However, unlike previous years, the determinations provide for different guideline rent increases in different authorities instead of a uniform increase for all authorities receiving subsidy. The rent guidelines for 1990–91 are set by reference to the value of each authority's housing stock.

  For 1990–91, the subsidy formula provides for a 3 per cent. real terms increase in the provision for management and maintenance expenditure. The allowance will be related to authorities' past expenditure.

  The subsidy formula also takes into account the full cost of loan charges and of rent rebates, subject to safeguards to prevent double subsidy and to provide an incentive for the efficient operation of the rent rebate scheme.

  Rechem (Pontypool)
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will now arrange for further soil samples to be taken around the Rechem incinerator at Pontypool designed to detect polychlorinated hiphenyls at levels significantly lower than 200 parts per billion.

  Mr. Grist
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: I am considering what further action may be necessary in the light of the recent results of monitoring undertaken by the Welsh Office in the Pontypool area.

  Air Pollution
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what action he intends to take following the identification by Her Majesty's inspectors of pollution of local contamination above background levels by polychlorinated biphenyls at Ordnance Survey grid reference number SH 5101: and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what action he intends to take, following the identification by Her Majesty's inspectors of pollution of local contamination above the established background levels by dioxins and furans at Ordnance Survey grid reference (a) SO 5101, (b) SN 5101 and (c) SH 5151; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Grist
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply given today by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State at the Environment Department in relation to levels at locations in England.

  Earnings
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish in the Official Report tables showing the proportion of (1) manual, (2) non-manual and (3) all full-time employees earning less than (a) £157, (b) 160, (c) £163. and (d) half average earnings a week, for (i) men, (ii) women, and (iii) all full-time employees excluding overtime, shift and public borrowing requirements premia, in each county in Wales.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  [holding answer 11 December 1989]: I shall write to the hon. Gentleman.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  European Monetary System
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with other European Community Ministers regarding the European monetary system and political co-operation; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maude
  European monetary union was discussed briefly at the Foreign Affairs Council held on 18 and 19 December in Brussels, and political co-operation at the European Council held in Strasbourg on 8 and 9 December.

  Vietnamese Boat People
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether identity passes are to be provided for Vietnamese boat people returning to Vietnam.
  417
  Mr. Maude
  All Vietnamese citizens carry identity cards containing a photograph and thumb print. We have no reason to believe that identity cards will not be issued to the returnees. This is one of the issues which will be raised in the course of the embassy's monitoring exercise.

  Bulgaria
  Mr. Stern
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make all information in the hands of the Government available to the Lukanor inquiries into corruption in Bulgaria under its former rulers.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  We have received no such request from the Bulgarian authorities.

  Diplomatic Bags
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to non-European Community countries urging them to permit the non-intrusive searching of diplomatic bags.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  None.

  Falklands Fishing Company
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what response he is making to the report by Mr. Stewart Boyd QC in relation to Mr. Brian Cummings over Falklands Fishing Company losses; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Mr. Stewart Boyd QC was commissioned by the Governor of the Falkland Islands to inquire into the affairs of Seamount Limited, a joint venture between Stanley Fisheries Ltd., a subsidiary of the Falkland Islands Development Corporation, and Seaboard Offshore Ltd., a UK company.

  The report's contents and findings are entirely a matter for the Falkland Islands Government who are responsible for the operation of the Falkland Islands Development Corporation.

  Departmental Papers
  Mr. Manus
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which of his Department's papers have been made available to the public since 1 October 1988.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Between 1 October 1988 and 30 September 1989, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office—excluding the Overseas Development Administration—made the following papers available to the public on request:

  Africa

  Britain in Southern Africa

  Britain's Voice in South Africa

  Libya: External Relations and Activities

  Namibia Chronology: March 1988-March 1989

  Soviet Priorities in Africa

  Americas and Antarctica

  Antarctic Treaty System

  Antarctic Minerals Convention and Its Role in Protecting the Antarctic Environment

  Britain and Argentina: Attempts at Normalisation

  Cuban Economy

  Democracy and Regional Integration in South America

  Drugs in Latin America

  418
  Asia and Pacific

  Afghanistan: Long Road to Recovery

  Afghanistan: Continuing Conflict

  China's Energy Prospects

  China's External Economic Relations

  Fiji Coups, 1987: Context and Chronology

  General Information on Taiwan

  North Korea: Forty Years On

  Religion in China

  Soviet Interest in the Pacific Region

  Vietnam: Current Problems

  Europe

  CSCE: Implications of the Vienna Meeting

  Role of the Western European Union

  Western European Union

  Near and Middle East

  Demography and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa

  Guide to Arab-Israel Peace Plans

  Intifada: The Palestinian Uprising

  Lebanon: Background to Current Events

  Palestine Liberation Organisation

  Soviet Union and Eastern Europe

  CMEA at a Standstill

  Common Euopean Home: New Thinking

  Comparison of Soviet and Chinese Economic Reforms

  Crisis in Soviet Agriculture

  East European Energy Prospects

  Party and Government Leadership of the Soviet Union

  Soviet Communist Party's External Propaganda Activities

  Soviet Economic Reforms

  Soviet Energy Prospects

  Soviet Propaganda Organisations: A Survey

  Soviet Union: More Milestones

  Disarmament

  Arms Control and Disarmament Quarterly Review No. 10

  Arms Control and Disarmament Quarterly Review No. 11

  Arms Control and Disarmament Quarterly Review No. 12

  Arms Control and Disarmament Quarterly Review No. 13

  Arms Control and Disarmament Quarterly Review No. 14

  Arms Control and Disarmament Quarterly Review No. 15

  Chemical and Biological Weapons: Negotiations for an International Ban

  Political Impact of the Process of Arms Control and Disarmament

  The West's Arms Control Objectives and Priorities

  Economic

  Aid to the Developing World

  World Food Supplies

  World Shipping Prospects

  International

  Annual Review of Consular Work, 1988

  Destablising Effect of the International Drugs Trade in Developing Countries

  International Drug Trafficking: Attacking the Profits

  International Monitoring of Human Rights

  International Parliamentary Union: A Century of Parliamentary Diplomacy

  Non-Aligned Movement: Search for More Effective Role

  1958 Geneva Conference of Experts on the Prevention of Surprise Attack

  Review of Consular Work in 1987

  Saving the Ozone Layer: A Summary of the London Conference

  The 1989 World Youth Festival: Further Preparations

  World Youth Festivals: Retrospect and Prospect

  Foreign Affairs Council
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will publish a statement on the outcome of the Foreign Affairs Council on 18 and 19 December.

  Mr. Hurd
  I represented the United Kingdom at the Foreign Affairs Council and at a working dinner with the Soviet Foreign Minister in Brussels on 18 December. My
  419
  hon. Friend, the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, represented the United Kingdom at a joint EC/EFTA Ministerial meeting on 19 December.

  The Council began with a discussion of follow-up to decisions taken at the Strasbourg European Council, in particular on the European bank for reconstruction and development, and on economic and monetary issues.

  The Council took note of the Commission's report on meetings with the US Administration on 14 and 15 December and confirmed the importance it attaches to close EC/US relations. I and other Ministers warmly welcomed Secretary of State Baker's wish, expressed in his recent speech in Berlin, to see a further strengthening of the United State's relationship with the Community.

  On specific EC/US issues, Ministers discussed the implications of the findings of the GATT panel on the US complaint against the EC's oilseeds regime, and expressed concern at lack of progress in the dispute over import of meat treated with hormones.

  The Council then discussed the Community's relations with Japan. It also agreed to the submission in Geneva on 20 December of a paper on long-term agricultural reform in the Uruguay round.

  The Council called for early consideration of a mandate for the negotiation of a trade and commercial and economic co-operation agreement with the GDR. It also took note of a Commission report, completed on 18 December, on Turkey's application for EC membership and agreed that it should be examined in depth.

  The Council also approved the Commission's negotiating mandate for a trade and commercial and economic co-operation agreement with Argentina and agreed a mandate for the negotiation of a second stage trade agreement with the Gulf Co-operation Council. The Commission informed the Council that negotiations with Andorra on a customs union had been successfully completed. The Council also reached a satisfactory agreement on the Poseidon programme of support for the French overseas departments.

  On 18 December, the Commission and presidency, on behalf of the Community, signed a trade and commercial and economic co-operation agreement with the Soviet Union, and a second agreement on textiles. The co-operation agreement is an important landmark in the EC's relations with the Soviet Union, symbolic of the new relationships emerging between the Community and eastern and central European countries as political reforms and economic restructuring take hold. The agreement lays the foundations for a stronger EC relationship with the Soviet Union, which we welcome. Its significance, and the importance of developments in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, was noted at the subsequent dinner with Mr. Shevardnadze.

  On 19 December EC and EFTA Ministers agreed to open substantive negotiations on a new, more structured relationship in the first half of next year. Our joint aim is to extend as far as possible the single market to include EFTA. The United Kingdom fully supports this important decision, and will continue to play a full and constructive role in the negotiating process: a successful outcome would open the way to a new stage in EC-EFTA relations, benefitting all parties, and reflecting the Community's commitment to a liberal single market, open to all.

  The text of the joint conclusions agreed by EC and EFTA Ministers on 19 December will be placed in the Library of the House.

  Central American Presidents
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information he has received on the outcome of the meeting of Central American Presidents in San Isidro de Coronado, Costa Rica, on 10 to 12 December; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  We have been encouraged by the positive outcome of the meeting, which condemned armed action and terrorism by rebel forces in the region and expressed solid support for the democratically elected Government of President Cristiani. I have placed in the Library of the House a copy of the five Presidents' statement of 12 December.

SCOTLAND

  Health Service
  Mr. Dewar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give for each year since 1970 the number of patients on hospital in-patient waiting lists in Scotland at 30 March and 30 September of each year.

  Mr. Rifkind
  The information available is set out in the table.

  Number of persons on waiting lists for NHS hospitals at 31 March and 30 September, Scotland

  Year

  31 March

  30 September

  1970

  57,305

  51,482

  1971

  51,675

  48,066

  1972

  n/a

  52,468

  1973

  n/a

  61,079

  1974

  n/a

  56,182

  1975

  n/a

  53,770

  1976

  54,442

  52,765

  1977

  53,974

  54,715

  1978

  56,987

  61,481

  1979

  76,968

  71,247

  1980

  70,195

  67,387

  1981

  67,908

  65,228

  1982

  66,880

  86,365

  1983

  96,933

  86,338

  1984

  85,543

  83,077

  1985

  79,262

  77,677

  1986

  81,249

  80,732

  1987

  81,324

  77,772

  1988

  67,226

  63,569

  1989

  61,011

  —

  The statistical system on which these figures are collected including the revision which took place in 1988 is explained in ISD Statistical Bulletin 1/88, a copy of which is in the Library.

  Scottish Information Office
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give details of recent changes in office accommodation in the Scottish information office corridor of New St. Andrew's house.

  Mr. Rifkind
  There have been no recent changes.

  BBC Scotland
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) if he will list the occasions on which each Scottish Office Minister, in each of the past 12 months, has required the Scottish information office to make representations about alleged programme bias to BBC Scotland;

  (2) if he will make a statement on recent correspondence between BBC Scotland and the Scottish Office concerning alleged editorial bias;

  (3) what representations he has made to BBC Scotland concerning the integrity of coverage accorded to his Department by it; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Rifkind
  The Scottish Office has had need to make various representations to the BBC on these matters. So far as alleged programme bias is concerned, it is essential that the BBC charter is applied throughout the United Kingdom in a consistent manner.

  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what distribution was given to recent correspondence between Mr. Jack Regan of BBC Scotland, and Mr. Donald Stewart, of the Scottish information office.

  Mr. Rifkind
  As with all correspondence, it was distributed to those within the Scottish Office who appeared to have an interest.

  Correspondence
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make it his policy to ensure that correspondence addressed to the Scottish Office is dealt with only from within the Scottish Office and that none is referred for answer to any party organisation.

  Mr. Rifkind
  It is Scottish Office policy to reply to all correspondence correctly addressed to it. Correspondence not falling properly within the responsibilities of the Scottish Office will normally be forwarded to whatever other body appears to be the correct recipient.

  Trials
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if, pursuant to his answer of 12 December,Official Report, column 558, he will list each of the sheriff courts in which the number of summary criminal trials adjourned in the period 1 January to 30 September 1989 due to lack of court time exceeded 5 per cent. of the total number of trials set down in the period; and if, in each case, he will give the actual number of trials so adjourned and the percentage of the total number of trials set down.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The list of courts is as follows.

  Column 1

  Column 2

  Column 3

  Column 4

  1990–91 Rate Poundage Pre-UBR Reduction

  1990–91 Rate Poundage Pre-UBR Reduction

  Reduction to Ratepayer

  Region + District Reduction

  p

  p

  p

  p

  Borders

  38·4

  36·0

  -2·4

  —

  Central

  44·5

  41·7

  -2·8

  —

  Dumfries and Galloway

  40·9

  38·3

  -2·6

  —

  Fife

  49·2

  46·1

  -3·1

  —

  Grampian

  36·5

  34·2

  -2·3

  —

  Highland

  44·1

  41·3

  -2·8

  —

  Lothian

  50·6

  47·5

  -3·1

  —

  422
  1 January 1989 to31 March 1989

  Haddington1

  Alloa

  Stirling

  1 April 1989 to 30 June 1989

  Falkirk1

  Stirling1

  Haddington1

  1 July 1989 to 30 September 1989

  Stirling

  Dunfermline1

  Falkirk1

  Dumfries1

  1 Indicates that target not met for only part of 3 month period.

  Information on the actual number of trials adjourned and the percentage of the total number of trials set down is not held centrally.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Alan Stewart
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on non-domestic rates in 1990–91.

  Mr. Rifkind
  In my statement to the House on 26 July about the revenue support grant settlement for 1990–91, 1 announced that I intended to reduce the rate bill for Scottish business next year by £80 million below what it would otherwise have been. I have now decided to apply this sum to reduce the rate poundage for all local authorities by 6·25 per cent. This will mean that all non-domestic ratepayers throughout Scotland will benefit from this further move to reduce their burden. The table shows the rate poundage which I intend to prescribe for each local authority in an order which I shall lay before Parliament early in the new year. The table also indicates the extent of the reduction in poundage at an individual ratepayer level as a result of our policy.

  It is implicit in our policy that, over a period, the 40 per cent. derating which at present applies to manufacturing and freight industry in Scotland should be eliminated. But my intention is that the phasing out of industrial derating should be co-ordinated with the phasing in of a unified business rate north and south of the border. This will give manufacturing and freight industry the assurance that the effect of reducing the level of derating will in any particular year be neutral. For all other business sectors, the: reduction will be entirely beneficial. Having regard to my decision to reduce rate poundages by 6·25 per cent., I intend to set the level of industrial derating next year to 35 per cent., a decrease of 5 per cent. on the present level. The position will be reassessed each year until a unified business rate has been achieved and industrial derating has been eliminated entirely.
  423

  Column 1

  Column 2

  Column 3

  Column 4

  1990–91 Rate Poundage Pre-UBR Reduction

  1990–91 Rate Poundage Pre-UBR Reduction

  Reduction to Ratepayer

  Region + District Reduction

  p

  p

  p

  p

  Strathclyde

  49·1

  46·0

  -3·1

  —

  Tayside

  45·9

  43·0

  -2·9

  —

  Orkney

  41·9

  39·3

  -2·6

  -2·6

  Shetland

  39·6

  37·1

  -2·5

  -2·5

  Western Isles

  61·5

  57·6

  -3·9

  -3·9

  Berwickshire

  8·0

  7·5

  -0·5

  -2·9

  Ettrick and Lauderdale

  9·1

  8·5

  -0·6

  -3·0

  Roxburgh

  10·1

  9·4

  -0·7

  -3·1

  Tweeddale

  7·7

  7·2

  -0·5

  2·9

  Clackmannan

  15·9

  14·9

  -1·0

  -3·8

  Falkirk

  13·0

  12·2

  -0·8

  -3·6

  Stirling

  19·3

  18·1

  -1·2

  -4·0

  Annandale and Eskdale

  9·7

  9·1

  -0·6

  -3·2

  Nithsdale

  9·7

  9·1

  -0·6

  -3·2

  Stewartry

  8·4

  7·9

  -0·5

  -3·1

  Wigtown

  7·9

  7·4

  -0·5

  -3·1

  Dunfermline

  10·8

  10·1

  -0·7

  -3·8

  Kirkcaldy

  13·4

  12·6

  -0·8

  -3·9

  North East Fife

  12·0

  11·3

  -0·7

  -3·8

  Aberdeen City

  11·7

  11·0

  -0 7

  -3·0

  Banff and Buchan

  10·5

  9·8

  -0·7

  -3·0

  Gordon

  8·4

  7·9

  -0·5

  -2·8

  Kincardine and Deeside

  6·9

  6·5

  -0·4

  -2·7

  Moray

  8·8

  8·2

  -0·6

  -2·9

  Badenoch and Strathspey

  6·7

  6·3

  -0·4

  -3·2

  Caithness

  10·5

  9·8

  -0·7

  -3·5

  Inverness

  8·0

  7·5

  -0·5

  -3·3

  Lochaber

  12·1

  11·4

  -0·7

  -3·5

  Nairn

  6·7

  6·3

  -0·4

  -3·2

  Ross and Cromarty

  10·5

  9·8

  -0·7

  -3·5

  Skye and Lochalsh

  10·1

  9·4

  -0·7

  -3·5

  Sutherland

  7·5

  7·1

  -0·4

  -3·2

  East Lothian

  14·3

  13·4

  -0CC9

  -4·0

  Edinburgh City

  14·0

  13·1

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Midlothian

  14·3

  13·4

  -0·9

  -4·0

  West Lothian

  12·6

  11·8

  -0·8

  -3·9

  Argyll and Bute

  15·9

  14·9

  -1·0

  -4·1

  Bearsden and Milngavie

  10·9

  10·8

  -0·6

  -3·7

  Clydebank

  16·3

  15·3

  -1·0

  -4·1

  Clydesdale

  14·1

  13·2

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Cumbernauld and Kilsyth

  13·9

  13·0

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Cumnock and Doon Valley

  14·3

  13·4

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Cunninghame

  17·2

  16·1

  -1·1

  -4·2

  Dumbarton

  15·9

  14·9

  -1·0

  -4·1

  East Kilbride

  12·0

  11·2

  -0·8

  -3·9

  Eastwood

  8·4

  7·9

  -0·5

  -3 6

  Glasgow City

  22·3

  20·9

  -1·4

  -4·5

  Hamilton

  15·1

  14·2

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Inverclyde

  13·4

  12·6

  -0·8

  -3·9

  Kilmarnock and Loudoun

  13·9

  13·0

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Kyle and Carrick

  14·3

  13·4

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Monklands

  15·1

  14·2

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Motherwell

  13·7

  12·9

  -0·8

  -3·9

  Renfrew

  15·1

  14·2

  -0·9

  -4·0

  Strathkelvin

  13·4

  12·6

  -0·8

  -3·9

  Angus

  11·3

  10·6

  -0·7

  -3·6

  Dundee City

  18-1

  16·9

  -1·7

  -4·1

  Perth and Kinross

  11·7

  11·0

  -0·7

  -3·6

  Notes:

  1. Column 1 shows rate poundages which would have been required in 1990–91 were it not for the Government's Unified Business Rate policy.

  2. Column 2 shows the actual rate poundages for 1990–91 which the Secretary of State intends to prescribe following the £80 million UBR reduction.

  3. Column 3 shows the reduction in poundages at individual payer level.

  Mr. Bill Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on his proposed community charge transitional relief scheme.

  Mr. Rifkind
  I have today sent to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities a paper describing the 424
  conclusions I have drawn after consultation with it. I intend to lay regulations in the new year which will provide for the introduction of the scheme.

  Electricity Boards
  Mr. Stewart
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to receive the annual reports and accounts for 1988–89 of the Scottish electricity boards; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Rifkind
  I have now received the annual reports and accounts of the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board and the South of Scotland electricity board. These have been laid before the House. Notwithstanding the position shown in the accounts at 31 March 1989, I have confirmed to the boards, with the agreement of Treasury that they shall continue to have access to advances which can be made by me under section 24(1) of the Electricity (Scotland) Act 1979 subject to the limit set out in section 29(1) of that Act, as amended, until the transfer date defined in section 67(4) of the Electricity Act 1989.

  Nursery Education
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what extra resources he is proposing to devote to the promotion, development and provision of local authority nursery places in Scotland; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what is his policy regarding promoting an increase in local education authority provision of nursery places in Scotland;

  (3) what research he is currently undertaking to estimate the demand for local authority nursery places in Scotland;

  (4) what targets he has set for the increase in provision of local authority nursery education over the next five years.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: It is for education authorities themselves to determine, within the resources available to them, the level of nursery education places they wish to provide for their area, having regard to local circumstances and competing priorities. They are also responsible for estimating demand and setting any targets.

  UDG/URG applications 1987–88

  UDG/URG approvals 1987–88

  City grant applications 1988–89

  City grant approvals 1988–89

  Barnsley

  —

  —

  2

  —

  Birmingham

  4

  2

  6

  3

  Blackburn

  2

  2

  7

  3

  Bolton

  2

  3

  3

  2

  Bradford

  1

  1

  2

  —

  Brent

  1

  1

  2

  —

  Bristol

  1

  1

  3

  1

  Burnley

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Coventry

  —

  —

  2

  1

  Derby

  —

  —

  10

  2

  Doncaster

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Dudley

  2

  2

  2

  1

  Gateshead

  —

  —

  2

  —

  Greenwich

  —

  —

  2

  —

  Hackney

  —

  —

  1

  1

  Halton

  —

  —

  1

  —

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Haringey

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Hartlepool

  —

  —

  3

  1

  Islington

  1

  —

  1

  —

  Kensington and Chelsea

  —

  1

  —

  —

ENVIRONMENT

  Social Landlords
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he has taken to prevent private companies setting up as social landlords, obtaining a council dowry and then defaulting on their responsibilities.

  Mr. Chope
  Under the Housing Act 1988, tenants' choice landlords are required to meet stringent criteria if they are to be approved by the Housing Corporation to seek to acquire property under tenants' choice.

  Only responsible applicants with a long-term commitment to the provision of rented housing for those who need it will be approved. All applicants will also have to give a series of binding undertakings in a deed under seal to the corporation, regarding the way they operate.

  A negative valuation or "dowry" may arise where repairs are necessary to bring transferring property up to the standard required by the public sector landlord's repairing obligations. Disputed valuations are set on statutory principles by the district valuer.

  After a valuation is set, an approval landlord wishing to acquire property under tenants' choice is required to make a detailed offer to the tenants on a range of matters including repairs. If the tenants vote to accept the offer and transfer proceeds the offer is contractually binding on the landlord.

  Urban Development
  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will list for each qualifying authority(a) the number of inquiries, applications and approvals relating to either urban development grant, or urban regeneration grant in 1987–88 and (b) the number of inquiries, applications and approvals relating to city grant in 1988–89;

  (2) if he will publish a table which lists those qualifying authorities which did not win (a) any approvals for either urban development grant or urban regeneration grant in 1987–88 and (b) any city grant approvals in 1988–89.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The information requested is shown in the table:
  427

  UDG/URG applications 1987–88

  UDG/URG approvals 1987–88

  City grant applications 1988–89

  City grant approvals 1988–819

  Kingston upon Hull

  5

  3

  —

  —

  Kirklees

  —

  —

  3

  1

  Knowsley

  —

  —

  1

  —

  Lambeth

  1

  —

  1

  —

  Langbaurgh

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Leeds

  3

  3

  2

  1

  Leicester

  3

  1

  2

  2

  Lewisham

  1

  1

  2

  1

  Liverpool

  1

  1

  1

  —

  Manchester

  —

  3

  4

  —

  Middlesbrough

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Newcastle

  2

  1

  4

  3

  Newham

  1

  1

  —

  —

  North Tyneside

  1

  1

  2

  2

  Nottingham

  2

  5

  13

  7

  Oldham

  —

  1

  1

  1

  Plymouth

  1

  —

  1

  —

  Preston

  1

  —

  1

  —

  Rochdale

  1

  1

  —

  —

  Rotherham

  1

  —

  —

  —

  St. Helens

  —

  —

  1

  —

  Salford

  1

  —

  3

  2

  Sandwell

  2

  3

  3

  2

  Sefton

  —

  1

  1

  —

  Sheffield

  2

  2

  4

  3

  South Tyneside

  1

  3

  2

  —

  Southwark

  —

  —

  3

  1

  Stockton

  —

  —

  1

  —

  Sunderland

  —

  —

  3

  1

  Tower Hamlets

  1

  —

  4

  2

  Walsall

  3

  1

  —

  —

  Wandsworth

  —

  —

  1

  —

  Wigan

  2

  1

  —

  —

  Wirral

  —

  1

  —

  —

  Wolverhampton

  1

  —

  1

  —

  Wrckin

  2

  —

  1

  —

  Total

  54

  46

  113

  44

  Notes:

  1. Excludes projects in UDC areas.

  2. The information requested on inquiries which are not formal applications is not held centrally.

  3. Applications received towards the end of a financial year may be decided at the beginning of the following year.

  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environments if he will list for each urban development corporation(a) the value of city grant approvals in

  (a)

  (b)

  (c)

  (d)

  City Grant approvals

  Inner Urban Areas Act Grant approved expenditure

  Receipts from land Sales

  Area of land sold

  £ million

  £ million

  £ million

  hectares

  Black Country

  1·2

  0·4

  0·3

  2·5

  Bristol

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Central Manchester

  7·2

  —

  —

  —

  Leeds

  0·4

  —

  —

  —

  London Docklands

  —

  0·1

  133·1

  30·4

  Merseyside

  1·2

  0·4

  2·3

  19·0

  Sheffield

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Teesside

  2·2

  —

  0·1

  0·8

  Trafford Park

  0·1

  —

  —

  —

  Tyne and Wear

  7·9

  0·5

  0·6

  7·2

  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will provide estimates showing for each financial year from 1987–88 to 1990–91 the amount of actual or planned expenditure on(a) urban development corporations, (b) city grant, (c) derelict land grant, (d) city action teams, (e) Estate Action and (f) the urban programme.
  428
  1988–89.(b) the value of Inner Urban Areas Act grants distributed in 1988–89, (c) the value of receipts from land sales in 1988–89 and (d) the area of land sold in 1988–89.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The information is as follows:

  Mr. Moynihan
  The information is as follows:
  429

  £ million

  1987–88

  1988–89

  1989–90

  1990–91

  (a) Urban Development Corporations1

  133

  234

  440

  542

  (b) City Grant2

  25

  25

  35

  49

  (c) Derelict Land Grant

  81

  78

  67

  72

  (d) City Action Teams

  5

  7

  6

  8

  (e) Estate Action

  75

  140

  190

  190

  (f) Urban Programme3

  266

  261

  260

  265

  1 External financing limits.

  2 Includes urban development grant and urban regeneration grant.

  3 Includes current and capital expenditure funded by the programmes of various Government Departments and local authority self-financed expenditure.

  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a table showing for every qualifying authority the amount of urban programme aid spent in each year from 1986–87 to 1988–89 on(a) new industrial and commercial buildings, (b) improving and converting industrial and commercial buildings, (c) land improvement, (d) housing and (e) other buildings which fulfil a social purpose.

  Mr. Moynihan
  I am arranging for copies of the information requested to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what amount of urban programme aid was allocated to each of the 57 qualifying authorities in 1987–88 and in 1988–89.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The amount of urban programme aid allocated to each of the 57 qualifying authorities and district health authorities in these areas for 1987–88 and 1988–89 is shown in the table. The figures do not include the amounts topsliced for the Merseyside special allocation, residual traditional urban programme commitments, low-attaining pupils programme and research.

  Region and Local authority allocations

  1987–88

  1988–89

  Northern

  Newcastle/Gateshead

  17·3

  16·8

  Hartlepool

  1·7

  1·8

  Langbaurgh

  1·6

  1·7

  Middlesbrough

  5·8

  5·5

  North Tyneside

  3·6

  3·4

  South Tyneside

  4·5

  4·4

  Stockton

  1·2

  1·4

  Sunderland

  4·3

  4·7

  North West

  Manchester/Salford

  24·3

  22·2

  Blackburn

  4·0

  4·0

  Bolton

  4·0

  3·8

  Burnley

  1·0

  1·8

  Oldham

  4·0

  3·7

  Preston

  1·3

  2·0

  Rochdale

  4·0

  3·6

  Wigan

  1·5

  2·2

  Merseyside

  Liverpool

  20·0

  20·4

  Halton

  1·5

  1·5

  Knowsley

  4·1

  4·0

  St· Helen's

  1·5

  1·7

  Sefton

  1·6

  1·5

  Wirral

  3·5

  3·5

  430

  Region and Local authority allocations

  1987–88

  1988–89

  West Midlands

  Birmingham

  25·4

  24·7

  Coventry

  4·4

  4·8

  Dudley

  1·3

  1·3

  Sandwell

  5·0

  4·9

  Walsall

  1·5

  1·5

  Wolverhampton

  5·5

  5·4

  The Wrekin

  0·6

  0·6

  East Midlands

  Derby

  1·5

  1·4

  Leicester

  5·4

  5·4

  Nottingham

  5·5

  5·7

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  Barnsley

  1·6

  1·5

  Bradford

  4·5

  3·1

  Doncaster

  1·8

  1·8

  Hull

  5·0

  4·9

  Kirklees

  0·8

  0·8

  Leeds

  4·5

  4·8

  Rotherham

  1·8

  1·8

  Sheffield

  5·6

  5·5

  London

  Hackney

  10·8

  9·7

  Islington

  9·8

  9·7

  Lambeth

  11·7

  10·3

  Brent

  4·0

  3·9

  Greenwich

  1·5

  1·9

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  4·7

  4·3

  Haringey

  2·0

  2·3

  Kensington and Chelsea

  1·3

  1·9

  Lewisham

  1·7

  2·0

  Newham

  1·8

  2·3

  Southwark

  2·0

  2·3

  Tower Hamlets

  4·5

  4·5

  Wandsworth

  4·5

  4·5

  South West

  Bristol

  1·6

  1·5

  Plymouth

  0·5

  1·0

  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a table for each urban development corporation which shows, either in terms of units or in matters of square feet, the volume of planning applications since the inception of the corporations for(a) private housing, (b) industrial premises, (c) commercial premises, (d) warehousing and (e) retail premises.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The following information is available:

  Total amount of development (completed and under construction) in each UDC (to 31 March 1989)

  Type of Development

  Urban Development Corporations

  Year established

  Housing(number of Units)

  Non-housing(sq ft—millions)

  Merseyside

  1981

  572

  5·4

  London Docklands

  1981

  16,829

  20·1

  Trafford Park

  1987

  0

  0·5

  Black Country

  1987

  325

  1·7

  Teesside

  1987

  0

  2·2

  Tyne and Wear

  1987

  453

  0·2

  Central Manchester

  1988

  327

  0·3

  Leeds

  1988

  0

  0·1

  Sheffield

  1988

  0

  0·5

  Bristol

  1989

  0

  0

  431

  Total number of planning decisions by English UDCs

  Number of planning decision up to 30 June 1989

  Urban Development Corporations

  Year established

  Number of quarters for which date are available

  Dwelling

  Offices, Manufacturing, Storage & Waarehousing

  Retail

  Decisions

  Granted

  Decisions

  Granted

  Decisions

  Granted

  Merseyside

  1981

  20

  12

  9

  34

  30

  11

  8

  London Docklands

  1981

  20

  607

  587

  305

  287

  140

  134

  Trafford Park

  1987

  3

  1

  1

  37

  37

  2

  2

  Black Country

  1987

  7

  48

  43

  206

  193

  51

  44

  Teesside

  1987

  8

  1

  1

  67

  59

  6

  5

  Tyne and Wear

  1987

  7

  42

  39

  97

  75

  75

  60

  Central Manchester

  1988

  3

  2

  2

  10

  8

  6

  6

  Leeds

  1988

  3

  1

  0

  32

  27

  5

  2

  Sheffield

  1988

  3

  0

  0

  26

  24

  1

  0

  Bristol

  1989

  1

  1

  1

  2

  2

  0

  0

  Note:

  The information given in column 2 relates to the number of quarters since the establishment of each UDC for which data is available. Figures for Merseyside and London Docklands relate only to information available for the most recent 5 years.

  Mr. Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will provide estimates showing for each financial year from 1987–88 to 1990–91 the amount of actual or planned expenditure designed to support the urban programme.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The figures showing the total amount of expenditure for the urban programme for the years 1987–88 to 1990–91 are as follows. These figures include the amounts topsliced for the Merseyside task force, residual traditional urban programme, low-attaining pupils programme and research.

  £ million

  1987–88 Actual

  266

  1988–89 Actual

  261

  1989–90 Planned

  260

  1990–91 Planned

  265

  Standard Spending Assessments
  Mr. Wilshire
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list(a) the factors and (b) the figures used to determine the percentage increase in the 1990–91 standard spending assessments to take account of the costs arising from the geographical location of Surrey county and Spelthorne borough councils.

  Mr. Chope
  The standard spending assessments for all authorities in the south-east standard region are adjusted to take account of higher labour costs in the region as identified by standardised earnings for an appropriate range of occupations from the new earnings survey for 1988. The precise adjustments vary from service block to service block according to the proportion of total costs represented by labour costs. Provisional figures are set out in annex F to the draft distribution report which my right hon. Friend placed in the Library on 6 November.

  Pollution
  Mr. Bellingham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list in the Official Report the appeals under section 10 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 currently under consideration by his Department; how many decisions have been issued since 27 July; and what steps he is taking to increase the speed of progress.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Following is a list of the appeals currently under consideration showing the dates they were 432
  first lodged. Three decisions have been issued since 27 July. Internal reorganisation of staff will allow greater priority to be given to these appeals in future, and changes have also been made to the various administrative procedures in order to speed up the decision-making process.

  Date

  Empire Brickworks, Stubbers Green Road, Aldridge, Walsall

  1 June 1982

  Seal Sands Terminal, Seal Sands, Cleveland

  26 June 1984

  Empire Brickworks, 51, Stubbers Green Road, Aldridge, Walsall

  8 September 1986

  Empire Brickworks, 231, Stubbers Green Road, Aldridge, Walsall

  8 September 1986

  Empire Brickworks, 323, Stubbers Green Road, Aldridge, Walsall

  8 September 1986

  Empire Brickworks, 324, Stubbers Green Road, Aldridge, Walsall

  8 September 1986

  East Tilbury (1) East Tilbury, Essex

  26 March 1987

  Aveley Clay Pit 2 and 3, Sandy Lane, Aveley, Essex

  10 July 1987

  Auckland Road, Leyton, LWRA

  21 July 1987

  Charleston Road, Hardley, Hampshire

  10 August 1987

  Gilbey Road, Grimsby, Humberside

  7 September 1987

  Old Railway Cutting, Chesterfield Road, Bolsover, Derbyshire

  7 December 1987

  Unit 3 Hartlepool, Sandgate Industrial Estate, Cleveland

  7 December 1987

  Springwell Hill, Nether Handley, Sheffield

  9 December 1987

  Norwood Industrial Estate, Rotherham Road, Killamarsh, Sheffield

  3 February 1988

  East Tilbury (2), East Tilbury, Essex

  18 April 1988

  Whinfield Farm, Pennington, Cumbria

  23 June 1988

  Munnery's Copse, Worthing, West Sussex

  27 June 1988

  Springwell Hill, Nether Handley, Sheffield

  1 August 1988

  Unit 10 Eddarbridge Industrial Estate, Cheshire

  19 August 1988

  Redbournbury Plant, St Albans, Hertfordshire

  24 November 1988

  Grazebrook Industrial Estate, Stubbers Green Road, Dudley

  6 January 1989

  Leabrook Road, Wednesbury, Sandwell

  10 January 1989

  Butterley Hole, Stubbers Green Road, Aldridge, Walsall

  6 February 1989

  Bakers Hole, Swanscombe, Kent

  8 March 1989

  Martin Earles No. 1, Cuxton, Kent

  8 March 1989

  Martin Earles Pit, Cuxton, Kent

  8 March 1989

  140 Moss Lane, Macclesfield, Cheshire

  13 March 1989

  Grazebrook Estate (2), Stubbers Green Road, Dudley

  4 May 1989

  Mucking Wharf, Mucking, Essex

  16 May 1989

  Offham Quarry, Teston Road, Offham, Kent

  19 June 1989

  Stangate Quarry, Borough Green, Kent

  19 June 1989

  Pluckley Brickworks, Chambers Green, Pluckley, Kent

  29 June 1989

  433

  Date

  Vineyard Chalkpit, Rainham, Kent

  29 June 1989

  Stone Pits 5 and 6, Stone, Dartford, Kent

  29 June 1989

  Stone 1 and Atlas Stone, Stone, Dartford, Kent

  29 June 1989

  Heathside Farm, Sandyford, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire

  3 July 1989

  Chesterfield Road, Barlborough, Derbyshire

  29 August 1989

  Barnett and Beddows, Stubbers Green Road, Aldridge, Walsall

  6 September 1989

  Moss Hall Farm, Rixton, Warrington, Cheshire

  19 September 1989

  Moss Hall Farm 2, Rixton, Warrington, Cheshire

  19 September 1989

  Rough Park Quarry, Mill Lane, Upholland, Lancashire

  9 October 1989

  Lumm Farm, Lumb Lane, Littlemoss, Droylesden, Greater Manchester

  20 October 1989

  Halfhead Farm, Shallowford, Stone, Staffordshire

  17 November 1989

  Bell Terminal, Grangetown, Middlesbrough, Cleveland

  20 November 1989

  Jolly Farmer Sand Pit, Guildford Road, Runfold, Surrey

  21 November 1989

  Farnham Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham, Surrey

  8 December 1989

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what action he intends to take following the identification by Her Majesty's inspectors of pollution of local contamination above background levels by polychorinated biphenyls at Ordnance Survey grid reference numbers(a) NY 5151, (b) NZ 5101, (c) NZ 0151, (d) SE 0101 and (e) TR 3666; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what action he intends to take following the identification by Her Majesty's inspectors of pollution of local contamination levels of dioxins and furans above the established background levels at Ordnance Survey grid reference numbers (a) NY 5101. (b) NZ 5151, (c) SE 0101, (d) SE 0151, (e) SU 5101; (f) TQ 0151; (g) TR 0151; (h) SK 0202 and (i) NT 0301; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  [holding answer 20 December 1989]: The report by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution has shown PCBs, dioxins and furans to be ubiquitous in United Kingdom soils. As expected levels are higher where there is a history of heavy industry and urbanisation. I am, however, informed that the levels of these compounds found at the locations mentioned do not pose a direct risk to human health. Further work will concentrate on sampling around those processes having the potential to release significant amounts of these compounds.

  Clause 28 Prosecutions
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has on the details of all prosecutions that have taken place under clause 28 of the Local Government Act 1988.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 (which prohibits local authorities from intentionally promoting homosexuality) does not create any criminal offence: there can therefore be no prosecutions under it.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he has taken to inform people of their rights to protect their confidentiality during the period remaining for implementation of the community charge in England and Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I am not aware that the implementation of the community charge in the manner advised jointly by the Department and the local authority associations poses any threat to confidentiality.

  Waste Paper
  Mr. Onslow
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his latest estimate of the quantity of waste paper removed from the House in an average week; and what proportion of this consists of unsolicited mail or other unused matter.

  Mr. Chope
  The quantity of paper removed from the Palace averages 2 tonnes per day, with a maximum of 4 tonnes per day. It is not possible to estimate the proportion of this which is unsolicited mail, or other unused matter. The waste paper is sent for recycling.

  Property Services Agency
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will arrange for Property Services Agency employees' severance terms to be no less favourable than those granted to workers in ordnance factories and dockyards;

  (2) if he will make a statement on his discussions with the United States forces on the future of the Property Services Agency;

  (3) when he hopes to announce the results of the study of the formalities of the relationship between the United States Air Force and the Property Services Agency when the Property Services Agency has been privatised.

  Mr. Chope
  [holding answer 13 December 1989]: There have been several discussions with representatives of United States forces about their future relationship with PSA since my right hon. Friend's statement of 25 May 1988. Further discussions of the implications of privatisation are now in progress as part of the study I referred to in the debate on the Property Services Agency and Crown Suppliers Bill on 6 December. This study is being led by the Ministry of Defence with full PS .A involvement. My right hon. Friend will make an announcement about the continuing role of a privatised PSA in providing services to United States forces in the United Kingdom as soon as conclusions have been reached.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proposals he has in relation to regulation 7 of the principal Civil Service pensions scheme concerning Property Services Agency employees.

  Mr. Chope
  [holding answer 13 December 1989]: On pensions, we shall make it clear to purchasers that we expect them to offer terms which are broadly comparable with those of the principal Civil Service pension scheme. The terms that they offer will be subject to analysis by the Government Actuary. If they are assessed as not being as

  435
  good as the Civil Service scheme, some means will be found to ensure that the staff are not disadvantaged in respect of the overall terms and conditions of service.

  On redundancy, the purchaser will be required to provide compensation terms which, as far as possible, are identical to those the staff have at present.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what the Government Actuary has advised about the Property Services Agency pension terms offer.

  Mr. Chope
  [holding answer 13 December 1989]: Advice on an offer has not been sought.

  Water Privatisation
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish for each water authority in England the estimated percentage held by(a) individual shareholders and (b) financial institutions as on the first day of trading in the new companies.

  Mr. Howard
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: The allocations to applicants in each of the nine English water companies were announced on 11 December. The offer of shares to the general public in each company was oversubscribed to an extent that the clawback arrangements set out in the prospectus were triggered. As a result, 39·25 per cent. of the shares in each company were allocated to institutions and 46·875 per cent. of the shares in each company were allocated to applicants in the retail public offer.

  City of London Heliport
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will call in the planning application submitted to the corporation of the City of London for the construction of a heliport adjacent to the Cannon Street railway bridge; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) if there will be a public inquiry on the planning application for the proposed City of London heliport; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  This application has been made only recently and my right hon. Friend is considering its implications. The corporation of the City of London, as local planning authority, is responsible for deciding planning applications within its area. In determining applications, the corporation is required to take into account all material planning considerations.

  MINIS 10
  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the outcome of the full consultation and discussion on MINIS 10 within Government promised by the then Minister of State in Standing Committee on 4 May.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  Copies of MINIS 10 were placed in the Library on 15 November 1989.

  British Rail Land, Nottingham
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will now use his powers to order the sale of the British Rail-owned land between Sainsbury's and Gunn and Moores in Nottingham.
  436
  Mr. David Hunt
  I understand that the British Rail Property Board is today discussing its disposal plans for the land. It would be premature for the Secretary of State to become statutorily involved at this juncture.

  Toxic Waste
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will take steps to reduce the import and export of toxic waste.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  The Environmental Protection Bill contains provisions to restrict or prohibit the import or export of any type of waste into or out of the United Kingdom, in order to prevent risk of harm to the environment or human health, or to conserve disposal resources.

  Satellite Television Dishes
  Mr. Shersby
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment under what statutory enactment an individual is obliged to apply to the local planning authority for permission to erect a satellite dish on a private dwelling house.

  Mr. Howard
  Class H of part 1 of schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1988 grants permission to install a single satellite antenna on or within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse provided the antenna's maximum diameter does not exceed 90 cm and it does not project above the highest part of the house's roof. Otherwise, specific planning permission is necessary under section 23(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971.

  Coventry Council (Ombudsman's Report)
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what further action has been taken in the cast of Coventry city council and Mr. and Mrs. Malcolm Quin and Mrs. Havels née Quin since the answer to the hon. Member for Pembroke of 22 February at columns 696–97.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  1 and 2 Bridge Street, London
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment who owns Nos. 1 and 2 Bridge street, London, SW1; whether the building is listed; and whether there are any proposals to demolish or improve the building.

  Mr. Chope
  Nos. 1 and 2 Bridge street, which are Crown property, are listed grade II. They form part of the Bridge street site which is being redeveloped to provide additional parliamentary accommodation. Proposals for the second phase, which includes Nos. 1 and 2 Bridge street, were sent to the Services Committee last month.

  Norris Green Estate, Liverpool
  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when his Minister of State, the hon. Member for Wirral West, (Mr. Hunt) will be responding to the letter from the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby of 15 September in respect of the Norris Green housing estate in Liverpool.
  437
  Mr. Howard
  I have written to the hon. Member.

  Homelessness
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his Department's estimates of the number of families who will present themselves as homeless in(a) London, (b) England in each of the years from 1990 to 2000 inclusive.

  Mr. Chope
  The Department has no such estimates.

  Crown Premises
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment approximately how many complaints Her Majesty's Government have received from private landlords about the poor maintenance and rundown appearance of Crown-occupied premises; and what effect he estimates such complaints have had on the willingness of lessors to have the Property Services Agency as a tenant.

  Mr. Chope
  No information is held centrally about complaints by landlords of poor maintenance. The National Audit Office referred in its report "The Management of the Civil Estate" to the only two cases which came to light following a specific enquiry to PSA regions in 1986 for evidence of cases where landlords had refused to grant leases.

  There is no evidence that those two cases have affected the general willingness of lessors to have PSA as a tenant.

  Control Properties
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the results of his evaluation of the Property Services Agency's selection of control properties experiment, terminated in the autumn of 1988.

  Mr. Chope
  The radical option experiment to which I believe the hon. Member refers has provided valuable lessons for Government Departments and the Agency when they assume their new responsibilities for property management from April 1990.

  Accommodation (Free Assets)
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the outcome of his review of free assets, in relation to the value of accommodation, as described in the National Audit Office report on the Property Services Agency, section 4:28.

  Mr. Chope
  For 1990–91 it has been decided that opportunity cost rents will be charged on Departmental Estate properties in the same way as on common user estate properties. Property Holdings will act as agents for the Treasury in assessing rents and collecting them.

  Property Services Agency Estate Surveyors
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the result of his consideration of improvements in the Property Services Agency estate surveyors information system and in the longer-term estate support system.

  Mr. Chope
  Changes to the Property Services Agency estate surveyor information system (ESIS) have been 438
  considered in the context of the reorganisation of PSA from 1 April 1990 as announced in the statement by my right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State on 25 May 1988. By that date PSA services will require a more flexible and responsive resource cost management system. A weekly diary capture system is now being developed. This will be in place by 1 April 1990 and the ESIS system will then be abandoned.

  Norfolk House, East Kilbride
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment why Norfolk house, East Kilbride, was vacated in 1984; when the lease of Norfolk house expires; and what is the annual cost.

  Mr. Chope
  The occupying Department, Inland Revenue, vacated the premises since they were considered to be unsuitable either for adaptation under the computerised office programme or as a training centre. PSA (Scotland) is currently negotiating abandonment of the lease which is scheduled to expire on 24 March 2029. Annual costs vary from year to year but including rental approximate at £200,000.

  Police and Fire Brigade Pay
  Mr. Baldry
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what provision has been made in the standard spending assessment of local authorities for next year in respect of pay awards for the police force and the fire brigade.

  Mr. Chope
  The control totals for each of the standard spending assessment service blocks take account of all the costs of providing a standard level of service. Provisional figures are set out in annex B to the draft distribution report which my right hon. Friend placed in the Library on 6 November.

  Water Meter Trials
  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will obtain information from the Yorkshire water authority as to why the local people in the Normanton meter trial area were not given the opportunity to consider the draft code of practice for water leakage before it was submitted to the director general as promised in the letter of 29 August from his Department to the hon. Member for Normanton; and if lie will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  The draft code will apply to all Yorkshire Water's domestic customers who are metered, not just those customers in the trial area. We did, however, ask Yorkshire Water to give the local liaison committee on the south Normanton trial an opportunity to comment on the draft code before it was submitted for approval to the director general. I understand that Yorkshire Water subsequently passed the committee's comments, including those from the hon. Member, to the director general with the draft code.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information is available to Parliament from the national compulsory water meter trials; and if he will make a statement.
  439
  Mr. Howard
  A copy of the first interim report on the trials, which was published last February, was placed in the Library. A second interim report is expected to be published in the spring.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the estimated cost to public funds for the compulsory water meter trials in the Normanton constituency; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  The Government have agreed to contribute up to half the cost of the south Normanton trial. The budget for the trial has yet to be finalised, but we expect the Government's contribution to be in the region of £240,000.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what mechanism is to be applied to monitor the total income, including the contribution from his Department to the compulsory water meter trials in the Normanton constituency, by the Yorkshire water authority during the trial period; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  The trial tariff has been designed to recover the same amount of income from the trail area as would have been recovered on a rateable value basis. We shall be regularly monitoring the level of income received from customers when charging starts in April 1991. The tariff will be amended if the income recovered from customers is greater than anticipated.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what value will be obtained from the investment of public money on the compulsory water meter trials in the Normanton constituency; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  The south Normanton trial is part of a programme of 12 trials in different areas designed to examine all aspects of metering, including the views of customers. The lessons learnt during the trials will help ensure that those water companies that decide to adopt metering as an alternative means of charging once the use of rateable values is no longer permitted, will do so cost effectively and with the least inconvenience to customers.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the number of water meters being installed in the Isle of Wight trial scheme which, when examined by the trading standards officer for verification, have fallen outside the tolerance area; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  I understand that one meter has been tested by the local trading standards officer on the Isle of Wight at the request of a customer. The meter was found to be just outside the error limits prescribed in the Measuring Equipment (Cold-water Meters) Regulations 1988 and was subsequently replaced.

  City Grants
  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he intends to review the priority areas for city grants; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The Secretary of State has no immediate plans to review the priority areas for city grant.
  440
  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will outline the criteria for deciding priority areas for city grant purposes; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Priority for city grant is given to the 57 local authorities invited to submit inner area programmes for support under the urban progamme.

  Urban Grants
  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give a breakdown of(a) urban development grant, (b) urban renewal grant and (c) city grants approvals to the 57 urban programme areas to the end of November, authority by authority, category by category; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The information requested has been placed in the Library.

  Crown Buildings, Cardiff
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has for leasing surplus space in the Crown buildings, Cathays park, Cardiff, subsequent to the departure of the insurance services group of the Export Credits Guarantee Department.

  Mr. Chope
  Any surplus space in the Crown building. Cathays park, subsequent to the departure of the insurance services group of the Export Credits Guarantee Department, will be reallocated to meet the requirements of another Government Department or Departments.

  Housing Revenue Account Subsidies
  Mr. Hayward
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will make housing revenue account subsidy determinations for 1990–91.

  Mr. Howard
  The housing revenue account subsidy determinations for 1990–91 have been made today. Every local housing authority in England has been sent a copy of the determinations together with provisional figures on which its subsidy entitlement will be based. The figures for each individual authority are subject to change in the light of new information supplied by the authority itself. Copies of the determinations and of the provisional figures for all authorities will be placed in the Library and the Vote Office.

  The new housing revenue account subsidy was introduced by the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. It replaces the existing main housing subsidy, housing benefit subsidy for rent rebates and the element in rate support grant related to authorities' own housing costs. The total Exchequer subsidy for 1990–91 is estimated to be some £3 billion, a similar sum to the combined figure for the different subsidies this year.

  Each authority's subsidy will be calculated in accordance with the formula which is prescribed in the determinations. For 1990–91, the formula assumes that there will be a national increase of 10 per cent. in gross rent income. That produces an average guideline increase of £2·08 a week compared with £1·95 last year. However, unlike previous years, the determinations this year provide for different guideline rent increases in different authorities. The rent guidelines are set by reference to the

  441
  value of each authority's housing stock, but are subject to a minimum and a maximum guideline increase. We estimate that the maximum guideline increase of £4-50 will apply to 66 authorities, and that 156 authorities will benefit from the minimum guideline increase of 95p which is less than would be required nationally to keep pace with inflation. Over half of all council tenants are on housing benefit and will not have to pay for any increase in rent because this will be fully rebated.

  Overall, the effect is that guideline rent increases are lower in parts of the country where the value of housing is lower, and higher where it is relatively high. Within any area, guideline increases are also lower for authorities with high rents at present than they are for authorities where rents are lower. In this way authorities will be encouraged to move towards a more sensible pattern of rents across the country which reflects the value of the housing being provided.

  For 1990–91, the subsidy formula provides for an 8 per cent. increase in the provision for management and maintenance expenditure which allows for at least 3 per cent. growth. The allowance will in most cases be related to authorities' past actual expenditure. There are two additional safeguards for authorities whose past expenditure has been low. First, if their past spending was lower than their allowance for management and maintenance spending under the existing housing subsidy system, then we will base their allowance for 1990–91 on the previous allowance. Secondly, we have set a minimum allowance per dwelling which will benefit the 10 per cent. of authorities whose allowances would otherwise (after adjustment for regional cost variations) have been the lowest in the country. To provide for the cost of the minimum allowance we have transferred £30 million from the local authority housing capital expenditure programme for 1990–91. In future years we intend that the provision for management and maintenance should be progressively directed towards those authorities with the greatest needs.

  The subsidy formula also takes into account the full cost of loan charges and of rent rebates, subject only to safeguards to prevent double subsidy and to provide an incentive for efficient operation of the rent rebate scheme. The existing system of admissible cost limits for capital works, under which subsidy is paid only on loan charges where the average cost of schemes falls within unit cost limits prescribed by the Government, will be dropped. Rents on leasehold property will also be taken into account in subsidy, but in this case the admissible cost limits will continue to apply for the time being.

  The draft determinations were the subject of consultation with local authorities, their associations, and other professional bodies. A large number of representations have been received, in response to which we have clarified and simplified the determinations wherever possible. We intend to publish a new edition of the "Housing Subsidy Manual", with practical guidance on the operation of the new subsidy system, early in the new year.

  The combined effect of these proposals is to direct the £33 billion of taxpayers' money which will be paid out in HRA subsidy towards the authorities that most need it.

  Drinking Water
  Mr. Andrew MacKay
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement about the new drinking water inspectorate.

  Mr. Howard
  Section 60 of the Water Act 1989 empowers my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State and the Secretary of State for Wales to appoint technical assessors to act on their behalf in relation to the new provisions on drinking water quality and supply. This is the statutory basis for the new drinking water inspectorate which will begin work on 2 January 1990. Their principal task will be to ensure that water undertakers in England and Wales are fulfilling all their statutory requirements for the supply of wholesome drinking water. They will check for failures to comply with the standards set by the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 1989 which come fully into force on 1 January 1990. If a failure occurs the inspectorate will ensure that appropriate action is taken.

  Mr. M. G. Healey has been appointed chief inspector. Mr. Healey is head of the drinking water division of the Department of the Environment and is an engineer by training.

  Housing Investment Programmes
  Mr. Forman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will make the allocations to local authorities in England for their housing investment programmes in 1990–91.

  Mr. Howard
  Each housing authority is today being informed of its housing investment programme (HIP) allocation for 1990–91. Copies of the letters to authorities and of the schedule of HIP allocations will be placed in the Library and the Vote Office.

  The local authority associations have been consulted about the distribution of HIP allocations, including the construction of the generalised needs index (GNI), which has been comprehensively reviewed. My right hon. Friend has also consulted the local authority associations, local authorities and others about the determination of housing revenue account subsidy for 1990–91 and has decided that £30 million should be transferred from the total available for housing credit approvals in 1990–91 to increase the resources available for HRA subsidy.

  Local authority credit approvals and specified capital grants will therefore total £1,784 million in 1990–91, not including £112 million for the special homelessness initiative. The Local Government and Housing Act 1989 allows my right hon. Friend to take account of local authorities' capital receipts when making allocations, and the housing element of the receipts taken into account in this way is £270 million. Housing investment programme (HIP) allocations for 1990–91 will therefore total £2,054 million.

  HIP allocations in 1990–91 totalled £1,110 million, and the large increase in the total for allocations in 1990–91 has been made possible by the provisions of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. As a result, about two thirds of the total capital resources that local authorities are expected to spend on housing next year can be targeted to reflect differences in local needs, compared with about one third in recent years.

  After considering the views of the local authority associations, my right hon. Friend has concluded that a

  443
  revised GNI should be introduced for 1990–91, and that the distribution of resources should be made on the following basis:

  (i) £164·5 million to be allocated separately as supplementary credit approvals (SCAs), as follows:

  (a) £110 million for the estate action programme, for new and some continuation schemes. (A further £80 million for the remaining estate action continuation schemes is being allocated to authorities on the basis of agreed levels of commitment as part of their main HIP allocations).

  (b) £54·5 million held back for later distribution, of which £10 million is expected to be to cover renewal areas declared during the year, and the remainder primarily to provide against demand under the new renovation grant system for mandatory grants in excess of authorities' available resources.

  (ii) My right hon. Friend's view is that the existing system of weighting the GNI scores of the 57 "Action for Cities" target areas is not only obscure, but also ineffective in ensuring that additional resources reach those inner city authorities most in need of them. He has therefore decided that, for 1990–91, £100 million of the total for HIP allocations should be allocated to the 57 "Action for Cities" target areas as distinct inner city special allocations. These resources have been distributed to the DOE regions in proportion to the GNI scores of the 57 authorities. Each region's total for inner city special allocations has been allocated to the 57 authorities following recommendations by the Department's regional housing controllers.

  (iii) The remaining £1,709 million of the main HIP allocations, made up of the £1,296 million of housing annual capital guidelines (ACGs) and £413 million of resources for specified capital grants, has been distributed in two stages. First, the distribution to DOE regions has been made in proportion to the sum of the GNI scores of the local authorities in each region. Second, each region's total has been allocated to individual local authorities one half in proportion to each authority's GNI score, and one half following recommendations by the Department's regional housing controllers to reflect local needs.

  Urban Programme
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list schemes covering energy conservation under the urban programme for each year since 1986.

  Mr. David Hunt
  [holding answer 19 December 1989]: I am arranging for copies of the information requested to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Home Insulation
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give for each year since 1978 the number of dwellings insulated under public sector insulation programmes.

  Mr. Howard
  My Department is responsible for the energy conservation programme and homes insulation scheme. Information on activity in 1986, 1987, 1988 and the first quarter of 1989 for energy conversion, and the first half of 1989 for the homes insulation scheme, appears in table 2·21 of "Housing and Construction Statistics Part 2", No. 38. Figures for earlier years appear in table 7·7 of "Housing and Construction Statistics 1978–1988". Copies of these publications are available in the Library.
  444
  Work under the energy conservation programme is identified only where it is the only work being carried out to a local authority dwelling. Insulation is often installed when other general renovation work is carried out, but these cases cannot be separately identified.

  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will place in the Library the internal audit report of 1986 on the homes insulation scheme.

  Mr. Howard
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: No. It would be inappropriate to make generally available such reports, which are however sent to the National Audit Office and used by the Comptroller and Auditor General to inform his examination of the Department's work.

EMPLOYMENT

  Social Fund
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how much European social fund funding Leeds will lose for training programmes for long-term unemployed adults and unemployed young people in the coming year.

  Mr. Eggar
  Allocations to particular programmes have yet to be made. To date, support under the European social fund is made for one year at a time. Funding in one year carried no guarantee of support for future years.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the parameters now used to determine the allocation of European social fund money.

  Mr. Eggar
  Under the new European social fund arrangements the Commission determines the amount to be allocated to the member states and decides on the applications submitted earlier this year. The regulations on priorities for the schemes were agreed by all member states within the Community. In addition, the Commission has issued guidelines on those elements of the fund to support measures for the long-term unemployed and young people, which they have said they will apply in assessing applications for support. These regulations and guidelines have been widely circulated to all interested parties. This week the Commission published its Community support framework for four of the five objectives of the fund. They set out the priorities that the Commission and member states will adopt in assessing applications for support in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make it his policy that any overflow of European social fund training grants should be reallocated to local authorities that already have well-established European social fund programmes.

  Mr. Eggar
  We expect that all allocations by the European Commission of ESF will be fully taken up by the applicants concerned.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will publish a list of all the major schemes in order of amount supported by the European social fund.

  Mr. Eggar
  A copy of the latest European social fund decision on the funding of all United Kingdom applicants has been lodged in the House of Commons Library.
  445
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will publish a table of the European social fund training grants allocation to Leeds from 1979 to 1989, inclusive.

  Mr. Eggar
  Details of allocations to individual towns and cities can be identified only at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will publish his Department's reply to correspondence from Leeds city council about reduced European social fund allocations to training projects.

  Mr. Eggar
  It is not my Department's policy to publish correspondence with other organisations and individuals.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will set out the new criteria for the European social fund bid allocations to local authorities.

  Mr. Eggar
  My Department used the European Commission's own criteria of assistance to the long-term unemployed and to youth to produce percentage figures by region and, within that, by county based on long-term and youth unemployment, to facilitate the compilation of the bids for European social fund support. My Department then advised interested organisations of an overall amount they could bid for taking into account the likely demand from all quarters and the European Commission's requirement that bids should be realistic.

  Peterlee and Seaham
  Mr. Cummings
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement concerning the future of jobcentres and unemployment benefit offices in Peterlee and Seaham.

  Mr. Eggar
  The employment service is working progressively to bring jobcentres and benefit offices together under one roof. This will provide a new and improve one-stop service.

  I will ensure that the hon. Member is informed as soon as decisions about the future of offices in Peterlee and Seaham have been taken.

  Jobcentres
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement regarding the future of jobcentres in the(a) Burnley, (b) Pendle, (c) Hyndburn and (d) Rossendale and Darwen constituencies.

  Mr. Eggar
  The employment service is working progressively to bring jobcentres and benefit offices together under one roof. This will provide a new and improved one-stop service.

  I will ensure that hon. Members with a constituency interest are informed as soon as decisions about the future of offices in the Burnley, Pendle, Hyndham and Rossendale and Darwen constituencies have been taken.

  Training Schemes
  Mr. Ralph Howell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will list all training schemes and measures to reduce unemployment, including the enterprise scheme; and if he will give details of(a) the number of people participating at any one time and (b) the separate and overall expenditure in each case.
  446
  Mr. Eggar
  The information is as follows:

  1 Training Agency

  Programme

  Cost(£ million)*

  Numbers in training October 1989

  Employment Training (ET)

  1,251·5

  209,000

  Business Growth Training (BGT)

  42·4

  see below

  Youth Training Scheme (YTS)

  1,039·1

  405,000

  Community Industry (CI)

  28·1

  6,0002

  Work Related Further Education(WRFE)

  101·5

  see 3 below

  TVEI4 & Compacts

  121·2

  see 5 below

  Enterprise Allowance Scheme (EAS)

  138·56

  77,230

  1 The following figures are available for BGT for the period April-October 1989:

  Option 1, kits issued

  3,700

  Option 2, training places

  25,700

  Option 3, contracts signed

  700

  Option 4, contracts signed

  1,200

  Option 5, contracts signed

  25

  2 Employees in Scheme until 1 May 1989, when the contract changed from "Employment Measure" to "Training Provision".

  3 In the field of WRFE the TA operates by negotiating with Local Education Authorities. It is not possible to give participation figures comparable with the rest of table.

  4 Technical & Vocational Education Initiative.

  5In the academic year 1988–89 314,000 students were involved with TVEI. This figure rose to 630,000 in the academic year 1989–90.

  6Provision in TA Vote from July 1989 only.

  There are also other TA initiatives for which the numbers in training are not readily available:

  Programme

  Cost(£ million)

  Employment Rehabilitation

  9·0

  Residual Schemes1

  20·0

  Enterprise Training

  3·8

  Other Adult Training2

  11·5

  Enterprise in Higher Education & Other HE projects

  8·7

  Training & Education Support Programmes

  60·8

  1 Old Job Training Scheme, New Job Training Scheme, Wider Opportunities Training Programme, Community Programme, Residual Training for the Disabled, Voluntary Projects Programme.

  2 National Priority Skills Scheme, Local Grants to Employers, Local Collaborative Projects, Industrial Language Training

  Note:

  Expenditure reflects 1989–90 Estimates provision.

  2 Employment Service

  Programme

  Cost (£ million)1

  Participants

  Jobshare

  0·66

  1187

  Restart Courses

  7·85

  323,662

  Jobstart

  5·90

  33,793

  Jobclub

  28·50

  423,419

  1 As at 30 November 1989.

  2 Number of people beginning a Restart Course in November 1989.

  3 As at 27 October 1989.

  4 As at 24 November 1989.

  In addition, the ES, through its network of offices, helps and encourages unemployed people to take up available jobs and opportunities. In 1988–l89 the ES placed approximately 1·5 million unemployed people into jobs.

  Note:

  Expenditure reflects 1989–90 funds allocated.

  Noise at Work Regulations
  Mr. Flannery
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he has any plans to issue a Health and Safety Commission approved code of practice to accompany the 1989 Noise at Work Regulations; and when is the likely date of publication.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The Health and Safety Commission has no plans at present to issue an approved code of practice (ACoP) to accompany these regulations. In its consultation document on proposals to implement directive 86/188/EEC the Commission sought views on whether an ACoP should be produced: the majority of respondents thought that guidance alone would be preferable in this case because it facilitated provision of advice on technical issues in a single series of documents which could readily be amended in the light of technical progress.

  The Health and Safety Executive has prepared general guidance for employers, machine makers and suppliers which was published on 16 November. Further guidance will be produced shortly.

  Careers Services
  Mr. Anthony Coombs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will publish the inspection reports on local authority careers services; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  The reports on local authority careers services produced by the careers service inspectorate will in future be published. Publication will start with those inspections that began after October 1 1989.

  Strikes
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) how many days work were lost by unofficial strike action in each industry as categorised by his Department in each of the last five years for which official figures are available;

  (2) how many official strikes were settled within (a) one, (b) two, (c) three, (d) four weeks and (e) longer than four weeks, of the official action occurring in the last five years for which official figures are available;

  (3) how many unofficial strikes were settled within (a) one, (b) two, (c) three, (d) four, and (e) five working days of the unofficial action occurring in the last five years for which official figures are available;

  (4) how many unofficial strikes were settled within (a) two weeks, (b) three weeks and (c) four weeks, or took longer than four weeks, of the unofficial action occurring in the last five years for which official figures are available;

  (5) what was the total number of days lost by strike action, official and unofficial, and by each industry as categorised by his Department in each of the last five years for which official figures are available;

  (6) what was the total number of unofficial strikes in each industry categorised by his Department, in each of the last five years for which official figures are available.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The information is not available except at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment in how many(a) official strikes and (b) unofficial strikes the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service has been involved in each of the last five years for which official figures are available.
  448
  Mr. Nicholls
  Information is not available in the form requested. Information on the overall number of disputes in which ACAS has been involved is published in the service's annual reports, copies of which are held in the Library.

  Wages Councils
  Mr. McAllion
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many establishments were checked by a visit by wages council inspectors in 1988.

  Mr. Nicholls
  In 1988 a total of 19,573 establishments in Great Britain were checked by visits by wages inspectors.

  Closed Shop
  Mr. Moss
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether he has received any further representations about the closed shop; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nicholls
  In addition to comments on the proposals contained in chapter 2 of the Green Paper "Removing Barriers to Employment", my Department continues to receive letters which describe difficulties experienced as a result of the operation of closed shop arrangements. The Government's new Employment Bill will make it unlawful to refuse anyone employment because they are not a union member which, together with the protections provided in the 1988 Employment Act, will make all forms of the closed shop unenforceable.

  Self-Employment
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the various categorisations of self-employment.

  Mr. Eggar
  The borderline between employment and self-employment is not defined in statute, but is a matter determined by the common law. The question whether individuals are employed or self-employed will depend on the terms and conditions under which they are engaged and work. The courts will decide where the status of an individual is in doubt. The Inland Revenue and Department of Social Security have to establish whether an individual is employed or self-employed for purposes of income tax and National Insurance contributions.

  Unemployment Benefit (Quarterly Attenders)
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what is the total number of quarterly attenders reporting to unemployment benefit offices in Great Britain and in each of the standard regions, Scotland and Wales;

  (2) whether quarterly attenders aged over 50 years are included in the published monthly unemployment figures.

  Mr. Eggar
  The following table shows the number of quarterly attenders for November 1989 in Great Britain and in each of the standard regions, Scotland and Wales.

  Quarterly Attenders in November 1989

  Number

  Great Britain

  149,572

  South East

  25,985

  East Anglia

  2,756

  449

  Number

  South West

  8,032

  West Midlands

  18,627

  East Midlands

  10,257

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  18,397

  North West

  22,257

  North

  13,770

  Scotland

  21,674

  Wales

  7,547

  The provision of signing quarterly is mainly for those aged 50 and over, who have been unemployed for one year and have no entitlement to unemployment benefit.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment, what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mr. Nicholls
  This information is not available in the form requested.

  Business Enterprise Allowance
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement as to the eligibility of businesses in receipt of business enterprise allowance funding to(a) engage as sub-contractors and (b) engage sub-contractors.

  Mr. Eggar
  The aim of the enterprise allowance scheme is to help unemployed people create new small businesses that would otherwise not exist. Most labour-only sub-contracting arrangements are ruled outside the scope and the spirit of the scheme. However scheme support may be approved where applicants can show they will provide specialist expertise or services to a number of other companies not normally retaining these "in-house". Existing EAS participants are free to engage subcontractors or employ other staff.

  Military Conscription
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if his Department has identified reserved occupations for exemption from military conscription during a war emergency; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  My Department has not identified reserved occupations for exemption from military conscription during a war emergency.

  Host Nation Support
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if his Department has identified specific categories of skilled workers as part of planning for host nation support within NATO.

  Mr. Eggar
  My Department has not identified specific categories of skilled workers as part of planning for host nation support within NATO.

  Tourism
  Mr. Bevan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment, pursuant to the Prime Minister's answer to the hon. Member for York (Mr. Gregory) on 12 450
  December, Official Report, column 854, regarding the Minister for tourism for Great Britain, if he will ensure that he answers all questions on tourism relevant to Great Britain as a whole.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The Secretary of State for Employment has responsibility for tourism matters in Great Britain as a whole; as such he will continue to answer questions relevant to the whole of Great Britain.

  Sewage Sludge Tanks
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will set out the required safety standards set by the Health and Safety Executive for fencing around sewage sludge tanks.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Sections 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 require an employer to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable the health, safety and welfare of his employees and the health and safety of persons not in his employment who may be affected by his work activity. These duties extend to the risks at sewage and sludge tanks.

  The Health and Safety Executive has not published standards for the fencing of sewage and sludge tanks in the water industry but would expect employers, in complying with their duties under the Act, to provide adequate fencing around the tanks.

  Labour Statistics
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what information he has as to(a) the number and (b) the percentage of workers who leave their job within two years of starting.

  Mr. Nicholls
  This information is not available.

  Sick Pay
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is his estimate of the number of people who are not paid by their employer if they are off sick far between one and three days.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The information requested is not available.

  Employment Training
  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is meant by low incomes in relation to people who have joined employment training schemes, for(a) lone parents and (b) couples; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nicholls
  My Department does not use arty definition of low income in relation to people in employment training. Eligibility for employment training does not depend on the level of income and the training allowance paid to trainees is based on their existing entitlement to benefits.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what provision is made for people taking employment training who have child care problems, particularly where no creche facilities exist; and if he will make a statement.
  451
  Mr. Nicholls
  There are a number of ways in which people on employment training (ET) can be helped with childcare. Training providers are encouraged to set up creche facilities at or near the place of training and lone parents can get help towards the cost of this or other appropriate provision. In addition the inbuilt flexibilities of ET mean that training can often be arranged to take account of individual domestic circumstances.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what provision is made to help people taking Government employment training in computer courses to undertake training at home; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Where appropriate trainees may, with the agreement of the training manager, undertake training in computer skills at home. Where computer equipment is needed for people with disabilities, there is help available through the special aids to employment scheme.

  Within employment training there is also provision for higher level information technology skills courses specifically for women returners. In some cases where training is home based, office equipment and computers can be made available on loan.

  European Social Fund
  Mr. Quentin Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on allocations to the United Kingdom by the European social fund for measures for the long-term unemployed and young people in Great Britain for the period 1990 to 1992.

  Sir Fergus Montgomery
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement about allocations to the United Kingdom by the European social fund for measures for the long-term unemployed and young people in Great Britain for the period 1990 to 1992.

  Mr. Eggar
  Having obtained the agreement of the British Government, on 20 December 1989 the Commission of the European Communities made its decision on European social fund allocations to the United Kingdom for training and employment of long-term unemployed people and of young people under objectives 3 and 4 of the Community's structural funds. The decision is contained in the Community support framework, a copy of which will be placed in the Library.

  The priorities of the Community support framework will guide the allocation of 1,025 million ecu (approximately £782 million) made available by the Commission under these objectives of the fund for the three years 1990 to 1992. This is the highest allocation to any member state and represents 24·8 per cent. of the budget which the Commission has distributed.

  The Commission has yet to take decisions on allocations to particular programmes.

  Action for Jobs Campaign
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment, what was the total expenditure attributed to the Action for Jobs campaign in 1985–86, 1986–87 and 1987–88.

  Mr. Eggar
  The total expenditure attributed to the Action for Jobs campaign in 1985–86, 1986–87, 1987–88 is as follows:
  452

  1985–86

  £40,000

  1986–87

  £13·9 million

  1987–88

  £8 million

  Training and Enterprise Councils
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether it is his intention to place the responsibility for education capacity in the hands of the local training and enterprise council; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 18 December 1989]: Compacts will come under the training and enterprise councils (TECs) as they come into being, provided always that the educational partners in each compact agree to this. It is of the utmost importance that TECs should take all opportunities to work effectively with all relevant parts of the local education system to raise skill levels and educational achievements in their local community.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Legal Services Committee
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Attorney-General what support he intends to give to the regional north-western legal services committees and proposed similar committees in north-east England and south Wales.

  The Attorney-General
  The legal aid board funds the north west legal services committee.

  It will be considering, in the light of progress on its franchising proposals, future support for regional legal services committees.

  Jeremiah Miller
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Attorney-General what requests the Crown prosecution service has received for documents concerning Jeremiah Miller, a prisoner at Her Majesty's prison Walton; what documents he has released; if he has withheld any information; and if he will make a statement.

  The Attorney-General
  The Crown prosecution service has received requests for the disclosure of documents relating to police activity during the course of the investigation of an offence of attempted robbery which occurred at Upton, Wirral on 24 July 1986. Jeremiah Miller was subsequently convicted of offences arising out of that incident.

  Requests have been received both from Jeremiah Miller and from solicitors acting on his behalf; in addition, a request by Jeremiah Miller has been channelled to the CPS through the chief constable of Merseyside.

  I am satisfied that the Crown prosecution service has responded fully and properly to those requests.

  Accountancy Firms
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Attorney-General whether there are any current prosecutions of accountants for the creation of a false market in shares.

  The Attorney-General
  I have taken the hon. Member's question to refer to the statutory offence under section 47(2) of the Financial Services Act 1986, and any other proceedings where the prosecution case amounts to an allegation of market manipulation.
  453
  There are no such cases involving an accountant as defendant currently being prosecuted by the Crown prosecution service or the serious fraud office. For the purposes of this answer I have treated the word "accountant" as referring to persons employed as or acting in that capacity, as distinct from an individual who simply happens to hold a formal accountancy qualification.

  Jaderow Case Ruling
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Attorney-General if he will make a statement on the implications for United Kingdom law of the Jaderow case ruling delivered by the European Court of Justice on 13 December.

  The Attorney-General
  The judgment in the Jaderow case was given in answer to a request for a preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice under article 177 of the treaty. It is now for the referring court, the High Court of Justice, to decide on the lawfulness of the fish licensing conditions at issue in that case in the light of the ruling of the Court of Justice. The case will be reinstated before the High Court in due course and argument will be heard on the impact of the preliminary ruling. To the end, the judgement is being considered carefully by Her Majesty's Government. Until the High Court delivers its judgment, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.

  Trial Statistics
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Attorney-General, pursuant to the reply to the hon. Member for Pembroke on 18 December, if he will arrange for statistics concerning the period between offence and trial to be collected in future.

  The Attorney-General
  No. The Crown prosecution service collects statistics for its own management information and performance indicator purposes. It is not necessary for those purposes to collect statistics by reference to the date of offence.

  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Attorney-General what is the average period in(a) criminal cases and (b) civil cases between arrest or service of papers and hearing.

  The Attorney-General
  The latest figures recorded in the Home Office statistical bulletin for 29 November show that the average time taken between the date of charge or summons and the date of first hearing is 36 days.

  Statistics relating to the period of time between arrest and hearing, in criminal cases, and service of papers and hearing, in civil cases, are not collected.

  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Attorney-General what is the longest period in recent years between arrest and trail; and if he will give details of the case.

  The Attorney-General
  The information which is sought is not readily available and can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Morledge Case
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Attorney-General whether any police officers are to be prosecuted for perjury arising from the collapse of the Morledge case.

  The Attorney-General
  It is for the chief constable of the Nottinghamshire constabulary to determine whether there 454
  should be a disciplinary or criminal investigation. If there is a criminal investigation the provisions of part IX of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 will determine whether a report should be submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions. The question of prosecution cannot arise unless and until such a report is submitted.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Willow Watermark Disease
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the latest position on the combating of willow watermark disease.

  Mr. Maclean
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him on 15 November 1989 at column 336.

  There has been a significant and welcome reduction in the incidence of the disease, largely as a result of control measures carried out under the Watermark Disease (Local Authorities) Order 1986 and its predecessors.

  Shellfish Regulations
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will consider setting up a body run by his Department to administer and monitor the proposed molluscan shellfish regulations.

  Mr. Gummer
  The regulation of molluscan shellfisheries —including deposit controls, the granting of several orders and the approval of proposed byelaws of the Sea Fisheries Committees—are already matters for the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Proposals are expected soon from the European Commission dealing with intra-Community trade in live bivalve molluscs and safeguards to public health. We shall examine the resource needs for administration and monitoring in the light of the proposals made but at present see no need to create a separate, single and new body for this purpose.

  Rationing Schemes
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will ensure that guidance on war time rationing schemes for councils, resulting from a recent consultation exercise with local authority associations will contain specific provision for(a) ethnic minorities, (b) people with disabilities, (c) the homeless, (d) the illiterate and (e) those who decide to self-evacuate; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The Ministry takes its civil defence responsibilities seriously and will ensure that arrangements are as accessible as possible to the whole community. No doubt the hon. Member will encourage his local authority to take a full and constructive part in current consultations with local authority associations.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his Department has considered the possibility of using poll tax registers as a basis for the distribution of ration documents in a war emergency; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The community charge legislation contains no provision for local authorities to use information collected for the purposes of the community charge for other purposes.

  Food Stockpiling
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what advice his Department is offering to the public about the stockpiling of food in the event of a war emergency; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  As a result of the defence policy pursued by the Government within our membership of NATO, the likelihood of a war emergency is remote. However, the public would be advised appropriately should such a situation arise.

  Salmon
  Sir Michael Shaw
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what were the United Kingdom salmon catch statistics, distinguishing between the different methods of fishing in Scotland and England, for the most recent convenient years.

  Mr. Gummer
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. Maclean
  I met representatives of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds on 30 August, when we discussed a number of issues of mutual concern.

  Investment
  Mr. Speller
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to reduce the cost of borrowing for agricultural investment.

  Mr. Maclean
  I recognise that high interest rates are unwelcome to the agricultural industry; but farming and agricultural investment, in common with other businesses, would be damaged more by a resurgence of inflation than by a period of higher interest rates.

  Horse Sales
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he expects to present the proposed code of conduct for horse sales and markets; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  A new statutory order to protect the welfare of horses at markets, sales and fairs and a related code of practice are in the course of preparation. We hope to complete the new legislation and code of practice in the first half of 1990.

  Arts and Design
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what expenditure was made by his Department on(a) the arts and (b) design in the last financial year.

  Mr. Maclean
  During the course of carrying out its publicity activities, my Department does incur expenditure on design but does not contribute to the arts. Creative design is produced as an integral part of any given publicity campaign, consequently information in the form asked for is not readily available.

  Pesticides
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make it his policy for toxicity testing of pesticides to be based on exposures to multiple compounds.

  Mr. Maclean
  It is for the advisory committee on pesticides to determine what tests are required before approving pesticides.

  Herbs and Spices
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is conducting research into methods of sterilising herbs and spices other than irradiation and ethylene oxide; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The industry is conducting research actively into the sterilisation of herbs and spices.

  At present the only effective ways of ensuring that herbs and spices are free from microbiological contamination are treatment with ethylene oxide or irradiation. The problem in developing alternative treatments is the need to ensure that they are suitable for all, rather than just some, herbs and spices. Some promising new methods are currently being investigated, but it is too early to say whether any of these will be successful.

  Salmonella
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Norfolk, North (Mr. Howell), of 13 December,Official Report, column 689, what evidence he has that the removal of salmonella infected poultry flocks is helping to reduce the level of salmonella infection in humans; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The earlier reply referred to the risk of salmonella infection in humans. This risk is being reduced by the Government's measures, particularly through the compulsory slaughter of laying flocks known to be infected with invasive salmonella. Information collected by the public health laboratory service indicates that the number of salmonella food poisoning outbreaks associated with eggs rose from 23 in the first nine months of 1988 to 30 in the same period in 1989. This was a much lower rate of increase than that recorded in the previous two years.

  Alcohol
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list all the measures he has taken to reduce alcohol consumption in the United Kingdom diet; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  In response to the report by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy on "Diet and Cardiovascular Disease" we extended the Community requirement to indicate alcoholic strength on prepacked alcoholic drinks to dispensed drinks such as those sold in bars or restaurants. This is to help those consumers wishing to assess or reduce their alcohol intake to do so. We are also intending to introduce controls over the use of the description "low alcohol" to drinks not exceeding 1·2 per cent. alcohol by volume to ensure that consumers are
  457
  not misled in this area. Our Food Labelling Regulations already control the use of the terms "alcohol-free", "dealcoholised" and "non-alcoholic". All these are measures to give people the ability to choose. The responsibility for the sensible use of alcohol remains clearly one for every individual.

  Food Additives
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list all food additives which currently have approval for use in food, giving in each case, the year of approval; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  All currently approved food additives are listed in the back of our free booklet "Food Additives—The Balanced Approach", available from Food Sense, London SE99 7TT. Since publication of the list, one new sweetener, Lactitol, has been added and as a result of an EC directive four emulsifiers—polyoxyethylene (8) stearate (430), polyoxyethylene (40) stearate (431), lactylated fatty acid esters of glycol and propane-1, 2-diol (478), and dioctyl sodium sulphosuccinate (—) have been deleted, and two added tartaric acid esters of mono and diglycerides of fatty acids (E472(d)), and mixed acetic and tartaric acid esters of mono and diglycerides of fatty acids (E472(f)).

  I will send the hon. Member a copy of the booklet.

  The dates of current approval are the dates of the relevant regulations, a list of which I will also send to the hon. Member. The information requested on the individual approval dates could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list all the food additives for which he has withdrawn approval giving in each case the year when the additive was withdrawn; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  Cyclamic acid, a sweetener, and its sodium and calcium salts were withdrawn in 1969. The Colouring Matter in Food Regulations 1973 have been amended several times as follows:in 1975 Orange RN was withdrawn; in 1976 Fast Yellow AB, Orchil or Orcein, Solanthrene Blue RS or Anthragen Blue or Indanthrene Blue Black 7984 and Burnt Umber were withdrawn; in 1978 in order to implement an EC directive, Orange G, chocolate brown FB, the channel black form of carbon black were withdrawn; and in 1987 yellow 2G was withdrawn.
  In order to implement an EC directive the following emulsifiers and stablisers were withdrawn in 1989:
  Ployoxyethylene (8) stearate, polyoxyethylene (40) stearate, lactylated fatty acid esters of glycol and propane-1 2-diol, and dioctyl sodium sulphosuccinate.
  We have recently announced an intention to prohibit the use of mineral hydrocarbons in food, and potassium bromate as a flour improver. We have also accepted the advice of the Food Advisory Committee that the colours, crocin, santalin, solvent-extracted annatto, canthaxanthin and capsanthin/capsorubin should be removed from the permitted list, although in the case of the last three, Community action will be required.

  Saturated Fat
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list all the measures he has taken to reduce saturated fat consumption in the United Kingdom diet; and if he will make a statement.
  458
  Mr. Gummer
  In response to the report by the Committee on Medical aspects of Food Policy in "Diet and Cardiovascular Disease", which recommended reductions in overall fat intake and intake of saturated fat, we made adjustments to the beef and sheep variable premium schemes to exclude the fatter animals from eligibility. In 1987 my Department introduced guidelines on nutrition labelling. These have encouraged manufacturers to give nutrition information on food labels including total fat and saturates declarations, thus enabling consumers to compare products more easily and to help them reduce their fat intake. We are currently pressing for a satisfactory Communitywide system for consumers in negotiations on proposed Community directives on nutrition labelling. As announced in July we shall be introducing regulations to control nutrition claims such as "low fat", "low in saturates" to ensure that consumers are not misled. Together with the Department of Health and the Health Education Authority, my officials are preparing a simple set of dietary guidelines to be published in the new year which will further help to educate consumers about the need for an overall balanced diet.

  Sugar
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list all the measures he has taken to reduce sugar consumption in the United Kingdom diet; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  In 1987 my Department introduced guidelines on nutrition labelling. These have encouraged manufacturers to give nutrition information on food labels, including total sugar declarations, thus enabling consumers to compare products more easily and to help them choose a balanced diet. We are currently pressing for a satisfactory Communitywide system for consumers in negotiations on proposed Community directives on nutrition labelling. As announced in July, we shall be introducing regulations to control nutrition claims such as "reduced sugar", "no added sugars" to ensure that consumers are not misled. We are also actively considering those recommendations which fall to my Department's responsibility in the recently published report by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy on "Dietary Sugars and Human Disease".

  Sodium Chloride
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list all the measures he has taken to reduce the sodium chloride consumption in the United Kingdom diet; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  Although certain people require low sodium diets for medical reasons, I am not aware of any firm evidence of the need to reduce sodium chloride consumption in the United Kingdom diet. In 1987 my Department introduced guidelines on nutrition labelling. These have encouraged manufacturers to give nutrition information on food labels, including sodium declarations, thus enabling consumers to compare products more easily and to help those who wish to reduce their sodium intake to do so.

  I am currently pressing for a satisfactory Community-wide system for consumers in negotiations on proposed

  459
  Community directives on nutrition labelling. As announced in July we shall be introducing regulations to control nutrition claims such as "low salt", "low sodium", to ensure that consumers are not misled.

  Commission proposals relating specifically to sodium have not yet been issued, but I am seeking to ensure effective Communitywide regulation on all these matters, although a number of countries have been strongly opposed to those proposals issued so far.

  Fishing Rights
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his policy on the extension of inshore sea fishery district and exclusive fishing rights from three to six miles; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  My colleagues and I are currently giving careful consideration to a proposal put to us by the Association of Sea Fisheries Committees for an extension of SFC jurisdiction from three to six miles which would 460
  enable SFCs to propose byelaws for regulating certain stocks in the wider zone. We will make a decision as soon as we can. There would be detailed consultations with the fishing industry and constituent county and metropolitan district councils of SFCs if we decide to proceed.

  Bass Nursery Areas
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had with the sea fishery committees about his proposal to introduce bass nursery areas in Langstone harbour, Portsmouth harbour, Southampton Water, Poole harbour and the Fleet at Portland.

  Mr. Gummer
  The Ministry has had a number of discussions with the Association of Sea Fisheries Commmittees and with individual Sea Fisheries Comittees about the introduction of nursery areas in these and other waters to help protect juvenile bass stocks. We hope to be able to make an announcement soon.

Preamble
The House met at eleven of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Chichester.

Housing and Interest Rates
Lord Dean of Beswick Lord Dean of Beswick asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they are now able to calculate what effect the last increase in minimum lending rate has had on the housing situation in the United Kingdom.
The Paymaster General (The Earl of Caithness): My Lords, no.
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, perhaps I may acquaint the noble Earl with some of the effects of that increase. Is the Minister aware that since May 1988 the average increase in mortgages in this country has been £88 per month? In the London area it is almost double that —at £162 per month. Is the Minister also aware that in that same period the number of mortgagees who are between six and 12 months in arrears has risen to 45,000, an increase of 20 per cent.? Does he not understand that we may be watching a social disaster unfolding? When will the Government do something about it?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, as your Lordships will be aware, the Question, as the noble Lord, Lord Dean, phrased it, relates to the last increase in minimum lending rate. However, he has proceeded to regale us with figures from May 1988 which are considerably wide of the Question he originally wished me to answer.
With regard to arrears, I hope that the noble Lord will keep the matter in perspective. Although we all appreciate how distressing it is for individuals concerned, the latest figures to the end of June 1989 show that less than 1 per cent. of building society borrowers are more than six months in arrears. I know that the noble Lord will be keen to welcome the efforts that the Government have made in the Autumn Statement to help housing and particularly the homeless.
Lord Mellish: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the employers —never mind about the workers —have said that they face 1990 with some trepidation? There is a slump in house building due to various factors. Has the noble Earl any comment about that, or is he satisfied with the slump?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, after a record year in 1988 and the tremendous growth in the economy, it was inevitable that there had to be a pause for breath. However, I am sure that the noble Lord also has welcomed the dramatic increase in funding for the Housing Corporation.
The Earl of Selkirk: My Lords, can my noble friend say whether the majority of foreclosures are due to family break-up rather than purely to finance?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, my noble friend is absolutely right. I am sure that your Lordships have read with interest the report on the homeless which the Government recently published. The latest figures show that only 6 per cent. of homeless people accepted by councils were homeless due to arrears.
Lord Bruce of Donington: My Lords, is not the reason why the noble Earl gave a negative reply to the Question put by my noble friend that the Government are unaware of what the housing situation is? Therefore it is impossible to make any mathematical calculation. Can he give the House one instance where, over the last 10 years, the Government have improved the housing situation? It is now worse than it was 10 years ago.
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, the noble Lord is quite wrong; he is wrong on all counts. We have done an enormous amount for housing, as he knows. I was sad that he did not take as full a part as I hoped he would have done in the debates on what became the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 which has done an enormous amount to put funds where they are needed.
Lord St. John of Fawsley: My Lords, my noble friend has mentioned the situation of the homeless. Will he tell the House what the Government are doing to help those in London and our large cities who are without homes? Is it not an affront to the conscience of the nation that so many people, young and old, should have to spend Christmas on the streets?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, there are three groups of people who can help the homeless: the voluntary bodies and the churches; the local authorities; and the Government. My noble friend asked specifically about the Government. Perhaps I may tell him the figures that were announced on the day when my right honourable friend the Chancellor made the Autumn Statement. The Government will give a further £250 million over the next two years specifically to help the homeless in London and the South-East. That is a large sum to give to both the local authorities and the housing associations.
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, in response to the noble Earl's answer to my supplementary question, of course we welcome any increased funding for housing. However, is the Minister not aware that when he claims a record year, it is a spurious claim? Under a previous Conservative Government and the succeeding Labour Government we were building 300,000 houses a year. So the noble Earl is being selective in claiming a record.
Is he not aware that the noble Lord, Lord Mellish, is quite correct? There is a serious dip in house building in all sectors. In the welcome speech made by the new Secretary of State only last week at

341
the annual lunch of the National House-Builders Council he said that this Government's objective was a decent home for everybody. Is the Minister aware that, based on the department's own review, a million new properties will be needed by the year 2000? Does he really believe that that objective will be reached on the present figures? All the indications are that we shall get nowhere near that. Why does the Minister claim a success when it is not attainable?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Dean of Beswick, is quite right to chide me. I did not quantify the figure of the record. It was the highest number of private sector houses started since 1972–73. I apologise to the noble Lord for not putting it in quite the perspective I should.
The last time I discussed this subject with the noble Lord at the Dispatch Box he was keen to lower the price of houses for first-time buyers. As he will have seen from recent surveys, prices in the South-East are falling: that will therefore encourage first-time buyers.
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, will the noble Earl now answer the question that I put to him, and not the one he wants to answer, which has not been asked?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, as regards the number of houses that are built, as the noble Lord knows, that is determined very much by planning permission. Overall, there is an equilibrium of houses throughout the United Kingdom, but there are shortages in certain areas. In those areas there will be a need for planning permission to enable new houses to be built to meet the demand.
Lord Renton: My Lords, will my noble friend say to what extent the homeless in London are young people, sadly from broken homes a long way away, who have come to London in the mistaken belief that once there all will be well?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, I do not have the information that would help my noble friend. I might have been able to reply to that question six months ago but I do not have the information with me now. However, I believe there is some information in the review of homeless people. If my noble friend would care to look at that he may find something that helps him.

Airbus: Orders
11.14 a.m.
The Viscount of Oxfuird The Viscount of Oxfuird asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many firm orders for the Airbus series of aircraft have now been received.
The Minister of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Trefgarne): My Lords, I understand from Airbus Industrie that a total of 1,342 firm orders for Airbus aircraft had been received by
342
Airbus Industrie as of 15th December. This is an increase of 425 over last year and gives Airbus Industrie a 23 per cent. share of the market for large civil aircraft for the past 12 months.
The Viscount of Oxfuird: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that encouraging reply, particularly at this festive season. Can he advise us what the original launch aid sum of money was and when it is anticipated that Airbus will break even?
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, the launch, aid has been a continuous phenomenon, if I may describe it like that, although that is not quite an accurate description. A number of different sums of launch aid money have been provided at various times. As my noble friend will recall, the United Kingdom is now a 20 per cent. partner in the programme. The launch aid paid to British Aerospace in connection with the A320, for example, was £250 million. That was fully repayable through lump sum repayments and levies on aircraft sales. Up to £450 million will be available for the A330/A340. That sum is also fully repayable with a real rate of return. Of that £450 million, about £140 million has been paid so far.
Lord Underhill: My Lords, I join the noble Viscount in welcoming the success of the various series of aircraft made by Airbus Industrie. Is it not the case that British Aerospace always refers, quite rightly, in glowing terms in its publication Flightpath to its contribution to the aircraft of various aircraft industries? How many men are employed as a result of the United Kingdom's 20 per cent. partnership in the Airbus programme, not only by British Aerospace itself but also by the component industries?
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, I am afraid I cannot give the noble Lord those figures without notice, but they clearly represent a substantial number of people. British Aerospace has been principally involved, as the noble Lord will recall, in the manufacture of the wings of the Airbus family of aircraft. It appears that that company will be able to sustain a considerable number of jobs in that programme for many years ahead.
The Viscount of Oxfuird: My Lords, will my noble friend tell us how the new long-range A340 series of Airbus will perform in real tems as regards the airlines?
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, that aircraft has yet to fly in prototype form, but it is anticipated that it will have a range of some 7,450 miles, which should enable it to fly non-stop to Australia.

Environmental Research Expenditure
11.18 a.m.
The Viscount of Oxfuird The Viscount of Oxfuird asked Her Majesty's Government:
How the recently announced increase in expenditure on environmental research will be allocated.
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science announced in November an increase of £175 million in the science budget for the period 1990–91 to 1992–93, of which over £24 million has so far been allocated to equipment needed for environmental research. My right honourable friend is at present considering the Advisory Board for the Research Councils' advice on the allocation of the remainder of the science budget for the next three years and his decision will be announced in due course. It will be for the research councils to decide their future priorities for specific research areas within the overall totals allocated to them.
The Viscount of Oxfuird: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Can he possibly indicate to the House how he believes the increased funding will benefit the research undertaken by this country?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, part of the additional funding will contribute to the construction of the Royal Research Ship "James Clark Ross" which will play a key role in support of research programmes in the Antarctic. Funding is also being provided for the construction of an instrument for use on board a proposed earth remote sensing satellite for launch in 1993.
Lord Molloy: My Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that the statement he has just made about research to protect the environment is most welcome? However, are the Government prepared to accept that certain aspects of the clean air legislation, which has made such a massive contribution to clean air, have been neglected by some local authorities? Does he accept that the environment could be protected if those local authorities were reminded of their responsibilities and of their powers to prosecute where it is absolutely necessary?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, that question is rather far from the Question on the Order Paper, but I take the point made by the noble Lord.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, does the noble Viscount agree that improved energy efficiency can contribute most to improving the environment in future years? Is any of the additional funding likely to be allocated to basic research on energy efficiency?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, my right honourable friend is at present considering the advice of the Advisory Board for the Research Councils on the allocation of the science budget. I am unable to comment at the moment on whether that advice includes a recommendation on the lines suggested by the noble Lord. I shall draw his remarks to the attention of my right honourable friend.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, further to the question of the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, in view of the cuts in the budget of the Energy Efficiency Office, will the Minister impress on his right honourable friend the necessity to increase research into energy efficiency? Since I assume that the members of the
344
new green Government opposite all use low energy electric light bulbs, can the Minister advise the House where such bulbs can be purchased? In the United States they are being given away by public utilities but in this country there seems to be no supply of them.
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, that also is a question on energy efficiency. This Question relates to environmental research.
Lord Peston: My Lords, I assume that the Minister of State at the Department of Industry will be advising us as to the places where we can buy light bulbs. It must be within his department's area of responsibility.
This is an important question and the noble Viscount was right to emphasise the context of the science budget. However, is he not aware that the Advisory Board for the Research Councils has asked the Secretary of State for almost twice the increase which it received and that therefore its view is that the science budget is seriously under-financed? Does he agree that if that is the case, à fortiori the environmental research budget would be too low?
More generally is the noble Viscount not aware that the costs that this country will incur as a result of environmental damage are measured in billions? Does he agree that therefore the research sums that we are talking about, in millions, would be highly cost-effective and should be very strongly supported?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I do not believe that it is the Government's job to advise on purchasing light bulbs. However, I shall do anything I can to help the noble Lord.
The settlement represents a substantial increase in resources. The science budget in 1990–91 will be nearly 10 per cent. more in cash terms than in the current financial year or 4·7 per cent. higher in real terms. I can tell the noble Lord that the chairman of the ABRC has welcomed the increase. The science budget in 1990–91 will be more than 28 per cent. higher in real terms than when the Government came to office in 1979.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, does the noble Viscount recognise that energy efficiency is a part of environmental research, and an important part? Will he answer my question and the question of the noble Lord, Lord Ezra? Will part of the new allocation be devoted to research on energy efficiency?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I have answered that question, and anyway it is a separate issue.
The Viscount of Oxfuird: My Lords, can my noble friend indicate what international collaborative research projects this country is involved in?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, the United Kingdom is playing a major role in a range of international research projects including the World Ocean Circulation Experiment, the Joint Global Biogeochemical Ocean Flux Study, the Ocean Drilling Programme and a range of earth observation

345
satellites for which the UK has provided specific remote sensing instruments.
Lord Tordoff: My Lords, is the noble Viscount aware how pleased we are on these Benches to see all the green plants on the Government Back Benches flourishing at this time of year?
Viscount Davidson: Yes, my Lords.

Student Loans
11.24 a.m.
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall now repeat a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science. The Statement is as follows:
"With permission, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a Statement on the administration of student loans.
"I reported to the House yesterday —at the earliest opportunity —the background to the decision of the participating financial institutions to withdraw from the Student Loans Company. I indicated then that I would be happy to make a Statement today. The main points are as follows:
"The objectives, principles and framework of the scheme as outlined in the Education (Student Loans) Bill remain completely unchanged. I regret the banks' withdrawal but it affects neither the policy nor the Bill.
"As I announced yesterday, arrangements are now being made for the Student Loans Company to pass into government ownership. This will ensure that the preparations for the scheme can continue smoothly. A great deal of the preparatory work already undertaken is relevant to the new approach. The banks have agreed to contribute £0·5 million to these preparatory costs.
"The new approach may even be a cheaper option. It has always been the case that the Government would fund the administration of the scheme as well as the loans. We were prepared to pay a fee to the financial institutions in order to secure the benefits of their branch networks for students.
"The main result of the institutions' decision will be less easy access to loans for students. I would have preferred them to have that convenience. But the essential point is that nothing in the decision of the institutions alters either the Bill or the analysis behind it. The Bill will continue on course".
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
11.26 a.m.
Lord Peston: My Lords, I thank the noble Viscount for the Statement. However, I am bound to say that for complacency and lack of content it exceeds any Statement that I have heard in your Lordships' House.
346
Is the noble Viscount aware that his right honourable friend the previous Secretary of State for Education and Science said in another place on 19th June 1989 (at cols. 22 and 23 of Commons Hansard):
"It is right that this scheme should be administered in the private sector, as our financial institutions possess skills in information and banking systems that are not readily available to the public sector"?
He also said:
"We have had discussions with a number of banks and other financial institutions. I am clear that there will be substantial interest in participation in the scheme, subject to the negotiation of the final contract. In particular, it is clear that the major clearing banks will be ready to participate in the scheme".
He ended by saying:
"That must be their decision, but I am confident, from assurances given personally to me, of substantial interest in participating in the scheme".
That is the background to this extraordinary Statement today.
Perhaps I may draw your Lordships' attention to the words in the Statement that:
"arrangements are now being made for the Student Loans Company to pass into government ownership".
We have an extraordinary example of the Government nationalising a company almost before it has been privatised.
One has to ask the noble Viscount some substantive questions, even though the Statement contains nothing. What scheme are we now really to have for student loans? Do the Government themselves even know what scheme will eventually be put into operation? Since costs have been incurred in order to persuade the banks to join the scheme, can the noble Viscount tell us the extent of the squandering of public money that has occurred here? I am told, and one has read, that at least £1 million has already been spent. If there were ever a case for an inquiry by the Public Accounts Committee this is it.
What about future costs? Have the Government any idea of what they are involving themselves in? Is there nothing more to be said about the extraordinary suggestion in the Statement that the new approach may even be a cheaper option? How can we possibly believe that? If it is a cheaper option, why was the new approach not the original approach?
Finally, many of us believe that we have to examine student finance. It is not a subject that we feel is over and done with. Is it not the time for the Government to abandon this totally ridiculous Bill, to do some thinking on the subject —and many of us who have worked in the field would be willing to help the Government in order to get the subject straightened out —and then to come back to the other place and to your Lordships' House with a serious scheme for the reform of student finance?
Lord Jenkins of Hillhead: My Lords, this is a remarkable Statement. As the noble Lord, Lord Peston, indicated, the Government are prepared to overcome even their anti-nationalisation dogmatism in order to pursue what they regard as a higher dogmatism of pressing on with the Bill, which quite clearly commands virtually no support. The banks regard it as undesirable and, according to most

347
informed academic opinion, including that of the noble Lord, Lord Peston, my noble friend Lord Russell and the noble Lord, Lord Beloff, the scheme is highly undesirable. That view is wholly shared by all the authorities of the University of Oxford, primarily on the ground that they are convinced that it will narrow rather than widen the social base of student entry.
That is a serious matter for consideration. Has the time not arrived when the Government should take away this meaningless little enabling Bill and look at it again, as the noble Lord suggested? Do the Government never listen? Do they never recognise that emulation of the seamanship of the captain of the "Titanic" is not the highest form of statesmanship?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I am not sure whether I am grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Peston and Lord Jenkins of Hillhead, for their comments. I am not surprised by them, but I venture to remark that the Opposition parties have made quite a meal of a comparatively simple Statement. The Bill is in Committee stage in another place and will come before noble Lords in due course. I can tell the House that without any doubt at all. Government policy is to secure the introduction of the student loan system and to give extra resources to students. That remains our policy. The Student Loans Company will pass into the ownership of the Government, so as to ensure that preparation for the introduction of the scheme may continue without interruption. We are pressing ahead with the legislation. I listened to the noble Lords and I promise them that I shall draw my right honourable friend's attention to what has been said this morning in the House, but, standing at the Dispatch Box, I cannot go any further.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that unhappiness about the scheme is not confined to the other side of the House? Is he also aware that, on the best possible outcome, it must be many years before any saving to public funds results from it? In those circumstances, would it not be wise to use the Christmas Recess to give further thought to it?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I read the papers. I am aware that there is a certain amount of disquiet in many quarters about the Bill. Again, I shall draw my noble friend's remarks to the attention of my right honourable friend.
Lord Rippon of Hexham: My Lords, I welcome the principle of student loans, but is my noble friend aware that the Bill as drafted is an affront to Parliament and gives no details whatever of any arrangements for student loans? Should it not be withdrawn until the Government can say something about what is intended?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, again, I cannot say yes or no to that question, but I shall draw it to my right honourable friend's attention.
Lord Beloff: My Lords, perhaps I may ask the noble Viscount to look at col. 643 of our Hansard
348
of 9th November 1988, when the scheme, in the form of a White Paper, was first brought before the House and we were told that two years had gone into its preparation. I said on that occasion that since the scheme was to be administered by the banks, it might have been wise to consult them during the preparation of the White Paper. I ventured to suggest to noble Lords that they might well find the terms unpalatable and that in the end they might well tell the Government to go away. If, with my limited sources of information, I could be wholly accurate in November 1988, why has it taken over a year for the Government to realise the mess that they have got themselves into?
We know —I believe this is why my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter referred to the possibility of further thought —that the present Secretary of State for Education and Science had nothing to do with the preparation of the White Paper or the subsequent Bill. We owe that to the ingenuity of Mr. Robert Jackson, widely known as the Pol Pot of academia, and I see no reason in conscience why a new Secretary of State is bound to accept every part of a damnosa hereditas particularly when, as my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter argued, it will make no difference to public expenditure for some years to come if the scheme, or some new scheme of student finance involving repayment, were to be introduced. It is officially accepted that the Treasury could not possibly benefit until the next century.
In the light of that, what is the tremendous hurry? We have serious business for the House to transact. Why should the Government persist in saying that they will bring forward a Bill which has no support in any quarter of the House, and which will take up valuable time which could be devoted to more important things? I seriously appeal through my noble friend the Minister to the new Secretary of State to give due consideration to what the noble Lord, Lord Peston, has said. I am quite sure that, if he were willing even at this late stage to consult the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals and the Committee of Directors of Polytechnics, it should be possible to work out a scheme which they would assist in putting into place, instead of alienating them by persisting in a scheme or a variant of a scheme which they have repeatedly told the Government is impossible.
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I shall ensure that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State is made aware of the remarks and feelings of my noble friend, if he is not already aware of them. As to the occasion in November 1988 to which he referred, perhaps I should say in the words of the song, "I remember it well".
Baroness White: My Lords, as the noble Viscount has said that the Opposition are making something of a meal of this, does he agree that it is the best Christmas dinner that any Opposition had for many years?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I can see that they are enjoying it.
Earl Russell: My Lords, I believe that the situation is a little too important for the scoring of party points. Rather than doing that, I should like to turn our attention to the question of whether students entering higher education next October, and their parents, may count on some visible means of support. With that in mind, I should like to ask the noble Viscount whether he can give a copper-bottomed guarantee, or, if not, whether he will ask his right honourable friends the Secretary of State and the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether they can give such a guarantee, that student grants will continue to increase in line with inflation unless or until a workable student loan scheme is in place.
I should also like to ask the noble Viscount about the timetable. He is no doubt aware that the Price Waterhouse report has already expressed grave misgivings about whether student loans can be in place for the next academic year. If that does not make the preparatory work slower it should do. Many of us in all quarters of the House have the gravest doubts as to whether the scheme can possibly be made effective for the next academic years and view with grave misgivings the prospects, should it be on the Statute Book, but not in place. Since I agree wholeheartedly with the noble Lord, Lord Rippon of Hexham, about the contents of the Bill, perhaps I may ask the Government to take it away and bring it back when it is ready.
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I am sure that the noble Earl will realise that I am not in a position to give any copper-bottomed guarantee. I listened to what he said and to the misgivings that have been expressed in the House. I can assure the House that these comments will be passed on to my right honourable friend.
Lord Renton: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that although the Bill is indeed an enabling Bill, the way in which the Minister could exercise his powers under the Bill is very fully and precisely described? He will not have much discretion except to say whether or not his power should be used at all.
Viscount Davidson: Yes, my Lords, that is quite correct.
Lord Grimond: My Lords, now that this scheme, which the Government assured us was so perfect, has collapsed will the Minister ask his right honourable friend to consult again with the Vice-Chancellors and Principals and so forth on the other two schemes that have been put forward in some detail—either for graduate tax or for linking loans to national insurance? There are many people in this country who think that these are preferable to the current scheme in any case. Does he not agree that surely now they should be re-examined?
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I shall of course ask my right honourable friend to look at it again.

Hybrid Instruments: Select Committee
The Chairman of Committees (Lord Aberdare): My Lords, I beg to move the first Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That, as proposed by the Committee of Selection, the Lords following, with the Chairman of Committees, be named of the Select Committee on Hybrid Instruments:—

Cawley, L.

Cork and Orrery, E.

Dilhorne, V.

Lloyd of Kilgerran, L.

Prys-Davies, L.

Thurlow, V. —(The Chairman of Committees.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House of Lords Offices: Select Committee Report
11.41 a.m.
The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, I beg to move that the first report from the House of Lords Offices Committee be agreed to. Perhaps I may draw the attention of your Lordships to two items in this report. With regard to item 4, the committee recommends that during Committee and Report stages seating should be provided on an experimental basis in the clerks' box for up to three advisers to those Peers who sit on the Opposition Front Benches. Hitherto, advisers to the Front Benches opposite have been located below Bar and there have been various difficulties with that arrangement. The recommendation is that up to three advisers should be able to sit in the clerks' box, which is the one immediately opposite the civil servants' box and which is not usually very fully occupied by the clerks during Committee and Report stages. I hope that your Lordships will agree to that experiment.
The other matter is item 7 relating to insurance for noble Lords. I have been asked by various members of the committee particularly to make known to your Lordships that this insurance policy exists. It is a personal accident insurance policy and covers Members of the House against the risk of death or injury on days on which they are engaged on parliamentary business within the precincts of the Palace of Westminster or at ministries or other government-owned premises in London, including transit between and while at ministries outside London. I hope that this scheme will not be of great use to any noble Lords present. However, I thought your Lordships should know about it. beg to move.
Moved, That the 1st Report from the Select Committee be agreed to. [HL Paper 14]. —(The Chairman of Committees.)
The Report was as follows:
1 Appointment of Sub-Committees
The following members of the Committee were appointed to the Sub-Committes:
(a) Library Sub-Committee

L. Dainton (Chairman)

V. Davidson

V. Falkland

L. McIntosh of Haringey

L. Peston.

With the Clerk of the Parliaments.
With power to co-opt further Lords.
(b) Refreshment Department Sub-Committee

L. Allenby of Megiddo

L. Ampthill (Chairman)

L. Denham

B. Hylton-Foster

L. Mason of Barnsley

L. Nugent of Guildford

L. Ponsonby of Shulbrede

B. Stedman

L. Tordoff

With the Clerk of Parliaments.
With power to co-opt further Lords.
(c) Works of Art Sub-Committee

B. Birk

B. Ewart-Biggs

L. Gibson (Chairman)

L. Hesketh

With the Clerk of Parliaments.
With power to co-opt further Lords.
(d) Computer Sub-Committee

L. Dainton

E. Halsbury

L. McIntosh of Haringey (Chairman)

B. Nicol

L. Peston

With the Clerk of Parliaments.
With power to co-opt further Lords.
(e) Staff of the House Sub-Committee

L. Aberdare (Chairman)

L. Belstead (L. Privy Seal)

B. Nicol

With the Clerk of Parliaments and the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.
With power to co-opt further Lords.
(f) Finance Sub-Committee

L. Aberdare (Chairman)

L. Ampthill

E. Attlee

L. Denham

L. McIntosh of Haringey

L. Ponsonby of Shulbrede

L. Dainton

L. Tordoff

With the Clerk of Parliaments.
With power to co-opt further Lords.
(g) Administration Sub-Committee

L. Aberdare (Chairman)

L. Ampthill

E. Attlee

L. Dean of Beswick

L. Dainton

L. Denham

L. Gibson

B. Hylton-Foster

L. McIntosh of Haringey

L. Nelson of Stafford

L. Ponsonby of Shulbrede

L. Tordoff

With the Clerk of Parliaments and the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.
With power to co-opt further Lords.
2 Gentleman Usher of the Black Road.
The Committee were informed of the wishes of the Administration Sub-Committee to retain for a further two years the services of Black Rod, Sir John Gingell, as their agent after his present appointment expires on 13th January 1990.
3 Security
The Committee approved an increase in the complement of the security force for the Palace of Westminster.
4 Accommodation in the Chamber for Opposition Research Staff
The Committee recommend that during Committee of the whole House and Report stages seating should be provided on an experimental basis in the clerks' box for up to three advisers to those Peers who sit on the Opposition front benches.
5 Staff of the House
A report from the Staff of the House Sub-Committee was made to the Committee who agreed to —

(a) a one year extension for the two temporary word processor operator posts in the Hansard Office;

(b) an allowance for a Higher Executive Officer for a period of up to nine months during the introduction of a computer in the Accountant's Office;

(c) a temporary additional Executive Officer post in place of a Clerical Officer/Senior Clerical Officer post in the Printed Paper Office until 23rd June 1990;

(d) the creation of an additional post for a sandwich student for the academic year 1990–91; and

(e) an additional general assistant for the staff canteen in the Refreshment Department.

6 Parliament Office
The Committee were informed of the appintment of Mr. N. J. Adamson CB QC, as Assistant Counsel to the Chairman of Committees in place of Mr. G. A. Preston who has retired.
The Committee were also informed of the impending retirement of Mr. L. A. Ketcher MBE, Senior Executive Officer in the Private Bill Office after 40 years service in the House of Lords. The Committee expressed their warm appreciation of Mr. Ketcher's long and valuable service to the House.
7 Insurance for Lords
The Committee approved an increase in the personal accident insurance cover for Lords whilst engaged in Parliamentary duty.
8 Revised scales of pay and allowances
The Committee confirmed the application of the following Civil Service memoranda to staff of the House of Lords:—

(a) DEO letter dated 21st July 1989. (Subsistence and Meal Allowances)

(b) DEO letter dated 22nd September 1989. (Substitution pay for part-time staff)

(c) DEO letter dated 24th October 1989. (New age pay arrangements for Clerical Staff)

(d) DEO letter dated 31st October 1989. (Pay of Grades 4, 5, 6 and 7)

(e) CM/890 (Pay of staff linked to IPMS Grades)

(f) GM/445 (Fees to Specialist Advisers)

(g) IM 86/6 (Split Duty Allowance for Industrial Staff)

(h) IM 89/3 (Industrial Staff Pay)

(i) IM 89/6 (London Weighting for Industrial Staff)

9 Official Shorthand Writer
The Committee authorised a revised scale of fees for the Shorthand Writer.
10 Computer Development Office
The Committee were informed of a proposal to increase the complement of the Computer Development Office and authorised payment of a proportion of the cost.
11 Superannuation
The Committee were notified of the following awards made under the House of Lords Staff Pension Scheme:—

(a) Pension and lump sum to Mr G. A. Preston, Assistant Counsel who retired on 1st October 1989.

(b) Lump sum death benefit to the personal representative of Mr. R. L. Harmer, Senior Clerical Officer who died on 14th March 1988.

(c) Pension and lump sum to Mrs. J. W. Farley, Cleaner who retired on 23rd September 1989.

(d) Pension and lump sum to Mrs. B. T. McBreen, Cleaner who retired on 28th October 1989.

(e) Pension and lump sum to Mrs. L. B. Pearson, Cleaner who retired on 7th October 1989.

(f) Transfer value payment to the British Telecom Plc New Pension Scheme in respect of Mrs. S. L. A. Langdon, Chef de Partie who resigned on 30th October 1989.

(g) Revised pension and lump sum to Mrs. E. E. Rudd, Cleaner who retired on 17th November 1989.

(h) Revised pension and lump sum to Mrs. L. H. Diedrick, Cleaner who retired on 29th April 1989.

(i) Preserved pension and lump sum to Mrs. H. M. Jelley, Cleaner who resigned on 31st October 1986.

(j) Preserved pension and lump sum to Mrs. M. J. Steels, Clerical Officer who resigned on 4th December 1987.

(k) Preserved pension and lump sum to Mrs. C. A. Lang, Senior Personal Secretary who resigned on 23rd May 1986.

(l) Notional transfer value in respect of Mrs. A. Mossop, Executive Officer who transferred to the House of Commons on 27th June 1988.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Business of the House
The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Belstead): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That, if the Consolidated Fund Bill is brought from the Commons, Standing Order 44 (No two stages of a Bill to be taken on one day) be dispensed with to enable the Bill to be taken through all its stages this day. —(Lord Belstead.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Courts and Legal Services Bill [H.L.]
The Lord Chancellor (Lord Mackay of Clashfern): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House to whom the Courts and Legal Services Bill [H.L.] has been committed that they consider the Bill in the following order—

Clauses 1 to 17,

Schedules 1 and 2,

Clauses 18 to 23,

Schedule 3,

Clauses 24 to 27,

354

Schedule 4,

Clauses 28 to 31,

Schedule 5,

Clauses 32 to 38,

Schedule 6,

Clauses 39 to 50,

Schedule 7,

Clauses 51 to 59,

Schedules 8 and 9,

Clauses 60 to 79,

Schedule 10,

Clauses 80 to 87,

Schedules 11 to 13,

The title. —(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Consolidated Fund Bill
Brought from the Commons, endorsed with the Certificate of the Speaker that the Bill is a Money Bill, and read a first time.
Then, Standing Order No. 44 having been dispensed with (pursuant to Resolution of today), Bill read a second time; Committee negatived; Bill read a third time, and passed.

Scottish Episcopal Clergy Widows' and Orphans' Fund Order Confirmation Bill
11.44 a.m.
The Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a third time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read a third time. —(The Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne.)
The Earl of Lauderdale; My Lords, before the House passes from this Bill perhaps I may say that a number of noble Lords have asked me whether I want to say anything. The reason is that, despite one or two regrettable lapses, my family have adhered to the episcopalian tradition —that is, the application in Scotland of what was once known down south as the Elizabethan Church Settlement.
Ever since the Reformation events of 1560 my predecessors have urged such a solution, among them the illustrious Lord Chancellor John Maitland, who, as a treasured adviser to King James VI, was among the first to put that solution forward. From then on my family was pretty constant in supporting the episcopal form of government in the reformed Scottish Kirk. Despite some Whig and Covenanting propaganda from time to time, this was after all a Stuart solution upheld victoriously, I may say, on the slopes of Killiekrankie Pass in 1689, only to be dashed later under the usurpation of the House of Orange.
Then followed the tragic split between supporters of the episcopal and of the presbyterial type of government in the reformed Scottish Kirk, as also between the traditional and ancient Catholic and the new Calvinist theology. It is my adherence to that proud (and at times persecuted) tradition for which

355
we are often still branded as Dissenters, which caused some noble Lords to ask my opinion.
Since none of the legal or theological leaders of my Church has sought to brief me, I have little to say. If the Bill had had any theological or ecclesiological content, I have no doubt that the eminenti in my Church would have done two things. They would have briefed someone competent to speak and would have hoped that I would keep my mouth shut. Since neither of those things has happened, I merely call attention to the fact that the Bill bears the superscription of the Secretary of State for Scotland, whose party I support and whose direction of Scottish civil policy I applaud.
However, before wishing all blessings on the Bill and on my Church, perhaps I may revert to that tragic split between the episcopalian and presbyterian forms of Church government in the days after the usurper, King William of Orange. One of the most exciting events in Scotland's quarrelsome religious history and experience is proceeding now with a singular healing of the memories under the benign but sometimes suspect influence of the ecumenical movement. It is reflected in pilgrimages to my family chapel, which adjoins the parish kirk of Haddington St. Mary's in East Lothian, where each May Roman Catholics, Church of Scotland and Episcopalian ministers, clergy and bishops, and people join together —a mere 30 of them two decades ago but about 3,000 in 1988. Under a presbyterian roof the ministers and bishops of the several traditions lay the hand of blessing on scores of sick and disabled people and some remarkable favours are on record. The pilgrimage now attracts coach parties from County Durham, Cumbria, Lancashire, Derbyshire and, believe it or not, even from London, as well as from all over Scotland.
A joint church oversight of the goings-on in my family chapel has been achieved and accepted by an ecumenical trust embracing the Dean of the Chapel Royal in Scotland (Church of Scotland), the Archbishop of St. Andrew's and Edinburgh (Roman Catholic) and the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church. That Chapel of The Three Kings is open for use by all Trinitarian Churches.
It would have been a pity to miss this opportunity of conveying such good news of God's Church in my country as we approach recollection of the greatest good news of all human history —of God's incarnation and God's revelation in Christ at this tide.
11.51 a.m.
Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, the noble Earl will be aware that there was no discussion at Report of the Bill largely because we had no representatives of his church here. I am most grateful to him for the brief but interesting history that he has given of his Church in Scotland. I come from the other side of the country. I am not religious. Nevertheless, I was very conscious of Killiecrankie in Scottish history and such matters as the silver bullet. To call King William of Orange a usurper may be all right down here; in parts of Scotland it is not a phrase that would most readily come to the lips.
356
However, I am grateful for the points that have been raised by the noble Earl. It has given me an interest in looking more thoroughly into the history of the Episcopal Church in Scotland.
I also had no respresentation from any bodies. Having considered the Bill it appears to be a convenience that will be of benefit to the Church. We should all be grateful for that.
The Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne: I thank my noble friend Lord Lauderdale and the noble Lord, Lord Carmichael, for their remarks and opinions. I have taken note of them. I commend the Bill.
On Question, Bill read a third time, and passed.

Pakistan Bill [H.L.]
11.52 a.m.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Brabazon of Tara): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time.
Britain's involvement with the region which now forms the state of Pakistan is a long and an intimate one and our relations with independent Pakistan have always been correspondingly close and friendly. We are the largest overseas investor in Pakistan and we have a substantial bilateral aid programme there. We consult and co-operate regularly with the Pakistani authorities on a wide range of matters, including the increasing and worldwide problems of narcotics. We regretted Pakistan's departure from the Commonwealth in 1972, because we felt that both the Commonwealth and Pakistan were poorer for it. Pakistan's return to full parliamentary democracy in November 1988 was therefore a double cause for celebration. In itself, it added a new depth and warmth to our relationship, reflected in the highly successful visit which Prime Minister Bhutto made to this country in July. The parliamentary dimension to our friendship was further underlined by the warm welcome given to the Speaker of the other place when he visited Pakistan in August. The other cause for celebration was that Pakistan's return to full democracy made possible her readmission to the Commonwealth by consensus of all members.
That said, the purpose of the Bill before us today is no more than to modify existing domestic legislation to place Pakistan on the same footing as other Commonwealth countries. Pakistan has duly rejoined the Commonwealth, with effect from 1st October. The Bill involves purely technical amendmens to a number of Acts in order to apply them to Pakistan. The Bill deals with Pakistan's relationship with the Commonwealth Institute. It reinstates the right of the Government of Pakistan to appoint a trustee to the Board of the Imperial War Museum. It makes some amendments to our legislation so that Pakistan forces are included in the definition of Commonwealth forces, with implications for their legal status when, for example, training in this country. It makes provision for the exercise of command and discipline when British forces and Commonwealth forces are serving

357
together and for attachment of members of one force to another. It also ensures that the arrangement for reciprocal enforcement of judgments with Pakistan will continue in force.
The immigration and electoral implications of Pakistan's return to the Commonwealth have been dealt with separately by an Order in Council made on 2nd August, which added Pakistan to the list of Commonwealth countries given in Schedule 3 to the British Nationality Act 1981.
With that brief summary of the Bill, I commend it to your Lordships.
Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time. —(Lord Brabazon of Tara.)
11.56 a.m.
Baroness Ewart-Biggs: My Lords, we are most grateful to the Minister for presenting the Bill and for describing the implications so clearly. It must be rare for a Bill to come before us which I feel will receive unequivocal support and will also attract a great deal of pleasure and enthusiasm. Indeed, it is a relief to have left behind us the hurricane caused by the subject of student loans and to enter the calm waters which are represented by such a reunification.
On these Benches, we are delighted by the re-entry of Pakistan to the Commonwealth and would like to take the opportunity of offering a welcome to its Government and people. I believe that the Commonwealth will very much benefit from Pakistan's renewed presence within its ranks. We are well aware of the wide experience and talent of Pakistan's sophisticated and intelligent civil servants and the contribution that they have made and are making to international organisations, notably the World Bank, where many Pakistanis have served in very high-ranking positions.
Pakistan's Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, is the world's first ever Moslem woman leader and there is little doubt that she has attracted admiration from many parts of the world; and, equally, that much hope has been placed in her efforts to lead her country away from a system of military rule towards a democracy. The difficulties that she has encountered and is encountering have been very clear. We hope that the framework of the Commonwealth will provide a buttress to support her in her commitment to social reform and the creation of a democratic and free society to which she so obviously aspires.
However, equally there can be little doubt that she will need all the help and support that she can get. In this regard the fact that Pakistan will now qualify for technical assistance from the Commonwealth Secretariat Fund is very much to be welcomed. We also hope that the country's return to the Commonwealth will bring additional well targeted aid from this country.
It is therefore a sobering truth that its needs are overwhelming. The one statistic that will provide unequivocal proof is that a staggering 90 per cent. of Pakistan's women are illiterate. We therefore hope that our development aid will take into account the involvement of women as being essential to national development in its varied dimensions of economic
358
productivity, population planning, reducing infant mortality and strengthening human potential. That is the major help that we shall be able to give Pakistan.
Benazir Bhutto is to be congratulated on the very real step that she has taken in bringing about a rapprochement between her country and India. As noble Lords will remember, at the beginning of this year she and a previous Indian Prime Minister, Rajiv Ghandi, laid the groundwork for the establishment of better relations between their two countries. We hope and trust that these relations will continue to strengthen under the new Indian leadership in view of the vital importance of underpinning security in that part of the world. We feel that Pakistan's place within the Commonwealth will put these two countries in a more favourable position to build up trust in place of the bygone suspicion and strife that have existed.
I consider myself very fortunate and privileged from this side of the House to give a wholehearted welcome for the return to the Commonwealth of a country that is headed by a woman whose courage, both as a campaigner and leader, has attracted wide-ranging respect and has given a lead to the women in her country. Moreover, she has fulfilled her role as a wife, mother, politician and public figure with distinction and elegance. We wish her well, as we wish the Bill well.
12 noon
Lord Bonham-Carter: My Lords, I shall not detain the House for long but I should like to thank the Minister for introducing the Bill. I also wish to associate myself with the remarks made by the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs.
We on these Benches join your Lordships in welcoming Pakistan back into the Commonwealth. We hope that its return will strengthen the forces of democracy. It has a hard task to fulfil. As the noble Baroness said, its return will contribute towards improving relations within the Indian sub-continent. I also am happy to be given the opportunity to articulate good wishes from these Benches.
Lord Hunt: My Lords—
Lord Alport: My Lords, I also should like to say a few words in support of this short Bill. One of the most pleasant aspects about this time of year is that one receives annual bulletins of news from friends in various parts of the world. A few days ago I received a letter from an old friend in Rawalpindi. He was a general in the old Indian Army and subsequently a general in the army of Pakistan. He is now a prolific and successful writer, greatly respected in his country and in ours.
He set out his news with immaculate military precision:

"1. We now have democracy with all its birth pangs.

2. The situation in Afghanistan, in spite of the Geneva accord, presents a formidable problem with no immediate solution, leaving 3 million refugees in Pakistan.

3. The Americans have been good friends and have been assisting us in solving the Afghan problem.

359

4. The Indians are at their old game of causing as much embarrassment to us as possible and are now building a dam on a river flowing into Pakistan. This will affect our irrigation.

5. The British, as always, have stood by us in difficult times.

6. By the grace of God the family has been well".

For those of us who believe that the Commonwealth has a great and continuing importance for all the diverse countries which belong to it, and in particular for Great Britain, the readmission of Pakistan to its ranks is a most welcome development. That is, first, because of the influence that Pakistan has in the turbulent Islamic world and the role that it could have in lessening the tension in Arabia and the Middle East. Secondly, in the continuing friction with India the Commonwealth membership of both countries may make it possible for leaders in other Commonwealth countries to help to reconcile these differences as the occasion arises. In that respect, Britain's historic relationship with Pakistan and India, already mentioned by the Minister, may enable us to give help. Thirdly, amid the "birth pangs of democracy" —to use the general's words —the association of Pakistan with the multitude of Commonwealth organisations covering so many aspects of political, professional and civil life, may help to carry it through to stability and success.
Those who know it will agree that Pakistan is a fascinating country with the splendour of its buildings and cities like Lahore; its ancient culture; its historic trunk roads from the Indian to the Afghan frontier; the Karakoram highway from Islamabad to the Chinese border; its Indian Ocean ports which have traded from time immemorial with the Gulf, Arabia, Sri Lanka and beyond.
Pakistan stands at the heart of Asia. Its penalty is that it is affected by developments in almost every part of that great continent. Its importance is that, given internal political stability, given a genuine understanding of its difficulties by Great Britain and other Commonwealth countries, Pakistan may fulfil the most important and constructive role in world affairs to which its history and geography —and I add the potential of its Prime Minister and people —entitles it.
I hope that Her Majesty's Government will not allow themselves to become so absorbed in the residual problems of the old empire in the South Atlantic and the China sea —or, indeed, in the financial complexities of our relations with Europe —that they forget that in every continent there are nations with influence and good will which can be mobilised through membership of the Commonwealth to help to solve our problems. At the same time we in Britain, with our resources, friendship and experience, can perhaps help to solve theirs, particularly, as regards Pakistan, the continuing and dire problem of the Afghan refugees.
I am glad to have had the opportunity of adding a few words from an old friend from that part of the world for the readmission of Pakistan to the Commonwealth.
12.5 p.m.
Lord Lucas of Chilworth: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for his warm remarks in introducing
360
the Bill in addition to explaining its purport, with which no one in your Lordships' House will wish to disagree. I do not dissent from anything said by previous speakers and I should like to be associated with all their comments. However, I have one exception —if my noble friend Lord Alport will forgive me —and it is a comment contained in his friend's letter.
We must realise that Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was elected on 2nd December last year. Therefore, she has only recently completed one year with her new administration. It would be fair to say that at that time her new government were faced with immense problems, and many remain. It is significant to remind ourselves that one of the most notable changes has been the lifting of restrictions on the media and trade unions, and the promotion and encouragement of an atmosphere of free speech.
I understand from friends who trade with Pakistan that during the past year a new spirit has pervaded the country. Human rights are fully respected. In the social sector a number of programmes have been introduced, as was mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs. The programme to eliminate illiteracy is foremost.
My noble friend the Minister mentioned the economic situation. The fact is that the UK is the fourth largest trader in Pakistan, although it is right to say that our share of the market has diminished to only 7·5 per cent. The re-entry of the country into the Commonwealth should give intending investors even more confidence with the proclamations about the export processing zones, repatriation of profits and capital, and so forth.
There is no doubt that the Prime Minister's visit to Britain last July was successful. My honourable friend Mr. Alan Clark, then Minister for Trade, said when he addressed the BASATA conference that her visit would reinforce confidence between the UK and Pakistan and there is no doubt that it played an important part.
In the commercial area I see no hindrance to a further expansion of UK investment in Pakistan and of commercial firms participating in joint ventures or as exporters. I should prefer joint ventures or collaborative arrangements, as I believe they may. The Bill and the words spoken by noble Lords in regard to the re-entry should give great encouragement. I hope they give encouragement to that country.
12.10 p.m.
Lord Hunt: My Lords, I owe your Lordships an apology, particularly the two speakers who have just contributed to this debate, for stepping in quite prematurely and allowing my impetuosity and enthusiasm for the Bill to override my knowledge of the rules of the House. I offer my sincere apologies and I shall try to make up for it by being exceedingly brief.
As one who in the war commanded Pakistani forces who on partition returned to their own country, and who has associated with Pakistani officers at our army staff college and with Pakistani scientists during a major expedition to their

361
mountains in the Karakoram, it may be deemed in order for me to express my particular delight and pleasure that Pakistan is now returning to the fold of the Commonwealth.
It was a particularly sad experience for all of us at the time of partition who were in a position of commanding soldiers who had served so loyally and gallantly in the war when regiments composed partly of Indian soldiers and partly of Pakistani soldiers were torn apart by the events immediately following the last war. The regiment of my brigade thus treated was the Third 12th Frontier Force Regiment and the Punjabi Moslem companies in that battalion. They were returned to Pakistan, leaving their brothers with whom they had fought shoulder to shoulder in the war on the other side of the fence.
It was an extraordinary experience when in 1980 I returned to Pakistan to take part in the Royal Geographical Expedition to the Karakoram to be invited to visit the frontier force regiment in Rawalpindi and be received there as a long-lost brother. Other people have had that experience and it was something which I shall never forget. It was as though time had stood still and had never moved from those happier times. Therefore, no one is in a position to rejoice more warmly than myself at the prospect that the partition between India and Pakistan may be healed with the process of time and the good offices of the presidents of both those countries. I congratulate the Government on giving us this Bill.
Lord Brabazon of Tara: My Lords, I am most grateful to noble Lords for giving the Bill such a warm welcome. It has certainly been a useful discussion.
The noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, referred to the current aid programme for Pakistan. That is planned to increase to £25 million this year. It has doubled over the past five years and increased two years ago from £18 million to £23 million last year. It is our third largest programme of aid in Asia.
In order to mark Pakistan's re-entry to the Commonwealth we are increasing our contribution to the Commonwealth scholarship and fellowship Plan which we hope will enable the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission to provide a number of awards for Pakistan.
As regards the social matters referred to by the noble Baroness, we signed the memorandum of understanding during the visit of Prime Minister Mrs. Benazir Bhutto in July for an allocation of £25 million of aid for slum improvement and primary health care, rural water and teacher training. We have identified projects in all those areas and of course our present aid programme includes substantial assistance for family planning programmes.
The noble Baroness and my noble friend Lord Alport referred to Pakistan's relations with India. We are pleased that the new Indian Government have said that they wish to improve relations with their neighbours. We have no reason to doubt the intentions of the Indian Government to maintain the good relationships which have been developed
362
recently between the two countries. Indeed, India joined the consensus of member states supporting Pakistan's re-entry.
All noble Lords have spoken warmly in support of the Bill and my noble friend Lord Lucas reminded us that we are the fourth largest trader with Pakistan. He did not mention the part which he has played in fostering those trade relations and we congratulate him on that.
I am grateful for the welcome which the Bill has received. I am sure that those in Pakistan will be delighted to know of the many friends which they have in your Lordship's House. I appreciate the warm words which noble Lords have had for the Commonwealth and for the renewed membership of Pakistan. As I made clear, the Government placed great value on the unique advantages of the Commonwealth and the contributions which Pakistan will be able to make to its work. Therefore, I commend the Bill to the House.
On Question, Bill read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Local Government Act 1988 (Competition in Sports and Leisure Facilities) Order 1989
12.18 p.m.
Lord Reay Lord Reay rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th October be approved [29th Report from the Joint Committee, Session 1988–89].
The noble Lord said: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Hesketh I beg to move the order standing in his name on the Order Paper.
The order seeks to extend the range of activities which must be put out to tender by local authorities under the Local Government Act 1988 by including the management of facilities for sport and leisure. The order adds a new defined activity of "managing sports and leisure facilities" to Section 2(2) of the Local Government Act 1988. It also adds a new paragraph 8 to Schedule 1 of the Act which sets out a definition of the activity.
As your Lordships know, local authorities are the major providers of sports facilities in this country. They have in their ownership over 1,000 swimming pools, a similar number of sports halls, and in addition ice rinks, athletic tracks, tennis courts and facilities for many other sports. In 1987–88 local authorities spent over £800 million on sport and recreation, much of it financed by the rate support grant. The Government place the highest value on the sport and leisure facilities which local authorities provide.
I should emphasise that this order does not require local authorities to privatise their sports and leisure facilities. What it does is to require local authorities to submit the management of their facilities to competitive tender. We are not seeking new ownership but better management. The point of competitive tendering is threefold: fuller use of the facilities, a better delivery of the service which they provide and increased value for money. The users of the facilities will benefit from more cost-effective management; so will the ratepayers.
A few moments ago I referred to the numbers and range of facilities provided by local authorities. Regrettably, it is sometimes the case that the facilities which have been provided do not match the needs of the local population. As a result, some facilities may be only half full while others cannot meet local demand. Some managers may not be aware of exactly what it is that their customers want. What is needed is a better understanding of the requirements of the users and a more professional approach to marketing. This is where competitive tendering has an important part to play because a competitive environment provides a powerful incentive to managers to get things right.
I give noble Lords a good example of a facility where we think the planning and marketing is right; that is, the Queen Mother Sports Centre in Westminster. This is one of five leisure centres formerly operated by Westminster City Council and now run by a private contractor, City Centre Leisure. Last year 172,000 people used the swimming pool at the centre. This year that figure has increased to 216,000. Much of the increase is due to the longer opening hours. The centre also provides a wider range of opportunities for people to participate in a variety of activities. In the years when the centre was run by Westminster Council, entrance prices were rising by more than 10 per cent. a year. Under the new management entrance prices have risen by only 6.5 per cent. and users have benefited from new and improved facilities.
There is no doubt that there is scope for improving value for money in the public sector. The Audit Commission estimates that savings from voluntary contracting out may be in the region of 20 per cent. or more of previous costs. The Government believe that major savings are available but we do not want to see these savings achieved at the expense of those people who could not participate in sport without some form of subsidy. That is why we have said that pricing and admissions policy will remain in the control of the local authorities. We recognise that this control is essential if everyone is to be given the opportunity to take part in sport.
Before I move on to outline the main elements of the order, I should like to stress again that despite rumours put about by the Opposition, we are not proposing to privatise local authority sports and leisure facilities. Local authorities will not be required to sell off their facilities, nor will they be forced to run them at a profit. Authorities will retain control of their pricing and admission policies. They can insist upon access for disadvantaged groups, for elite competitors and for others. Authorities are responsible for drawing up the contract documentation, which means that as long as they do not act in a way which could be regarded as anti-competitive or which goes against the meaning of the order, they can decide the extent to which they wish to devolve responsibility to the contractors. And those contractors could just as easily be an in-house team as from the private sector. There is nothing to stop the in-house team winning the contract if it produces the most competitive bid.
This order has been the subject of two rounds of consultation. The first was in 1987 when the Government originally set out their proposals to extend competition to the management of sport and leisure. The second period of consultation was in late 1988 when the first draft of the order was circulated. Ministers at the Department of the Environment and in the Welsh and Scottish Offices have given careful consideration to the 74 responses which we received.
I will briefly explain the contents of the order. The first section lists the facilities where management is to be opened to competitive tendering. The second section exempts facilities provided on premises not predominantly used for sport or physical recreation from competititve tendering and also facilities provided on premises occupied by educational institutions. The order defines the circumstances in which facilities where there is dual use —that is, use by both educational institutions and the community —are also exempted. These conditions are, first, that the facility must be provided under Section 53 of the Education Act 1944 and, secondly, that the facility must be used exclusively by educational institutions for more than 600 hours in the immediately preceding financial year.
The last part of the order defines the acts which are included in the management function. In response to comments from consultees this section has been amended to allow the new management team to bring in outside expertise to help with the coaching or training of certain sports if it so wishes. The implementation timetable is not specified in the order before us today, but will be the subject of another order to be laid before Parliament early next year. Subject to parliamentary approval we propose to phase in implementation on a percentage basis. Thus all authorities in England and Scotland will be required to have exposed to competitive tendering facilities representing 35 per cent. of their gross expenditure in sport and leisure by 1st January 1992, 70 per cent. by 1st August 1992 and 100 per cent. by 1st January 1993. In Wales, competition will be phased in over a two-year period.
It must of course be for local authorities to interpret the order, but my department, the Department of the Environment, will prepare for publication during the early part of next year a circular giving advice on a number of issues. When preparing that circular the department officials will take into account the questions that have been raised by authorities on points of detail and will, where appropriate, offer guidance.
The purpose of this order is to ensure that local authorities improve the management of their sport and leisure facilities. We want to see such facilities run economically and at the same time providing an improved service to their customers. We hope that everyone will benefit —the managers themselves, the sportsmen and women who use the facilities and the ratepayers. I conimepd the order to the House.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th October be approved [29th Report from the Joint Committee, Session 1988–89]. —(Lord Reay.)
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, the House is grateful to the Minister for the very clear way in which he outlined the purpose of the order. I certainly have no quarrel either with this Minister or with the manner in which the order has been presented to the House. However, earlier this morning we had yet another example of dogma gone mad when we debated the Statement on student loans. Despite advice from friends of this Government —and I am prepared to believe the rumour that they still have some left —they failed to listen in regard to student loans. The Government have repeated that dreadful mistake of not listening to their friends in respect of this compulsory tendering issue.
I appreciate that this Minister was not involved in the earlier discussions, as I was, on previous local government Bills, but this aspect of compulsory tendering does not have a friend in the world of local government. The Minister should be invited —as I invite him now —to tell us the bodies of major import in local government or elsewhere who favour the proposals in this Bill. Of course there are outside contractors—people who can see and smell a gravy-boat a mile off—who may well get something from it.
The Minister spoke of wanting to obtain the highest value from public money. This is a very good illustration of the maxim that the Government understand the cost of everything but the value of nothing. I honestly believe that as this is pushed through, promulgated and put into effect by reluctant councils and councillors, there will be horror on the faces of thousands and thousands of people who cannot believe that a government could be as stupid as this Government will be shown to be by pressing this forward.
I should like the Minister to deal with a number of questions. He tells us that he is not putting forward this order as a privatisation measure. His words can mean whatever anyone wants them to mean. The Minister is in effect saying that this is a measure to put out the management of the facilities to tender. Everybody knows that ultimately this Government believe there is nothing that the private sector cannot manage and control better than the public sector. It is no good saying to the hundreds of thousands of parents and children who currently enjoy the facilities of playing fields or swimming pools that those facilities may not eventually be sold off. The Government are not standing at the Dispatch Box saying "Never, ever". Will that be the next step we will face?
I am deeply disturbed, angry and more than in despair that the Government persist. I honestly ask the Minister to explain why the Government persist in dealing with this minuscule aspect of local authority affairs instead of the enormity of the burdens and problems which face the Government? He tells us that it is possible for an in-house team to win a tender. The Minister knows that in every aspect of compulsory tendering more than 80 per cent. of tenders have been won by an in-house team —whether it be for refuse collection or school dinners —but at what price?
366
The trade unions, the workers and the councillors have had to twist and turn to produce winning tenders. It has not only meant exta work —and no one can quibble at that —but corners had to be cut and sails trimmed. At the end of the day the service continues. In Enfield there has been trimming and twisting, for instance, in refuse collection. My dustmen, whenever I speak to them, whenever I can gauge their thoughts, are very angry at the way in which, while they continue to do their job, enormous pressures are put upon them.
The Minister may naively believe that very little will be changed other than what the Minister wants; namely, better value for money. He mentioned Westminster but failed to mention other essays into the subject matter we are talking about. In his reply, will the Minister tell us about the experience of Torbay? The council put out private tenders for ground maintenance but within 10 days the scheme had to be abandoned because of the standards. Would he care to tell us about the experience of Chelmsford and its swimming pool where, after three months, the invitation to tender collapsed?
We are not speaking of a matter that can be shrugged off, but of a service to people who may be absolutely dependent upon it. I looked at the record of a debate in the other place. As usual, Mr. Nicholas Winterton, the Member of Parliament for Macclesfield, spoke very good sense. He told the House conservative-controlled authorities like his would resent very much having imposed on them the measures contained in this order.
I have been a councillor for many years. Councillors resent very deeply the intention of the Government to interfere yet again in these kinds of matters. I am grateful for what the Minister said; namely that next year, in the light of the comments made, there will be further guidance.
I wonder whether the Minister will deal with this kind of situation. From his reading of the papers he will understand the question of dual user and the complexity of the interests using the facilities which are the purpose of the order. I have had access to a number of documents. I have before me a very interesting article written by Mr. Alex Millar, who is the national vice-chairman of the Institute of Groundsmen and of the institute's structure subcommittee. In that recent article he said:
"One of the most obvious pitfalls of the new arrangements is that if contracts are not kept in house, they may be won by untrained, unknowledgeable and unskilled contractors, particularly in the area of sportsground maintenance".
Other than a local authority ensuring that the people who get the tender appear to have the necessary qualifications, what interest or oversight are the Government and the ministry going to take to ensure that tenders are given to properly trained people? The country needs to know something about that.
I now turn to the question of the range of interests. In the same very good article, Mr. Millar said:
"A major concern under the new regime is that minority sports, such as archery, may lose out. Such activities do not generate sufficient income for facilities managers which is why, as I said in my 1987 IoG Sportsground Environment address, local authorities should be allowed to retain their power to decide the level of charges for facilities".

367
The Minister has said that the level of charges will be a matter for the local authority. Can the Minister say how we shall bridge the gap between the level of charges which an authority feels is appropriate or reasonable and what the contractor says needs to be charged in order to make the project profitable? Are we speaking about community needs or profit?
I have before me the annual report of the Sports Council. At page 17 the council state:
"The Council gives considerable priority to assisting sport improve its management and marketing skills and expand its use of new technology. The field of recreation management has latterly been dominated by one issue: Compulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT). This has posed a major challenge to local authorities. The Council has been consulting widely on the implications of the recent legislation and has issued advice highlighting the need for local authorities to preserve the concept of Sport for All".
I ask the Minister a direct question: when the dust dies down do the Minister and his colleagues care that there are fewer facilities available and a less wide range of opportunities for local people to enjoy the amenities that they once had? Will the Minister and his colleagues then be happy that by some magic formula the local ratepayer is paying less? In other words, where is the heart of the Minister and the Government in these matters? There are dreadful consequences facing the Government if they persist.
When we talk about swimming, we are not speaking solely of a sports activity, but of saving lives. I take an interest in judo. There are two bodies passionately involved in that minority sport; one is the British Judo Association, and the other is the British Judo Council. One body is officially recognised by the Sports Council; the other is not. The complaint of the organisation that is not recognised is that, through recognition by the Sports Council, one of the organisations is able to enjoy better facilities provided by local authorities. Can the Minister tell us whether the Government care or are concerned that people who enjoy judo or archery, and many other minority sports, shall still be able to enjoy them?
I have left the Minister with one or two questions. In general the Minister may very well achieve his objective of injecting more sharpness into the management of public facilities. That could have been done without the enormous paraphernalia which he and his colleagues have dreamed up. It is a waste of public money and time. I very much hope that the Minister has some answers to the questions that I have asked.
Lord Reay: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord opposite for his gracious personal opening remark when he said that he had no objection to me. I can assure the noble Lord that I have no objection to him. He asked me a number of questions which I shall do my best to answer. He claimed that this measure was wanted by no one. That is not true. Many authorities are already seeing the benefits of competitive tendering in other areas: we believe that more will come to see the advantages.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, can the noble Lord tell the House the names of 12 of them?
Lord Reay: My Lords, I have no specific figures. I do not wish to go into specific cases. I am quite sure that as this measure becomes better understood it will gather a greater level of support behind it. People will realise the possibilities of improving what is offered not only to the ratepayer but also to the customer. The noble Lord made reference to the fact that 80 per cent. of the contracts had been won in house. We are not worried if work remains in house provided that the competition has been fair and that the direct service organisation tender represents the best value for money.
The noble Lord made a more general point when he contradicted my claim that this was not privatisation; he insisted that it was. He said that that was the only way in which the Government looked at the matter. I refer the noble Lord to paragraph 47 in the Audit Commission report Sport for Whom?:
"Although sometimes described as privatisation CCT is nothing of the sort. Section 19 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 remains in force. Authorities will still be able to control prices and programming and will decide policy matters such as who is to receive subsidies and what activities facilities are to be used for. They will be able to set quality standards, default point systems and ultimately early termination can be used if a contractor fails to meet his obligations".
Those are the words of the Audit Commission, not of the Government.
The noble Lord asked about Torbay and Chelmsford. I do not have details of those two cases. If I may, I shall look into the matter and write to him. The Audit Commission estimated that contracting out on a voluntary basis produced savings of up to 20 per cent. on previous costs. We believe that no local authority should resist an opportunity of that kind.
The noble Lord asked about staff training. Section 17(5) of the Local Government Act 1988 states that local authorities shall not make reference to non-commercial matters such as staff training in their dealings with contractors, but there is nothing in the legislation to prevent local authorities requiring that contractors' staff should be properly qualified to carry out the work specified in the tender documents.
The noble Lord asked also about minority sports. It is up to the local authority to write into the contract suitable terms for the minority sports that it would like to see provided.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, I assure the noble Lord that this will be my last intervention. A local authority, in the light of its knowledge of the needs of the area, will produce a brief which the contractors will say makes their job of making a profit impossible. They are concerned only with making a profit. That will put pressure on the local authority to trim its brief and, perhaps under pressure from the potential contractors, eliminate from the brief sports that should be encouraged. It is no use the Minister saying that it is entirely up to local government to decide which sports should be carried on and to decide on the level of charges and exemptions if at the same time the Government say that local government must get rid of management responsibility and put it out to tender. Does the

369
noble Lord not understand that it is neither flesh of one nor fowl of the other? It is a dog's breakfast.
Lord Reay: My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Lord. I should like to quote again from the Audit Commission report. The noble Lord speaks as though there is no problem and appears to suggest that the position cannot be improved. That is not the view of the Audit Commission. Paragraph 9 of the report says:
"Many authorities do not have a clear idea of what their role in sport and recreation should be and have not reconciled their social and financial objectives. The problems relate principally to objectives —provision, price setting and subsidy and performance monitoring. Poor marketing lies at the heart of their problems. A poor understanding of local needs and how they are changing, who does and does not participate in sport and use facilities, why this is so, who the authority is trying to help and how they should be reached and what charges they can afford".
It goes on to say that these are management deficiencies.
That is the position which the order seeks to improve. The order is intended to be in the interests not just of the ratepayers, as the noble Lord alleges, but principally of the customers.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Census Order 1989
12.44 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Hooper)The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Hooper) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 13th November be approved [3rd Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the Government propose that a census of Great Britain should be taken on 21st April 1991. A census has been conducted in Britain every 10 years since 1801, except for 1941. A European Community directive adopted in 1987 called for member countries to hold a census between 1st March and 31st May 1991. That conveniently fits with our plans.
To make, manage and monitor policy, any government will need reliable up-to-date statistical information on a uniform basis about people and households for all parts of the country. Only a census can give us that. The census provides the starting point for annual estimates of district populations. It is essential for distribution of central grants and resource allocations to local and health authorities, which now amount to more than £34 billion a year. A wide range of users outside government also need census statistics.
The proposals were announced in our White Paper of July 1988, Cmnd. 430. The Order in Council, apart from directing that a census is to be taken on a particular date, needs to specify who is to be counted, who will be responsible for completing the returns, and what information is to be provided.
Article 4 of the draft order defines the people to be counted. The census is designed to include every person in Great Britain at midnight at the end of census day at the place where he or she spends census night. But we also need to count the usually resident
370
population of each area by asking households about absent residents, so the draft order also covers people who may be abroad on census day.
As to the people responsible for making the returns, the only significant change from the 1981 census is a new paragraph, at Article 5(5), to let people sleeping rough authorise somebody else —perhaps the enumerator, or a representative of a voluntary organisation —to complete the return for them. The information requested in the returns is specified in Schedules 2 and 3.
The census offices —that is, the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys for England and Wales, and the General Register Office (Scotland) —have conducted thorough consultations and field tests to ensure both that the questions will yield the statistical information needed and that the public will find them understandable and acceptable. Some items in the schedules are printed in italics. Under the terms of the Census Act 1920 these items are subject to approval by resolution.
The majority of the questions were asked in the 1981 census. I shall concentrate on the new items, the first of which appears as part of item 7 of Schedule 2. This provides for a question on the term-time address of students and schoolchildren who live away from home during term-time. The annual population estimates for local areas include students at their term-time address; and this question is needed so that those students not present at their term-time address on census night can be included in the correct areas in population estimates. On 21st April about half of all students are likely not to be present at their term-time address, presumably because that date falls in the Easter vacation.
Item 10 in Schedule 2 provides for a question on ethnic group. Census information on ethnic group will improve the allocation of resources to local and health authorities and will help them target their services. It will also provide a much improved factual basis for assessing and then tackling racial disadvantage; for example, in employment. In the 1988 White Paper we left the final decision on inclusion of this question until after the census test had been conducted this April. That test was the culmination of a process of testing and consultation to develop a workable question on ethnic group which began in the mid-1970s. The test showed that the proposed ethnic group question was sufficiently acceptable to the public for us to include it in the draft order. Less than one-half of 1 per cent. of the households included in the test refused to take part specifically on this account. The accuracy with which the question was answered would be acceptable in a full census.
We have also been asked fairly recently to include a separate Irish category. There would need to be wide consultation to establish a nation-wide need for such information, followed by further consultation and formal testing to design a question which the public will understand and accept. This cannot now be done in time for the 1991 census. To introduce an Irish category without that process would risk asking a question which just would not work. We have consequently been unable to include that category in the order.
Item 11 in Schedule 2 refers to long-term illness, or handicap. There is a need for a nationally consistent source of information for local areas to assist planning health and social services.
The last new item —at paragraph (b) of Item 18 in Schedule 2 —concerns central heating. That new amenity question will provide a more discriminating indicator of the variation in housing standards for local areas than the bath and WC questions alone.
Regulations governing the conduct of the enumeration and containing copies of the census forms will be laid before the House in the new year. Census Newsletter No. 11 shows how the questions might appear on the form. Copies of that newsletter are available from the Printed Paper Office.
The White Paper stated that if the census were to be used to select samples for more detailed voluntary surveys Parliament would be informed. Our plans include a voluntary sample survey following the census to check the accuracy of information. As happened after the 1981 census, a small check on the completeness of electoral registers will be carried out in conjunction with this survey. The census offices are also considering proposals that they should conduct small voluntary surveys on the following subjects: households in privately rented accommodation, and possibly other small tenure groups; households sharing accommodation; vacant accommodation in Scotland; and people with certain qualifications but not currently working in those specialisms; namely, school teaching, nursing, social work and paramedical qualifications. The data collected in any such surveys will be handled within the census offices and treated in strict confidence. No details about any identifiable individuals will be passed to anyone other than people employed by the registrars general.
The census offices are determined to maintain their excellent record for preserving the confidentiality of census information. The principles were set out in the White Paper. When the forms are being collected people will be able, if they wish, to avoid revealing information about themselves to the other people in their household or establishment or to the local emunerator. The answers on the forms will be used solely to provide statistics. No names will be entered into the computer; neither will addresses, apart from postcodes which will be used only to produce statistics.
In England and Wales, it is proposed to use postcodes to build up special areas for which particular users want to obtain statistical abstracts under Section 4(2) of the Census Act 1920. That will be an alternative to the provision of the small area statistics based on enumeration districts: the areas which constitute an enumerator's workload, typically about 180 households or 400 people. Statistics relating to areas based on groupings of postcodes will give extra flexibility in meeting users' requests. In Scotland, statistics have already been produced from the 1981 census for areas defined in terms of groups of postcodes, and their use again will facilitate comparability between 1981 and 1991 output.
Great care will be taken to avoid any inadvertent disclosure of information about identifiable individuals through census statistics. So far as concerns the small area statistics, that will apply both to those based on enumeration districts and to those based on groups of postcodes. For areas with fewer than a certain number of people, all but the basic counts will be suppressed. Further protection will be given by slightly blurring figures in the tables for local areas.
Tables from the census will be produced to the speediest practicable timetable. Preliminary counts of local populations will be published within about two months of census day. The census offices have consulted widely on a set of local statistics to be produced in a standard form. The top priority will be to make key results available for all local authorities by May 1992 so that they can be taken into account in the calculation of central grants to local and health authorities for 1993–94. National reports on particular topics will then be produced as quickly as possible so that the main results are available within two years of the census and the publication programme completed by autumn 1993.
Consideration is currently being given to a request from the Economic and Social Research Council for abstracts in the form of samples of anonymous records for people and households, so that the users of abstracts can prepare their own tabulations. Meeting any such request would be subject to the overriding need to ensure the confidentiality of individual data.
The estimated cost of this census is just under £135 million over the 10-year period from 1986–87 to 1995–96 in Great Britain. At £2·50 per head of the population spread over 10 years, the census gives good value for money, as I trust your Lordships will agree.
The Government are confident that the census as proposed strikes the right balance between meeting the essential needs for statistics and minimising the burden on the public. I commend the draft order to your Lordships.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 13th November be approved [3rd Report from the Joint Committee]. —(Baroness Hooper.)
1 p.m.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, I am happy that in the last exchange that we shall have before Christmas there is no basis upon which the Minister and I will disagree. I warmly welcome the decisions that have been taken for the census, and the competent and clear way in which the Minister explained the order to the House.
It is interesting to note how attitudes have changed over the years. Even 10 years ago, when I was Secretary of State for Social Services and was preparing for the previous census, it was difficult to reach agreement on questions such as the ethnic question, to which I shall come in a moment. It was difficult to persuade the public that the information that it was going to give was needed or would be kept confidential. There was an enormous amount of correspondence in the newspapers and speeches

373
were made suggesting that the questions were a gross intrusion into the privacy of the citizen. It required a great deal of explanation and advocacy to show the public that if a government, of whatever political persuasion, were to have policies, especially social policies, they needed to have the maximum amount of information about the nation's social problems so that they could address those problems.
The more information that can be gained—I will not say the better the legislation is likely to be because the quality of the legislation depends on the quality of the Government; and we have no reason to have any confidence in the quality of the legislation that the Government will produce from the census. The information is essential to enable a government to bring forward social legislation of a high quality.
I should like to take the opportunity to pay tribute to those who are involved in the work of the census and to the department which is responsible for it. As Secretary of State, I always felt that it was in a sense an offshoot of the DHSS, and that I never gave enough time to the staff, able and qualified as they were then and are now. So I should like to pay my tribute to the quality of the work done by the department in preparing, studying and testing material for the census before it goes before the public.
All the information is vital. I am looking at question 4 in Schedule 2, which relates to whether a person is single, married, widowed or divorced, and if married whether it is the first or subsequent subsisting marriage. From all that information, we begin to realise the tremendous changes that are taking place in our society and the extraordinary increase in the numer of marriages that break down, the fascinating number of second marriages and the large increase in one-parent families. A great degree of responsibility is shown by many of those one-parent families when looking after the children within those families.
I wish to obtain a little more information on one group of people touched upon by the Minister under question 7:
"Usual residence, and, in respect of any student or schoolchild who does not reside at that usual residence during term time, the current or most recent term time address".
We live in a society in which many people have no usual residence at all. It seems to me that there are probably 100,000—I believe that is a fair estimate—who live nowhere. They live in shop entrances or over heating vents in restaurants and hotels in London. They manage to find a place to live in empty properties. People are to be found in cardboard boxes, wrapped up under stations and other such places. This is one of the terrible facts of society today.
When the Minister replies, will she tell us a little more about how we shall obtain the information for this group of people? They are probably the most needy group in our society and for them social legislation and social understanding are essential. I did not quite catch the words of the Minister but clearly she was suggesting that some other member of the family would be expected to give information
374
about where such a person might be found. My impression from working, as I have done over many years, with some of the voluntary organisations concerned with the homeless and particularly single homeless people is that most of them have no families which they recognise and there are no families which recognise them. There are no people who will say, "Well, you are likely to find Jim sleeping in front of the Civil Service Stores in the Strand". This is a very difficult group to get hold of. Perhaps the Minister will tell me a little more about how the information will be collected, as it is absolutely vital.
The noble Baroness quite rightly touched on question 10, regarding the ethnic group, with the series of questions. I am delighted that the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, is taking part in this debate. It used to be the case—I hope it is not so now—that this was the most difficult one of all because of all the sensitivities. Often one argued as a Minister that it was essential for us to know the proportion of people of mixed race, where they lived and what was the size of their families in order to make proper provision to help them to live the fullest life in society. It often used to be the case that many of them felt almost inevitably that somehow we were trying to get at them and that there would be discrimination against them. They did not wish to provide that information.
I do not know to what extent we have got over that problem but I was impressed when the Minister said that in the test census only half of 1 per cent. refused to answer those questions. I do not know whether they refused to answer all the questions under question 10. Perhaps the Minister could be a little more precise about that.
There are some other difficult points which perhaps I may put to her. If she does not have the answer now then perhaps she could write to me. What is "white"? Who is white? Are we white because we think we are white or because someone else thinks we are white? If you are in South Africa you can be absolutely white but if someone can prove that four generations back there was a relationship that leads to your not being totally white, then you are not white. Is it what you think you are? What is "black"? That is the same problem. Who is black?
It is refreshing that now people are much more prepared to say "I am black" and be rather proud of it. But does "black" include brown? Many people who today say, "I am black", are not black at all; they are brown, but they have associated themselves with that group in society which society broadly thinks is black. What advice is given to people when they come to fill in the form about what "white" and "black" are?
Perhaps I may add another point as regards (h), "Chinese". What is "Chinese"? Is "Chinese" Hong Kong Chinese? Who knows what will have happened by April 1991 and whether there will have been a great increase in the number of people coming from Hong Kong. Are Chinese those people who come from China or also those who come from Hong Kong? I need not go any further into that matter.

375
Perhaps I may turn to disabled people. Question 11 says,
"Whether suffering from any long-term illness, health problem or handicap which limits his daily activities or the work he can do".
Presumably that includes people not just in the list of accommodation, which is very long and which almost includes canal barges and various other categories. I imagine that it includes hospices. I should like to know and if there is a straight answer perhaps the Minister will give it to me: when someone is dying in a hospice, who decides for them whether they are suffering from a long-term illness or whether it is a short-term illness? Do they have to go through the misery of having to answer such a question for themselves?
Question 12 says,
"In respect of any person aged 18 years or over, the academic, professional or vocational qualifications",
Is this a new question? It seems to me to be new compared with 10 years ago. It is very welcome that we are now ascertaining the academic training and thus the skills of those who will be filling in the census.
Perhaps the noble Baroness will say another word about question 13 which touches on young people. As a result of government legislation and changes in social security benefits, there are many young people who might have been living at home but who for some reason are not doing so and many young people who move back and forth between living at home and living somewhere else, sometimes for financial advantage. I wonder who has the responsibility—whether it is the parents who may conceivably not want their youngsters to live at home; that is quite often the case—or perhaps it may be the youngsters who have to decide whether they are living at home.
My last query relates to question 15 on page 7:
"Number of rooms occupied by the private household to which the return relates excluding any kitchen which is less than 2 metres wide and excluding any bathroom and water closet".
I notice that in question 18 we have some queries about baths, showers and water closets. But why in question 15 do we exclude bathrooms and water closets? I should have thought it was extremely important to know how many people were dependent upon one water closet or upon one shower. We could then see the quality of life or the hardship of life which people have to face.
That covers the questions which I wanted to raise. I was going to ask what was the cost, but in her reply the Minister said that it was £135 million. Perhaps she could now say how many staff are involved in this major and extremely important operation.
Lord Bonham-Carter: My Lords, I, too, wish to thank the Minister for introducing this order so clearly and for pre-empting many of the questions which some of us wanted to raise. I wish to say a few words about the ethnic question, number 10. I am delighted to see it. It is an absolutely essential matter and seems to have been reasonably drafted.
As the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, said, this matter was in the past extremely delicate. It gave rise to
376
quite violent controversy. I, like the noble Lord, was impressed by the statistic which the noble Baroness produced of those willing to fill in a questionnaire in such detail. I was impressed because I have always regarded the response to an ethnic questionnaire as, in some respects, a test of the confidence of the people being questioned in the intentions of the Government. I say that because if, for example, I were asked to fill in an ethnic questionnaire in South Africa, I would be reluctant to do so. If I were a black South African I would assume that the information collected would be used against rather than in favour of my interests. Statistics are in themselves neutral. What matters is the use to which they are put. Therefore, if the minorities in this country live up to the test figure given by the Minister, that will be an encouraging sign.
Taking up a point made by the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, I understand that the questionnaire depends on self-perception. We want to know what people consider themselves to be. It does not matter whether the census is 100 per cent. accurate. What we want to know are rough figures. Figures accurate within a margin of 5 per cent. are good enough for most uses. We want to be able to compare, decade by decade, the changes which take place. That is why it is so essential that the census should not be dropped but should be continued.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, does the noble Lord accept, with his greater knowledge, that nowadays people are more willing to admit they are black, even if their pigmentation is not very dark, than was the case in the past? Is there not some difficulty in being able to make comparisons when the politics of the situation mean that one may be more willing to admit to being black now, whereas 10 years ago one would have said one was dark pink, or whatever?
1.15 p.m.
Lord Bonham-Carter: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for that intervention. This matter poses a sophisticated problem. I should not like to give an absolute answer. However, I think that people's self-perceptions are significant of something. That something, as it changes, is in itself significant. The black issue, for example, is a highly political one. The slogan "black is beautiful" of the 1950s took on a highly political connotation within ethnic groups. It has, in particular, had reverberations in the relations between the Asian and the West Indian communities in this country. I am glad to see in the order the categories, Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi, because often there were moves to persuade all Asians to call themselves black. If they did not, they were made to feel they were not showing solidarity with other minorities. That always caused dispute and disarray and took the focus off the real questions which should have been addressed.
I do not think I have much more to add, except to say that I welcome the measure and I look forward to seeing its results. It is an extremely significant measure. The fact that the ethnic matter is contained within the census should encourage employers and others also to keep ethnic records. It is only by keeping proper ethnic records that one can

377
determine whether quality of treatment is a reality or a fiction.
Lord Monson: My Lords, I hate to cast a stone into the tranquil pond of seasonal goodwill, but I for one do not welcome the ethnic questions in the draft census form. Classifying people by race is part of the tradition of a number of countries, for example the Republic of South Africa, the Soviet Union, Malaysia and a few others. It is not part of our traditions. The idea that a person could be fined £2.000 for misdescribing his race seems to me quite shocking. Incidentally, the Daily Telegraph pointed out a few weeks ago that there is no such thing as an Indian or Pakistani race. There are Kashmiris, Pathans, Punjabis, Gujaratis, Bengalis, Tamils and others. There is no such thing as an Indian, Pakistani or, strictly speaking Bangladeshi race. There are of course Bengalis but that is by the by.
We are told that the order is necessary so that help can be channelled into immigrant areas. Why is that so? Previous waves of immigrants such as the Flemings in the Middle Ages, the Huguenots in the middle of the 16th and the end of the 17th centuries, the Jews in the 1880s, the early 20th century and the late 1930s, the Italians, the Chinese, the Irish, the Poles and the Hungarians, managed perfectly well without special funds being channelled in their direction. Most of them were just as poor on average as Commonwealth immigrants and most of them spoke English far less well on average than the average Commonwealth immigrant. Many were also discriminated against, in particular the Jews and the Irish. Indeed, the Dutch who came to drain the fens were frequently murdered by locals and their bodies thrown into ditches.
With minor exceptions such as language coaching for the Vietnamese, who seem to have particular problems in learning foreign languages, it seems patronising and even insulting to later waves of immigrants to suggest that they are innately incapable of pulling themselves up by their own efforts in the way that all previous waves of immigrants have managed to do. That is one more reason for believing that we should not start now to classify people by race, even less to fine people who get their racial category wrong.
Baroness Hooper: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Ennals and Lord Bonham-Carter, for their welcome of this order. I wish to thank the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, on behalf of the census staff for his kind tribute, which I fully endorse, both as regards their quality and efficacy. As regards the question of numbers of staff involved at this point, in addition to several hundred permanent staff in the census offices we shall be employing about 130,000 temporary field staff. I understand that about 118,000 of those will be enumerators who will be responsible for the delivery of over 20 million forms. There will also be about 1,500 temporary processing staff.
The noble Lord, Lord Ennals, also asked about paragraph 5(5) which concerns usual residence. He asked for a supplement of my comments on people sleeping rough. Special efforts will be made to enumerate people who are sleeping rough, as I mentioned in my opening comments. This will be
378
done through, for example, voluntary bodies with whom we have had and are continuing to have discussions, although the exercise will be managed by the census offices. The enumerators will have a certain responsibility in this respect. That is the purpose of the new provision in the order. It enables arrangements to be made wherever possible—that always has to be done in the light of possibility—to have someone else complete a return for a person who is not available.
I am grateful for the welcome which has been expressed regarding the question of the definition of "white", "black" or ethnic origin. It is a difficult problem and that accounts for the length of time that we have taken, through testing and consultation, to arrive at what we hope will be the most effective question. I was most interested to hear the comments made by the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, in that respect and by the noble Lord, Lord Monson, from his different point of view.
The answer wanted to the question about ethnic group is the answer which the person himself or herself thinks is the correct one—whether it is "white" or "Chinese". For those who find difficulty in agreeing to any of the categories listed from (a) to (i) there is provision for writing in an alternative.
When we discussed the matter with representatives of the black community they considered that people would be more willing to answer a question which distinguished the main sub-groups of the black category and that is one of the reasons for enumerating so many categories. It was also felt—and this accounts for the difference between this question and the 1979 test version—that the use of the terms "white" and "black" were acceptable now although they were not in 1979.
The noble Lord, Lord Ennals, asked me about the results of the ethnic questions. There is a summary in Census Newsletter No. 11 and a fuller report will be published in Population Trends in spring 1990.
The noble Lord, Lord Ennals, also asked about question 12 relating to educational qualifications. That is not a new question although it has been slightly restructured.
As regards question 11 and who decides what is a long-term illness, people who are able to fill in their own details will do so. For others the details will be completed by the head of the institution concerned, whether that is a hospice or other type of institution.
Regarding who has responsibility for including children living at home for part of the time, it is the responsibility of each person over 16 to complete the form or to ensure that it is completed. For those under 16 it is the responsibility of the parent, guardian or other adult in charge.
Turning to the point of the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, on question 15 about the exclusion of the bathroom and WC, if the noble Lord looks at question 16(d)(iii) he will see that there is a separate question on whether a household has the exclusive use of a bath or shower and WC or whether the amenity is shared with other households.
I trust that that answers the various questions that were raised. I am most grateful to all those noble Lords who have contributed to the debate. Perhaps

379
I could add a supplementary point in relation to what the noble Lord, Lord Monson, asked on the ethnic question. He referred to a maximum fine of £2,000. That is incorrect. The maximum fine is £400. The United States of America, Canada and Australia all have ethnic questions in their census forms. Most ethnic minority organisations have agreed that they want such a question. It is perhaps appropriate to end my remarks on the ethnic question since it is clearly one that is of considerable interest.
As I said, I am most grateful to those noble Lords who have participated in the discussion and for their general welcome of the order, which I commend to the House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Human Organ Transplant (Unrelated Persons) Regulations 1989
1.25 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State Department of Health (Baroness Hooper)The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State Department of Health (Baroness Hooper) rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 15th November be approved [1st Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, this set of regulations has its origins in Section 2(7) of the Human Organ Transplants Act 1989, which your Lordships debated thoroughly earlier this year, and seeks to achieve two objectives. Those are: first, to establish and constitute the authority referred to in Section 2(3) of the Act which will be known as the Unrelated Live Transplant Regulatory Authority, or ULTRA for short; and, secondly, to specify the conditions required to be satisfied in cases to which the regulations apply.
The purpose of ULTRA is to enable organ donation to take place between living persons who are not genetically related according to the definition in Section 2(2) of the Act. In every instance, therefore, where an organ transplant is proposed between a living donor and a recipient who are not genetically related, such cases must be referred to ULTRA. It will be the duty of ULTRA to satisfy itself that no payment for the supply of an organ has been or is to be made in contravention of Section 1 of the Act and that other conditions set out in regulations have been met before granting exemption from the prohibition of Section 2(1) of the Act.
The total number of kidney transplants carried out each year in the United Kingdom involving live donors is approximately 200. We envisage that less than half that number will be the subject of applications to ULTRA. We do not therefore expect ULTRA to have a heavy case load but that will in no way belittle the importance of its work. Live transplants will still be the exception but will continue to be possible when the motives for donating arise from genuine altruism.
With the approval of Parliament, ULTRA will begin its legal existence on 1st January 1990.
Submission of applications for exemption from Section 2(1) of the Act must be made by a registered
380
medical practitioner. One of the first tasks of ULTRA will be to determine the form which these submissions will take and how the decision of the authority is to be made. Advice on submission of applications, guidance on procedures and other information will be prepared by ULTRA and made available to health authorities, health boards and the independent sector before the remaining regulations come into force on 1st April 1990. Those other regulations, currently the subject of negative procedures, deal with tests for establishing genetic relationships and information to be supplied about transplants.
The constitution of the authority is set out in Regulation 2 before us. Members of the authority will be appointed by the Secretary of State and will consist of a chairman and not less than seven and not more than 11 other members. The chairman and at least three other members must be registered medical practitioners and at least four members must be appointed who are not, nor have been, registered medical practitioners.
Although not specified in the regulations, it is our intention that as well as registered medical practitioners, members of the authority will include persons experienced in tissue typing and genetics and in ethical and moral issues. We should also expect some members to have no involvement in transplantation. Members will be chosen for their individual expertise and not as representatives of any specific organisation. Membership of the authority will cover as many interests as possible and will take into account the geographical spread within the United Kingdom.
The constitution of the authority will attempt to strike a balance between the necessary medical and other professional expertise directly associated with organ transplantation and public interest and concern about organ donation. ULTRA's secretariat will be provided by the Department of Health and the authority will also have access to legal advice.
We have proposed in paragraph (1)(b) of Regulation 3 that the doctor who has clinical responsibility for the donor should be the person to refer to ULTRA a proposal to undertake a transplant between two living, unrelated persons. It is not unusual for a doctor who has clinical responsibility for the donor also to have clinical responsibility for the recipient. The regulations do not disqualify a doctor having clinical responsibility for both patients. The significance of Regulation 3, paragraph (1)(b) is that the application is made with explicit recognition that the doctor in that instance is responsible for the clinical care of the donor and must therefore have in mind the donor's best interests and well-being.
Regulation 3, paragraph (1)(c) is intended to deal with instances such as so-called domino transplants in which, for example, the heart and lungs of a dead donor are transplanted into a recipient whose lungs are diseased but whose own heart is also removed as part of the transplant technique. That heart, if found suitable, can be used for a second recipient. In such a case the first recipient is acting as a live heart donor for the second recipient. Under those circumstances, because the heart of the first recipient

381
was not removed for the primary purpose of transplantation into another person but as an integral part of the patient's treatment, it seems sensible that the conditions specified in Regulation 3, paragraph (2) need not be applied. However, ULTRA would still be required to satisfy itself that Section 1 of the Act had not been breached.
Conditions specified in Regulation 3, paragraph (2) are largely self-explanatory and take on board the concerns expressed by this House and in another place during the various stages of the Bill; namely, that a doctor should give an explanation of the procedures involved, that the donor understands those procedures and their risks, that he has been given the opportunity to withdraw his consent, has given his consent willingly and so far as can be established has received no inducements or been subject to any threat.
ULTRA must receive reports on the conditions set out in Regulation 3, sub-paragraphs 2(a) to 2(d) from suitably qualified persons who are skilled in interviewing techniques. Such persons, for example, may be fellows or members of the Royal College of Psychiatrists or the Royal College of Physicians or fellows of the Royal College of Surgeons. Of course it will be for ULTRA to decide from whom it will accept reports. It is important that the status and qualifications of persons reporting to ULTRA should lend credibility to their report.
The regulations are straightforward and uncomplicated and, I believe, comply with the wishes of your Lordships to put into place a mechanism for an effective check on the motives behind transplants proposed between persons who are not genetically related. On that basis I recommend the regulations to your Lordships. I beg to move.
Moved, that the draft regulations laid before the House on 15th November be approved [1st Report from the Joint Committee].—(Baroness Hooper.)
1.30 p.m.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, once again the Christmas spirit abounds and I warmly welcome the Minister's presentation and the regulations before us. However, I am slightly quizzical and cannot be totally complimentary. I remember that when the Government came to office 10 years ago there was a marvellous campaign slogan saying that they would get rid of all the quangos. I suspect—I might put down a Written Question after Christmas about this—that we now have far more quangos than we did 10 years ago. We are always setting up new ones. The idea that we should call this authority ULTRA is intolerable. There should be a regulation stating that in future no one should refer to it as ULTRA. ULTRA is obviously a Tory word and I would not serve on an organisation of that name. So I plead with the Minister to think of some better way of referring to a body which has such a responsible task.
I was a little surprised that the Minister did not list the membership. I want to know who the chairman and the other 10 members are because,
382
after all, they spring into action on 1st January. There is the Christmas break; some of them will be off with their families and the post will be a little delayed. How will they come together on 1st January? Perhaps they have not been asked or have not replied, or perhaps the Minister has not got around to it, but why does she not announce the membership of the body today? As she has not told us, I shall have to ask what voluntary appointments are included. Does the body include, for instance, a representative of the British Kidney Patient Association which has had a great deal of experience in the matter? Does it include someone whom I should have thought would be very important; namely, a transplant co-ordinator who, while not a professional, has an important role in making certain that the organ is available at the right time for the right person?
Perhaps I may ask the Minister a quite different question: to what extent will the authority—perhaps I may call it that—be able to deal with policies? I was privileged to be invited by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Mr. Roger Freeman, to attend the seminar which he organised a few weeks ago on the subject of organ transplants. It was an interesting conference and I was most grateful to him for organising it and inviting me.
One of the matters that we discussed was whether, in view of the continuing shortage of organs for transplantation at the time they are needed, we should give more consideration to the opting-out procedure rather than the opting-in procedure. Under that it is assumed that, unless we have said that we do not want our organs to be used to save the life of another, it is assumed that we are perfectly happy for them to be used. I realise that we are talking about those who have died, for example, in an accident, but that is one way of ensuring that we have more organs available at the time they are needed. Will the authority be able to deal with those issues? Will it be able, for instance, to conduct an opinion poll on this or any other question?
We have some worries. I hope that the authority will look at the problem. I note that it was said in the Fourth Standing Committee on Statutory Instruments in another place on 12th December 1989 that:
"the problem with voluntary donations is not that people are not asked—apparently, only 6 per cent. of relatives are not asked—but that 30 per cent. of relatives [speaking on behalf of the dead] said no … within days of the Minister's announcement that the problem is not that people are not asked but that relatives do not wish to donate organs, two television appeals for livers were made, and within a couple of weeks there was a 100 per cent. increase in donations. If the problem is that people do not support the transplant programme and do not want to make donations, that would not necessarily have happened".
The new authority should be able to tackle those questions as to how we can make the programme more effective and successful so that there is a standing committee which is constantly considering the problem. I should be grateful if the Minister would comment on that point in her reply.
In conclusion, as I said at the beginning, I warmly welcome the legislation and the speed with which the Government have decided to set up such an authority. I rather regret what seems to me to be the

383
laxity in inviting and accepting those people so that they are ready to start work on New Year's Day.
Baroness Phillips: My Lords, I wish to ask a simple question which I had thought my noble friend would ask. I was not clear whether every transplant would necessitate a submission to the authority or whether it was only a certain number where there seemed to be some doubt. I am sorry that I must dissent from the enthusiasm for opting-out of my noble friend on the Front Bench. I should certainly like to be the one who decided whether any of my organs were useful to anyone else. There are two surgeons in my family. When one of them once invited me to go to hospital to deal with a painful wrist, I said, "No thank you. I shall go in because there is something wrong with my wrist and you will remove all my organs". The surgeon was always very enthusiastic. I was somewhat reassured when he said, "Oh no, Nan, they're too old". That was at least some consolation.
On a serious note, in view of those dreadful cases of which we have heard—I note that the words "inducement" or "threat" have been used —we must ensure that there is never any inducement or threat to anyone. Since that seems to me to be the custom in certain other parts of the world from where unfortunately we always seem to borrow their worst as well as their best habits, I should like to know that it is absolutely 100 per cent. certain that before anything of this kind takes place there will be an application made to the authorities.
Baroness Seear: My Lords, I also should like to ask the noble Baroness whether there is no better way of obtaining the information that we want our bits and pieces disposed of so that they can be tracked down at once. I know that I signed something but I cannot now find it. If I should be run over, I wager that the piece of paper that I signed some time ago will not be found until my spare parts are no longer of use to anybody.
In these days of high technology can it not be ensured that once a person has given his or her name as someone who is prepared to be carved up, organs can be taken at once when that person is dead? I have looked for the piece of paper which I signed but I seem to have lost it. I do not think that it is an efficient way of obtaining my parts.
Lord Kennet: My Lords, I should like to follow up something said by the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, and to combine two points together into one. The noble Lord said that there were too many quangos and asked whether we could have fewer quangos in the world. It has occurred to me and perhaps also to the Government—if not, no doubt they could think about this matter because there is no special hurry—that it might be an advantage not to have a great many separate authorities, boards, licensing committees or whatever for different fields of the advancing technology of transferring parts of the human body into another body, but to have one umbrella authority which would cover the whole, starting with organ transplants and continuing with in vitro treatments and research, gamete donations
384
and the use of embryo tissue. There are so many procedures that are now coming forward. They are all creating their own problems and give rise to legislation or orders.
It seems to me that in fact there is a risk that some of them may go off in opposite directions. For instance, the regulations now before us assume that consanguinity or genetic relationship is a good thing, and that one need only worry about pressure being brought in cases of people who are not genetically related. In the case of transplants that is understandable and clearly right. However, in the Warnock Report (though I do not think that this is in the embryology Bill) it was stated that genetic relationship was a bad thing in the donation of ova. There was no reason given for that opinion, but it does not seem to me to be a bad idea for a sister to donate ova to her sister, if the latter is infertile in a way that can only be put right by such a donation. If there is a contradiction it needs thinking about, and clearly it should not be thought about other than by a body of wise people who are skilled in the whole of this field.
I should define the field quite simply as transferring parts of people into other people. That is very amateurish, but some such definition seems to me right. If that were to be done it should be done after these regulations are in force and after the Bill is in force. It would be quite a simple matter administratively to set up a joint overall authority.
Every one of these types of procedure introduces ethical problems. Sometimes I think we all tend to believe that an ethical problem is a rather simple matter. One simply asks whether a thing is right or wrong and one decides in a simple yes or no manner and settles the matter. However in fact almost all the ethical problems in the world, and certainly those in this field because they are new, are extraordinarily complicated and tend to go wider and even wider.
When she comes to wind up the debate perhaps the noble Baroness will be able to tell the House something about who will be providing the skilled ethical input into the body that we may or may not be calling ULTRA and how they will be providing it.
1.45 p.m.
Lord Swinfen: My Lords, when introducing these regulations my noble friend said that the donor might well be advised by a medical practitioner who is also the medical adviser to the recipient. I can understand that the person who treats both in hospital may well be the same specialist but I should be interested to know what arrangements are being made for the donor to receive independent advice from a medical practitioner who is not the medical practitioner of the recipient.
In most cases it is unlikely that there would be a conflict of interest but on the odd occasion it may arise. I think that this is a safeguard that should be included somewhere. I do not see it in the regulations and I did not hear it in the explanations given by my noble friend.
Lord Monson: My Lords, this is the second time in the past half hour that I have risen to my feet. The noble Baroness could be forgiven for thinking that when I hear or even sense the phrase "accepted wisdom" I reach for my gun. However, the Human Organ Transplants Act 1989 had an exceptionally easy ride in your Lordships' House—I happened to be away at the time—and there is a respectable opposing case which deserves a brief hearing.
Governments should never legislate to ban things which are merely distasteful. Undoubtedly the idea of organ transplants is aesthetically distasteful, at least to non-medical people. I contend that governments should only ban things which are demonstrably harmful to either individuals or society. Obviously exploitation is harmful. Any simple individual from outside Europe who is persuaded to part with his kidney for a derisory sum is unquestionably being exploited and such exploitation should be clamped down upon very hard.
However, if the element of financial exploitation is absent, are not matters slightly different? It is perfectly possible to have only one kidney and yet to lead a perfectly normal life. I know at least one person with only one lung and two or three people who have only one kidney, one of whom happens to be a niece of mine. Not only is she extremely fit, active and a first-class skier but she has borne two strapping sons since losing her kidney. So it does not seem to have done her an enormous amount of harm.
If that is so, and if someone is going to die—not just be uncomfortable—for lack of a kidney and if (subject to a panel of doctors certifying him or her to be of good health) an individual is prepared to sell one of his or her kidneys for a sum which fully reflects the statistically minor risk which both the operation itself and the subsequent absence of one kidney entails, a sum which would almost certainly be ten or twenty times that which has recently been paid to people from Turkey, then why should that not be allowed to happen? One life would unquestionably be saved—possibly a young life—at the expense on the other side of the scale of a very slight statistical shortening of another life.
I do not for one single moment expect that the Government will change their mind but I want to suggest that there are logical and humane arguments on both sides.
Baroness Hooper: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, for having given me advance warning of his new year question to me. Beyond that, while I appreciate his difficulties over the name, I suggest that it is open to him to use the full title. He can refer to it at all times as the Unrelated Live Transplant Regulatory Authority.
With regard to membership, the members cannot be appointed until these regulations have been approved. However, we are looking very carefully at the interests which the membership should cover and will certainly bear in mind the suggestions that the noble Lord has made.
He also asked whether the authority was able to make policies. ULTRA is not a policy-making body under the Act but may make recommendations to the Minister.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, my question was not on taking decisions, but whether it could consider and make recommendations.
Baroness Hooper: My Lords, I confirm that not only can it consider recommendations but it can make them to Ministers on policies.
On improving the supply of organ donation and the need for a Standing Committee, we believe that that cannot be a function of the Unrelated Live Transplant Regulatory Authority. The functions of the authority are simply those set out in the regulations before us.
The noble Baroness, Lady Seear, asked about recording her wish to donate. We have looked carefully at the possibility of maintaining a register. Experiments are going on to try out computerised registers. When we have the results, we shall decide whether to take the idea forward more widely. In the light of developing technology, matters are becoming increasingly facilitated. However, in the meantime, perhaps I may suggest to the noble Baroness that she ensures that at least some of her close relatives are aware of her wish to be a donor so that if they should ever need to be asked there is no risk that they would say no.
On the point raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Phillips, ULTRA will consider applications for prospective organ transplants only between live unrelated donors and recipients. That is the extent of the authority's powers. All such cases must be referred to the authority.
The noble Lord, Lord Kennet, raised points rather wide of the regulations before us. He referred to matters that will arise in our discussions on the embryology Bill. The authority under that Bill will not make decisions on the way IVF treatment is given. It will not therefore decide whether gametes should be donated by a person who is related to a person who is being given treatment for infertility. The authority will have power to issue codes of practice.
On the point raised by my noble Lord Swinfen, the regulations do not make specific provision for independent advice. However, the person who provides the report for ULTRA will be expected to ensure that the donor has been given unbiased advice. I have noted the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Monson. I commend these regulations to your Lordships.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Education Support Grants (Amendment) Regulations 1989
1.54 p.m.
Viscount Davidson Viscount Davidson rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 15th November be approved [1st Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Viscount said: My Lords, these draft regulations, which further amend the Education Support Grant Regulations 1984, have three purposes. First, they allow for the new activities which we want to introduce in the 1990–91

387
programme. All activities supported by ESG have to be specified in the schedule to the 1984 regulations. These amending regulations add our new activities to that schedule. Secondly, they provide for a change in the rate of grant, so that the bulk of activities next year will be supported at a rate of 60 per cent. Thirdly, they provide for a technical change in the way payments are made to local authorities in England.
The year 1990–91 will be the sixth year in which education support grant will be available to help local authorities to respond to important initiatives and to meet particular needs. Since it began, the programme has supported some impressive achievements. Perhaps I may take a few examples.
Under the primary science and maths activities, 320 advisory teachers in primary science and technology have been appointed, in England, and 360 for maths. Each advisory teacher helps an estimated 50 schools each year. The Local Management of Schools activity only began in 1989–90, but already all LEAs have established central teams to help implement and monitor their LMS schemes, and every authority has made good progress in installing or uprating computer based management information systems. The fact that all LEAs managed to submit their draft LMS schemes by the deadline is a testimony to the effectiveness of the activity, and to the hard work done by LEAs and schools.
The information technology in schools activity has helped to increase the number of micros in schools to an average of 30 per secondary school, as well as supporting some 600 IT advisory teachers, and encouraging LEAs to raise some £8 million last year in contributions from private sources towards IT in schools. I could give many more such examples. Suffice it to say that there is a lot of good work going on supported by ESGs.
We intend to continue that in 1990–91. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science announced in May the Government's intention to support through ESGs expenditure amounting to £140 million in 1990–91 in England which compares with £125 million last year. Of this, some £50 million will support new activities and the extension of existing ones. The remainder—some £90 million—will support the continuation of projects begun in 1989–90 and earlier years.
As in previous years, my right honourable friend has consulted the local authority associations about the content of the 1990–91 programme, The consultations included a meeting at an earlier stage than usual, in February. The activities to be covered by the programme were set out in the usual draft ESG circular issued in June. That explained the new activities proposed for 1990–91, and the rate of grant payable in each case. It is worth noting that the three largest activities—LMS, the basic curriculum and IT in schools—are intended to provide support for all LEAs which want it, and the allocations are all formula based. That means that we work out in advance the allocation we expect to give each LEA according to an objective formula—for example, the
388
number of schools and pupils in the LEA—subject only to the submission of a satisfactory bid from the LEA. That should make life a lot easier for LEAs.
Since the draft circular was issued in June, we have also announced proposals for an additional activity to support courses provided by the Workers Educational Association, the WEA. The purpose of the activity, which will support some £1 million of expenditure, is to ease the transfer of funding for the WEA's districts from the department of LEAs. This will help to ensure that WEA provision is properly dovetailed with LEA adult education provision.
In 1989–90, ESG grant is being paid at a rate of 70 per cent. on most activities, with a few paid at 50 per cent. For 1990–91, we are proposing that there should be a uniform rate of 60 per cent. with the exception of two activities which will be in their final year—maths in schools and science and technology in primary schools. For these two activities, grant will continue to be paid at 50 per cent.
In deciding the rates of grant, the Government had to reach a view on the most appropriate balance between the total grant to be paid out and the number of activities to be supported. While LEAs would doubtless have preferred to keep the higher rate, it is notable that the change has not reduced their willingness to bid. In all cases the value of the bids received exceeded the expenditure available for the activity.
There is one exception to the general 60 per cent. limit. Grant on the WEA activity will be paid at 70 per cent. This is because the activity will not be developing new provision but rather supporting existing courses, and we felt it right to give the WEA the extra reassurance of a higher rate of grant.
The amending regulations also make a small change in the way grant is paid. Grant is paid to authorities quarterly in arrears. The existing practice is that claims for the first three-quarters of each financial year are made before the end of the quarter, on the basis of an estimate. The amending regulations extend that practice to the fourth quarter. Fifty per cent. of the fourth quarter's claim will be paid before the end of the year, with the balance held over until the actual claim is submitted so that any necessary adjustments can be made then.
This change will allow so much grant as possible to be paid within the financial year in which the expenditure was incurred. Thereby it will help authorities' own cash flow.
In drawing up the 1990–91 programme, we once again gave priority to supporting the implementation of the Education Reform Act. In 1989–90 we are supporting £25 million of spending on local management of schools. Next year that will rise to over £36 million. It will go towards purchase of management information systems for schools, training for non-teaching staff, and the appointment of a central team in each authority to co-ordinate the introduction of LMS.
This year the ESG programme includes £9·5 million to help LEAs with the introduction of the national curriculum. Our proposals for 1990–91 include more than double that sum for an activity

389
which will also help LEAs implement the new pupil assessment regime. The £19 million available for this category also includes funding to allow authorities to appoint an extra inspector or adviser in addition to the one appointed with ESG support in 1989–90.
But the proposed 1990–91 programme is not restricted only to getting the Education Reform Act in place. We also want to support activities in a number of other areas. Two of these will follow up the report of the committee of inquiry into school discipline of my noble friend Lord Elton.
We propose to make £2·5 million available to help around one-fifth of LEAs to improve the effectiveness of their behavioural support services for difficult pupils. This will, for example, allow them to appoint additional staff—specialist teachers, educational psychologists and so on—to work with such pupils. A further £2·5 million will be available for smaller projects in around 40 LEAs to help improve attendance at schools, for example by spending more time on following individual absences.
We also plan to provide £2 million to assist the installation of protective systems in selected schools in around one-third of authorities to try to reduce losses through vandalism and arson.
The activity to help LEAs combat the misuse of drugs has been one of the most valued ESGs since its introduction in 1986–87. I am sure that your Lordships will welcome our decision to extend the activity in 1990–91 to include education about the dangers of alcohol and solvent abuse, and education about AIDS. The amount of expenditure supported is being increased correspondingly to £4 million.
My right honourable friend also proposes to make grant available to help LEAs devise schemes to recruit more mature entrants and qualified teacher returners to the teaching profession. The emphasis will be on tackling shortages either of primary school teachers or of specialist teachers in secondary shortage subject areas. The amending regulations allow for all these new activities.
As some of your Lordships may know, a team has been appointed to carry out an efficiency unit scrutiny of the two main DES specific grant programmes—ESGs and the LEA training grants scheme. The ESG programme is now in its fifth year of operation, and we thought it worthwhile to review its achievements and to look at the way it should operate in the future to ensure that it is as effective and streamlined as possible. The review is expected to be completed by the end of January.
Thus far I have focused on the programme in England. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Wales is responsible for the operation of ESGs in Wales. I am sorry to see that the noble Lord, Lord Parry, is not in his place because I am sure that he would have welcomed what I am about to say. On 14th September my right honourable friend announced that grant of up to £5·2 million would be available to support expenditure of £8·8 million.
The Welsh programme closely follows that in England. It too reflects the priorities of the Education Reform Act. But in addition, the Welsh programme
390
will continue to support the development of the Welsh language, which is to be taught in all primary and secondary schools as both a foundation and a core subject within the national curriculum. This activity will support expenditure of about £480,000 in 1990–91. The Welsh schemes for developing the knowledge and appreciation of Welsh heritage and culture, and the programme within the Welsh valleys paralleling the youth leaders in inner cities activity in England, will continue to be supported. In addition, a pilot project will be undertaken on the teaching of Spanish as a first modern foreign language.
In conclusion, we believe that the ESG programme continues to prove its worth. It is an important mechanism for channelling a proportion of funds into initiatives of national importance, helping the education service to respond to new priorities. It is providing financial underpinning for the ERA reforms while also supporting innovative projects in areas of concern such as school discipline. These amending regulations will allow us to carry on the good work. I commend them to your Lordships.
Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 15th November be approved. [1st Report from the Joint Committee]. —(Viscount Davidson.)
Lord Peston: My Lords, I thank the noble Viscount for his extremely clear and interesting introduction to the regulations. Many topics have been raised which are of interest to educationalists. I hope that noble Lords will forgive me if, at this late hour on this last day, I do not pursue every one but confine myself to only a few. That does not mean that the others are unimportant; quite the contrary.
Before doing so, I wish to make one slightly controversial remark. This is almost the last occasion on which the ILEA will be one of the relevant local education authorities to which the regulation support grants apply. The noble Viscount referred to various innovatory activities and it is worth bearing in mind that in many of those areas the ILEA was the leading authority. One can hope only that the individual London boroughs which are now responsible for such matters will show a similar interest in innovation and will take a forward look at many educational matters.
I was extremely interested to hear the noble Viscount say that the specific grants and others will be subject to scrutiny in terms of their efficiency. That is most important. I understood him to say that the work will be finished by January. Can he say whether information will be published and when?
On behalf of my noble friends, I welcome the statement about Wales. It will be most appreciated by many noble Lords who sit on this side and in all parts of the House. I am insufficiently expert on Wales to know whether the noble Viscount has done enough for Wales. I have a suspicion that one can never do enough for Wales, but that is by the way. However, the Minister's statement sounded most impressive.
I turn to specific matters; first, the Workers' Educational Association. It has played a major role in adult education. The noble Viscount will be aware that some of us are worried about whether the local

391
authorities to whom the activity is devolved will fully face up to the responsibility in supporting the WEA. I know that his honourable friend in another place said that the Government were fairly confident that the LEAs would take seriously the need to support the Workers' Educational Association. I understand the need for it to be dovetailed with other adult education but I hope that at the least the Department of Education and Science will keep an eye on what is happening. I also hope that in due course the Minister will come back to the House and tell us that the WEA is receiving appropriate financial support and is flourishing.
There are two or three other areas which I should like to mention. I understand that under the local management of schools heading, money will be made available for teacher appraisal. We strongly support the idea of that but there is the complication at the moment, although I fully understand why, that the approach is very much individual LEA-based. Again, I understand that the Minister's honourable friend in the other place stated that it is the Government's view that ultimately teacher appraisal should occur on a national basis. I should just like a word of reassurance from the noble Viscount on that matter.
I have a personal interest and was involved in the very beginnings of the government-sponsored adult literacy schemes. I believe that we have made good progress in terms of adult literacy and would like to make still more. Assuming that I have understood the document, I notice that we are continuing to finance work in that area. I should like to put in a plea for giving that rather more priority than either LEAs or the Government have done recently.
I believe that adult illiteracy for the individual is one of the most difficult areas with which to cope, because the individual who suffers from that problem is very frequently frightened of revealing it publicly. Therefore, the person remains deficient in that regard simply because of an inability to cope. I should have liked to see rather more money going into that but I do not put that forward in a mean spirit but merely as something which the Government may like to bear in mind.
My final point relates essentially to the scrutiny of these kinds of specific grants. I take it that that is being done with a view to seeing what we can learn from it. I hope that this is not a preliminary to the Government saying that they would like to abandon that sort of work altogether. I know that it is not for me at this time to ask the noble Viscount to make a statement about the future of that. However, I should like to place on record our interest in knowing in due course what will happen in the future. Subject to that, I again thank the noble Viscount for his explanation.
Lord Ritchie of Dundee: My Lords, I also express my appreciation of the noble Viscount's exposition of the order, which was clear and comprehensive. The number of initiatives under the education support grants has grown from 10 in 1984 to 34 in the current year. Of course, one wonders whether all of them are proving sufficiently worth while to
392
continue. Obviously one does not wish to spread one's jam too thinly.
It is quite evident, as the Minister said, that the more important part of them is closely related to the implementation of the Education Reform Act. This is no doubt as it should be and obviously inevitable at present. My reaction was to consider the object of education, something about which I think a great deal, and to think that education is at least as much a social and cultural matter as vocational. In looking at these initiatives, I wondered whether enough stress was being laid on the social and cultural side as compared with the academic and vocational side. In fact, they are all inextricably interconnected. If many people argue, as I would argue, that the object of education is to achieve a better society, I am not sure that the balance is right. If we think, as I and some of my noble friends think, that there is too much greed and need in the present society, will those initiatives be effective in correcting that?
Therefore, I say that all praise should be given to those objects which aim to do that; namely, to achieve greater racial harmony, social responsibility, relief for the unemployed in the way of education provision, health, help for those with special education needs, adult literacy and numeracy, as the noble Lord, Lord Peston, has just mentioned, and also provision for children with behavioural problems and an attempt to discover more about the reasons for absenteeism and vandalism. Stress is very much on attention to the implementation of the Education Reform Act 1988 rather than these objects. The relative expenditure is £111 million on the Education Reform Act and only £30 million on the rest.
That is my main comment. I am sure that good work has been done in the matter of drug abuse. The wording in the order regarding health—
"The provision of health education, especially education to combat the abuse of drugs"—
is a little negatively put. I feel strongly about this and we argued about it when debating the Act. I should like to see the positive and active promotion of health, without stressing the combating of drugs, alcohol, smoking, AIDS and so on. The promotion of health gives a more positive outlook. Children should be taught about diet, exercise and care of the body in a positive way and not just warned about dangers and the dreadful things which will happen to them if they smoke and drink and so on. I have a number of questions for the Minister. Paragraph 4(a) relates to records of achievement for pupils. I should like to know how this is progressing because it appeared to be an excellent idea that there should be records of achievement, but the waters were muddied by the requirement of the Education Reform Act that there should be testing and assessment at the age of 16. How will the two relate to each other? Are the plans for records of achievement to continue? Are they flourishing? How will they tie up with the requirements of the Education Reform Act?
What is the progress on paragraph 4(e) concerning the improvement of the use of the spoken word? This is of utmost importance. The way one speaks is the next most important thing to the way one

393
looks. Lack of confidence can give rise to many failures in speech. I am not referring to dialects or accents but to clarity and articulation—the qualities of speech that can give one confidence. Is that initiative proving successful? Can the Minister say anything about the promotion of social responsibility in children? I do not think anything could be much more important than that. What about the litter that surrounds not only our schools but everywhere? It is a grave failure in social responsibility that our litter problem is one of the worst in Europe.
Finally, is it possible for the Minister to say anything about the progress of adult literacy and numeracy? As the noble Lord, Lord Peston, said, that is a matter of the utmost importance. With those questions, I draw my remarks to a close and again thank the Minister.
2.15 p.m.
Viscount Davidson: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Peston and Lord Ritchie of Dundee, for their welcome and what I consider to be very valuable assistance to our education in this country. Your Lordships have always taken a keen interest in the education support grant programme, and this year has been no exception. In broad terms, it seems to me that there has been a large measure of welcome for the activities proposed for support next year. Doubtless we would all attach different priorities to different things; but I think it is undeniable that the 1990–91 ESG programme seeks to address some vital issues. It demonstrates once again the value of ESGs as a mechanism for targeting resources—limited resources, I agree, but none the less important—towards particular priorities.
If your Lordships will forgive me, I will spend a minute or two elaborating on the WEA proposals to which the noble Lord, Lord Peston, referred. One ESG activity which has attracted a lot of attention is the one to support adult education courses run by districts of the Workers Educational Association—the WEA. The WEA has a long history of valuable work, and is held in very high esteem. I should like to place on record that the Government too value enormously the work that it does. Some have suggested that ESG funding might put the WEA's work at risk. I do not accept that, and should like to explain in a little more detail what the ESG is about.
The essential point is that WEA courses ought, first and foremost, to be responsive to local needs and circumstances; and yet, under present arrangements, they are funded by central Government. The Education Reform Act strengthens the responsibility of each LEA to maintain an overview of the adult education needed in its area. It is self-evidently desirable that LEA provision of adult education should be properly co-ordinated with WEA provision, in order to avoid gaps or wasteful duplication. The Government's contention is that such co-ordination will be much easier to achieve if WEA provision is funded through LEAs.
This principle has attracted a lot of support. The local authority associations accept the Government's
394
overall objective of promoting closer partnership between statutory and voluntary providers of adult education. So that is not where the argument lies. The issue is whether a suitable mechanism for promoting that partnership through a transfer of funding responsibility can be found.
We believe that ESGs provide a good mechanism. They enable us to earmark funding intended for the WEA so as to give it some guarantee of stability, while still allowing individual LEAs and WEA districts some discretion over the way the money is spent. More thought needs to be given as to how precisely the ESG will work. That is why a working party has been set up representing the WEA, the Local Authority Associations and the department. I am sure that that will address a number of the concerns raised by your Lordships today with a view to ensuring a successful transition from central to local funding, which will enable the WEA to continue and even improve the excellent work which we all so much value.
Noble Lords asked certain specified questions. As regards the specific grant scrutiny, I can tell the noble Lord, Lord Ritchie of Dundee, that the scrutineer's terms of reference are:
"To examine the ways in which the DES administers and evaluates education support grants and local education authority training grants; to consider whether these grants are effective instruments for supporting the policy objectives that they are intended to support and to make recommendations for improvement".
I believe that that answers one of the noble Lord's questions.
The noble Lord, Lord Peston, asked whether the Efficiency Unit scrutiny will be published. I understand that the reports of the Efficiency Unit scrutinies are normally published. The noble Lord also asked about adult literacy. The purpose of this activity is to establish open learning centres where adults with inadequate literacy and numeracy skills can improve these skills using micro-computers and other new technology. Seventy-seven LEAs submitted bids, of which 54 were successful. ALBSU is providing support to the LEAs and is assisting the department in monitoring and evaluating this activity.
The noble Lord, Lord Peston, asked about school teacher appraisal. I certainly take the point which he made on that subject. Schools are already engaged on a heavy programme of reforms following the Education Reform Act. It would not be fair to make appraisal compulsory in all schools when some would not have the capacity to take on more change. We also want to hear a range of views before official guidance or national regulations are issued. We believe that teachers will wish to participate in appraisal. That has been the experience so far. The question of legal obligation will be kept under review.
We share the National Steering Group's view that the ultimate aim of appraisal should be better education for pupils. Appraisal must be designed to help individual teachers with their professional development. It must also be part of the management of teachers in forming management decisions.
The noble Lord, Lord Ritchie of Dundee, asked about preventative health education. Health

395
education is more often taught in schools on a cross-curricular basis than is the case with the foundation subjects. Therefore, a more sensible strategy is to incorporate elements of health education into different subjects. Precisely how schools actually teach health education will be a matter for each school to determine. I take on board the point made by the noble Lord that health education must cover the whole range of health rather than concentrate on any special part of it.
The noble Lord, Lord Ritchie, also asked about records of achievement. The Government take the view that schools should be required to report annually to parents about each child's achievements within the national curriculum and in approved public examinations. Regulations giving effect to this requirement will be introduced in 1990. The Education Support Grant will be available within the basic curriculum category for LEA work in support of this requirement. They will be introduced on a phased basis from the school year 1990x2013;91. As a first step we hope very soon to issue draft regulations and a draft circular for public consultation.
The noble Lord, Lord Ritchie, also asked about the use of the spoken word, which I remember is a subject that he raised last year. In this category the grant aims to build on work already started within LEAs. The projects involve both primary and secondary schools and, very importantly, span the whole curriculum. The spoken word should not be seen solely as the province of English or drama; every subject can be taught, learnt and assessed through talk.
I believe that the ESG programme that my right honourable friend is proposing for 1990–91 will provide much valuable assistance to LEAs. It builds on the present year's programme in providing support for the key elements of the Education Reform Act and continues a number of useful activities done in earlier years. It also includes some exciting new initiatives in other areas such as those relating to difficult pupils and improving attendance in schools. These will help LEAs to respond constructively to the report on school discipline produced by my noble friend Lord Elton.
I would suggest to the House that ESGs have more than proved their worth over the past few years. The amending regulations which we have discussed today will allow us to build on that success next year. I commend them to your Lordships.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Royal Assent
2.25 p.m.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified her Royal Assent to the following Acts:

Consolidated Fund (No. 2) Act,

Scottish Episcopal Clergy Widows' and Orphans' Fund Order Confirmation Act,

South Yorkshire Light Rail Transit Act.

Motion for the Adjournment
Lord Denham: My Lords, in moving the Adjournment of the House, I should like on behalf of all noble Lords on this side of the House to wish noble Lords in every other part of the House a happy Christmas, an auspicious new year —a new decade even —and a restful Recess. On behalf of the whole House I should like to thank all those who serve us so well at this end of the Palace of Westminster —the Clerks' Office, Black Rod's Office, the Doorkeepers, the Custodians, the Hansard writers, the secretarial staff, the Refreshment Department and not least the security service and the police—for all they do for us to make our political lives here comfortable, efficient and secure.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, on behalf of colleagues on this side of the House perhaps I may tell the noble Lord, Lord Denham, that he speaks on behalf of the whole House when he wishes us all a merry Christmas and a happy new year and pays tribute to the staff. I am grateful to him for taking the care to remember all the various groups of people that we include in that general list. I am grateful too because my list was not complete. However, those who work in the Library were on my list, though I am not sure whether they were on the noble Lord's list. That is the problem with making lists!
We are deeply in the debt of the servants of the House, who serve not only our interests but those of our guests, our visitors and those outside the House who need to find their way around. We are grateful for the courtesy and for the genuine feeling that our servants care for their welfare and well being. In the absence of my noble friend Lord Ponsonby, who is a past master at following the noble Lord in these matters, it is with great pleasure and with sincerity and absolute conviction that I join the general good wishes to the House and in particular to Black Rod and all those who under his guidance have served us so well.
The Viscount of Falkland: My Lords, in the absence of my noble friend Lord Tordoff, I echo the sentiments and wishes of the noble Lord the Government Chief Whip and the noble Lord, Lord Graham. We extend to the whole House our best wishes for a happy Christmas and also for, as they say in Scotland, a good new year. We should like to extend them to members of staff in all departments because, as has already been said, without their unfailing courtesy and sense of public service we would not be able to come here and carry out our duties in this memorable and extraordinary House. It is part of a unique parliamentary democracy. It has been seen on television, although I venture to suggest that it will now be seen a little less. All those outside will have seen how unfailingly courteous, good humoured and fair are our deliberations. I am quite sure that the country can be assured that this will continue in the same manner. I look forward to seeing all noble Lords and all members of the staff in the coming year.
Baroness Stedman: My Lords, we too should like to be associated with the words of the Government Chief Whip. I think that he covered almost everyone. I have a list as well which includes the cleaners. They look after our offices and leave them spick and span when we manage to make them untidy every day with our voluminous amounts of discarded papers. We are grateful to the staff and to all those who help to make life so pleasant for us here. They look after us and, as the noble Lord, Lord Graham, said, they look after our visitors as well. We wish all noble Lords and all members of staff a very happy Christmas and a good new year.
The Earl of Halsbury: My Lords, in the absence of my noble friend Lady Hylton-Foster, I rise on behalf of 244 of my noble friends to express 245-fold unanimity in thanking those who have served us so faithfully during the parliamentary term which is now coming to a close, and to wish them a merry Christmas and a happy new year. Perhaps I may assure them that the multiplicity of the services that they render the Cross-Benches, the second largest grouping in your Lordships' House, is reflected in the warmth of our thanks and our greetings.
Lord Denham: My Lords, I beg to move that this House do now adjourn.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned for the Christmas Recess at half-past two o'clock until Monday, 15th January next.

  EFFICIENCY SCRUTINIES
  EFFICIENCY SCRUTINIES
  WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT ROUTE
  WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT ROUTE
  LONDON ROAD BUILDING PROJECTS
  LONDON ROAD BUILDING PROJECTS
  NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS AND ELECTRICITY PRIVATISATION
  NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS AND ELECTRICITY PRIVATISATION
  TRAINING AND ENTERPRISE COUNCILS
  TRAINING AND ENTERPRISE COUNCILS
  HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME ASSOCIATIONS
  HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME ASSOCIATIONS
  DRINKING WATER INSPECTORATE
  DRINKING WATER INSPECTORATE
  HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT SUBSIDY DETERMINATIONS
  HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT SUBSIDY DETERMINATIONS
  RETIRED PUBLIC SERVANTS: PENSION ABATEMENT
  RETIRED PUBLIC SERVANTS: PENSION ABATEMENT
  ROVER plc: SALE TO BRITISH AEROSPACE
  ROVER plc: SALE TO BRITISH AEROSPACE
  THE RADIO AUTHORITY
  THE RADIO AUTHORITY
  THE INDEPENDENT TELEVISION COMMISSION
  THE INDEPENDENT TELEVISION COMMISSION