Sitting of 3 November 1989

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

  Road Safety
  Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Goodlad.]
  9.35 am
  The Minister for Roads and Traffic (Mr. Robert Atkins): I am delighted to introduce a debate on a most important subject that is of considerable interest to many people, both in this House and in the country.
  I wish to put on record my thanks—and, I suspect, those of hon. Members on both sides of the House—to my predecessor the hon. Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley), who did so much to achieve success in the broad area of road safety.
  Last year more than 5,000 people were killed and more than 300,000 were injured in road accidents. In other words, in a single year 100 of the constituents of every Member of this House were killed or seriously injured in road accidents. They are the sort of people we meet every day in our constituency activities. We probably all know a family that has been devastated by the death of a child in a road accident. Many of us have teenage children—I have two young children—and so we understand only too well the concern felt by parents for children of that age. Two out of every three teenagers who die accidentally are killed on the roads.
  That terrible loss of life is not the result of a natural catastrophe that is somehow beyond our control; it is a disaster of human making that we can and must tackle. Because of its importance, the Government have carried out a full inter-departmental review, of road safety policy. That review, which reported in 1987, analysed the problems, examined what was realistic and practicable, and provided us with a structured framework for reducing those road casualties by a third by the year 2000.
  In making its analysis, the review carefully studied what could be learnt from the experiences of other countries. The broad pattern seen in the United Kingdom was mirrored in most developed countries. We had, and still have, the best overall road safety record in the European Community in terms of road deaths both per head of population and in relation to miles travelled. We have a particularly good record for car users, but rather less so for pedestrians and cyclists. As children make up a larger proportion of those groups, we have a relatively poor record on child safety. That part of the study, therefore, gave us a clear indication of where we should concentrate our efforts.
  The review examined the effects of past measures that had contributed to the reduction in casualties over the previous 15 to 20 years. That was a complex process because of other changes in behaviour, travel mode and attitudes to one's own and other people's safety. Some actions by central and local government had clearly been
  580
  particularly significant. They included infrastructure improvements such as the building of motorways, which are eight times safer than other roads—we are, after all, meeting a day after the 30th birthday of the building of the M1—urban bypasses, which are often three times safer than the roads they replace; town centre pedestrianisation; improvement in road lighting; the construction of safety barriers, and other low-cost, high-return safety engineering techniques. Changes in road traffic law, notably the introduction of compulsory seatbelt wearing and breath testing for alcohol, have also made a major contribution. Education and driver and rider training, although less tangible, also played a significant part.
  In the light of the review, the Government decided to focus on three areas: The first was to raise the level of public awareness and response so that road safety was not seen simply as the Government's responsibility, but that everyone should play their part. The second was to target the most vulnerable road users—that is to say children, the elderly, pedestrians, cyclists and motor cyclists. The third was to use proven, cost-effective methods that could be forecast robustly and would cut casualties by calculable amounts, especially in the areas of vehicle and road engineering.
  Mr. Barry Field: My hon. Friend may be aware that I represent a constituency which does not have any motorways but which, sadly, has had a number of young fatalities recently. Indeed, there are a number of them every year. He has not yet touched upon the contribution that the speed limit can make to road safety, and I wonder whether his Department would uniquely consider the Isle of Wight for a uniform speed limit, as already exists in the Channel Islands. I wrote to the county surveyor about that matter some time ago.
  Mr. Atkins: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who speaks uniquely for the Isle of Wight, and with every strength and on every possible occasion. This is yet another excuse to visit his delightful constituency, to see the province at first hand. I shall ensure that my office is aware of his concern and we shall have a look at the matter. This is a serious point which he has developed at some length with his county surveyor, whose response I shall be interested to see.
  Based on the review's assessment of what such measures could achieve, we adopted the target of reducing road casualties by one third by the end of the century. This is a tough target which cannot be attained by the Government alone. It will need the combined arid sustained efforts of everyone involved in road safety.
  So, following the report, we consulted widely on how to achieve its aims. The first fruits of that exercise were set out in the report placed by my predecessor in the Library in July 1988. There was wide support for the proposed approach and a welcome commitment from the local authority associations—together with a work plan for the first few years of the target period. This summer we updated that with a further report and action plan which we circulated widely to all involved. It was warmly welcomed.
  In Government priorities, four sectors are being addressed—the road, the vehicle, the driver and the vulnerable road user. I shall deal first with the road. We recently announced in the White Paper "Roads to Prosperity" our plans for a £12 billion road building

  581
  programme over the next 10 years. The building of roads is often seen by the public and press solely in terms of increased mobility—the reduction of congestion and shortening of journey times. These, of course, are important objectives, but the aim is also to provide safer roads for vehicles and their occupants. Equally important, by moving traffic out of town centres, we can separate it from other road users such as pedestrians and cyclists and thereby improve their safety. All major road building developments are subject to a cost-benefit analysis. It is very important that this analysis gives full weight to casualty savings. We have looked at this carefully. The value to be placed on saving a fatality has been increased to £500,000 and work is in progress on revaluing serious injuries.
  Mr. Jeremy Corbyn: The Minister is making an important point. In the cost-benefit analysis. Have there been or are there likely to be any changes in the analysis of road building costs comparative to the costs of improving public transport or building railways, or improving railway services? That would reduce road usage, which would be a factor in improving road safety.
  Mr. Atkins: We give a great deal of attention to casualties and how they are caused across the whole of transport provision. I could not give the hon. Gentleman an immediate answer on the technicalities of the calculation. If he would like to write to me—
  Mr. Corbyn: The Minister should write to me.
  Mr. Atkins: I should be delighted to write to the hon. Gentleman and give him the technical answers so that next time he intervenes he will know as much about it as I do. He makes a serious point about safety, which has been well taken. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, West (Mr. McLoughlin), who handles aviation and shipping matters in the Department, as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield. Southgate (Mr. Portillo), who looks after public transport, are giving these matters important consideration, because they are fundamental to all that we do.
  Large-scale road building is not the only way that highway engineers can improve road safety. Local road safety schemes involving low cost remedial measures at problem sites can make a substantial contribution to reducing accidents. These can involve as little as the provision of new signs, road markings or lighting and can extend to resurfacing, junction improvements or the installation of traffic lights or roundabouts. Such schemes are extremely cost-effective. In the summer, we announced that we would be doubling our spending this year on such schemes on trunk roads to £10 million. We are anxious that local authorities should increase the number of schemes on local roads, where most accidents occur. Together we set up a joint task force last year to identify factors which constrain the rate at which schemes are implemented and to recommend ways in which performance can be increased. The task force reported in July, one of its recommendations being that a proportion of transport supplementary grant should be earmarked for schemes on all roads and not just those of more than local importance. Because of the value of these schemes, I have decided that we should give the matter very careful
  582
  thought, in consultation with the local authority associations, and as long as I can be satisfied that the proposed changes would not give rise to any insurmountable problems in relation to the principles of the system, I am prepared to consider them in the next TSG round.
  Mr. Tony Banks: The Minister has made an important announcement. Can he give any timescale involved in this? I am taking it that he is doing more than give a vague undertaking and is making a fairly firm pledge that this will happen and that TSG will be extended to cover roads of more than local significance.
  Mr. Atkins: I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's support, as in this matter his experience makes him realise the importance of what I have said. I cannot at this stage be specific. I am working as hard as I can to ensure that the change is incorporated as quickly as possible. In truth, the decision was taken only recently and we are still exploring the ramifications. I undertake to do this as quickly as I can.
  Mr. Ian Bruce: My hon. Friend will know that Dorset has only one trunk road, so the vast majority of road building falls upon the transport supplementary grant. Therefore, although the 50 per cent. coming from the Government is extremely welcome, the other 50 per cent. that must be provided locally is difficult to find. Has he given any consideration to increasing the number of trunk roads, particularly north-south, in Dorset?
  Mr. Atkins: My hon. Friend is expecting a little much of me, in a debate such as this, to give him chapter and verse of the road structure of Dorset. His intervention gives me an ideal opportunity to come to Dorset to inspect the road structure at first hand, and I shall be delighted to do so. Perhaps my hon. Friend would care to pursue the matter with me after the debate and we can explore what we can do to assist and improve the road structure—I am sure that it is already very good, but everything is capable of being improved—within his constituency and within the county.
  Site specific schemes are very effective in dealing with accident blackspots, but in a typical urban area, over half the accidents are scattered diffusely. These include a high proportion of pedestrian and cycle accidents, especially involving children. We therefore launched a major urban safety project for the development of area-wide traffic management systems for improving safety. These involved road engineering to discourage "rat-running" through residential areas, with road humps and selective road narrowing to reduce vehicle speeds. Five demonstration schemes have now been implemented around the country and the initial analysis has shown a reduction in casualties of between 15 and 30 per cent.
  In addition to schemes designed specially to achieve casualty reduction, significant benefits can be obtained by ensuring that all road works affecting the highway, whatever their main objective, are designed with safety in mind. This can be done at the design stage and by subjecting all schemes to a safety check by staff not associated with the original design. Such a "safety audit" will shortly become standard practice on the Department's own schemes.
  The second of our objectives is the vehicle. There are already large potential savings in casualties in improvement in vehicle design. The Transport and Road Research

  583
  Laboratory has been a world leader on design improvement that could reduce casualties. Our present task has two objectives. The first is to encourage manufacturers to start introducing some of these improvements without waiting for legislation. Like other hon. Members, as a Member with a constituency interest in a truck and bus manufacturer, I am only too well aware of the pressure on it, not only from the public generally but from me, for improvements. Customers today are demanding higher standards of safety. Older drivers, whose numbers are rapidly increasing, have made it clear that they attach as much weight to safety and comfort as to speed and high acceleration. The example of Volvo in successfully marketing the safety of its vehicles is one that others would do well to emulate.
  Secondly, we are pressing for better vehicle safety standards within the European Community. Where vehicle construction standards need to be agreed, we know exactly which features would save most lives.
  Mr. Corbyn: Like the hon. Gentleman, I welcome many of the improvements in bus design, and the Volvo has a high standard. Will the hon. Gentleman also turn his mind to the problem of access for less mobile people? Basic bus design is old fashioned, and it is possible to have much lower access to buses and lower floors, with a slightly different layout design. Less mobile people would then be able to use buses more safely and easily.
  Mr. Atkins: I am delighted that the hon. Gentleman congratulated a firm which makes buses in my constituency. His point is entirely fair and one that we make continually. My advisory committee on the disabled raises the matter with me regularly, and I reflect its anxieties to manufacturers whenever possible.
  Where vehicle construction standards need to be agreed, we know exactly which features save the most lives and those should have priority. The Commission has a real contribution to make and we wish to work closely with it. This does not involve it in matters outside its proper competence which are best left to national Governments, such as how much alcohol people may lawfully drink or the speed at which they can travel on roads.
  Mr. Michael Jack: Will my hon. Friend discuss the use of anti-lock brakes within the framework of the Community? He will be aware of the contribution of anti-lock brakes on aircraft and that 15 per cent. of accidents on roads arise from skidding. Anti-lock brakes would make a major contribution to solving that problem. Will he consider that?
  Mr. Atkins: I have anti-lock brakes on my car and I appreciate their importance in keeping me on a safe course in the event of an accident. My hon. Friend makes a good point, and I shall look at it most closely.
  We could save 10,000 deaths or serious injuries to car occupants per year with the measures to which I referred earlier. They include better protection against the side of a car impacting against another car or obstacle, and a better design of steering wheel which will reduce facial injuries to drivers. I was pleased to support the launch of a new steering wheel on the new 200 series of Rover vehicles at the Motor fair a few weeks ago. The manufacturers and TRRL put a great deal of work into producing that world-leading design. Likewise, thousands of deadly
  584
  injuries to pedestrians and motorcyclists could be avoided if cars were to be designed with a more "pedestrian-friendly" front.
  A further category where substantial savings could be achieved is in protection for motorcyclists. Some motorcyclists have sometimes argued that they should have complete freedom to choose the motorcycle that they like without paying attention to safety features. My hon. Friends will not be surprised to learn that I am all for freedom but at present the freedom does not exist. Our research shows that substantial benefits can be obtained from better protection of motorcycle riders, not just to the legs, although that would be an important benefit, but against frontal impact, for example through the provision of airbags. Yet, at present no manufacturer offers such features on its normal production run of motorcycles, so motorcyclists are denied the choice of safety features, even if they want them.
  I am also anxious further to improve bus safety, which we touched on a moment ago. We already have a good record. We were among the first in the world to have a stability test to prevent overturning. We have new measures in progress to reduce the risk of people being trapped in automatic doors on buses—something that has caused great anxiety especially among elderly people.
  More remains to be done. We are particularly anxious to encourage greater safety among children. We want to ensure that the buses provided are safe and in particular are fitted with seatbelts. I am pressing manufacturers to include seatbelts on all seats and we are encouraging schools to request seatbelts when they charter coaches. Every parent should encourage his or her school to do that.
  A further area where we are looking for improvements is on better access for disabled passengers, especially to enable easier boarding and alighting. Again we are encouraging manufacturers to bring forward improvements voluntarily, without waiting for legislation. But legislation may still be needed. This will require agreement within the European Community. As with many other matters which are not given the attention that they deserve, the United Kingdom is taking a leading role in pressing for early agreement on better bus standards. in keeping with the aim of harmonisation of standards within Europe to achieve a high level of safety.
  The Government's third priority is to influence driver behaviour. The most direct way of doing that is through legislation, and a substantial body of road traffic law is designed to maintain and improve road safety. Earlier this year we published our response to the road traffic Law review—the so-called North report. In the White Paper, "The Road User and the Law", we set out the Government's proposals to establish a closer link between the requirements of the law and the road safety and traffic benefits that it is designed to achieve. We aim to hit hard the bad driver and the drink-driver, and to ensure that those who drive badly or under the influence of drink are properly punished. The key measures include replacement of the present reckless driving offence by a new dangerous driving offence aimed more at the observable standard of driving and less at the drivers' state of mind; a new offence, with up to five years imprisonment, of causing death by careless driving while unfit through drink or drugs, and other measures against drink-drivers; a new extended driving test for drivers disqualified for the main bad

  585
  driving offences; use of modern technology to detect speeding and traffic light offences; and a major experiment in rehabilitation for drink-driving offenders.
  Meanwhile, we have already taken steps to extend the high-risk offenders scheme. Under the scheme, the worst drink-drive offenders—those disqualified at two and a half times or more over the limit or for refusing to provide a specimen—are required to satisfy the medical authorities that they do not have a drink problem and are otherwise fit to drive before their licences are returned.
  The law alone will not stamp out drink-driving or prevent people from driving badly. We have to change people's attitudes. Drinking and driving is the largest single cause of road accident deaths in this country. Nearly 1,000 people are killed each year in accidents where the driver or rider has been drinking over the legal limit. At night nearly half the drivers killed have alcohol levels above the legal limit. That is why we are concentrating our publicity effort against drink-driving. I am pleased to report that this is meeting with some success. Research carried out for the Department of Transport into the effectiveness of its advertising, measuring changes in attitudes to drink-driving, shows that the number of people driving after drinking has almost halved over the past 10 years from 29 per cent. to 16 per cent. Recently published statistics show a 5 per cent. fall in the number of breath tests found positive after accidents. That evidence is supported by coroners' statistics.
  The police have made an enormous contribution to combating the menace of the drink-driver. They have increased considerably the resources that they put into enforcing the law. The number of breath tests that they administer is now approaching half a million a year. Last year the police asked for their powers to breath test to be extended, as hon. Members know. Earlier this year the Home Office invited comments on whether there should be any change in police powers to require breath tests. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary will be studying the outcome of that consultation exercise as one of his priorities, and hopes to make an announcement shortly.
  Even where the driver is not under the influence of drink, research shows that over 90 per cent. of accidents involve human error. We simply do not know enough about human behaviour to understand such things as why people take risks, why they fail to see a pedestrian or why they misjudge distances and speeds. An increase in our knowledge of these matters could be of enormous benefit in reducing road accidents by enabling us to design roads and vehicles better to minimise the chance of error. We have therefore set up a programme of behavioural research to provide the building blocks from which we can hope to begin to find answers to those questions. It is long-term strategic research with potentially huge returns. Our road and vehicle safety research programme now exceeds £8 million a year and includes over £500,000 for long-term strategic research into driver behaviour.
  Motor cyclists are vulnerable road users, in that they are eight times more likely than car drivers to be involved in an accident and 40 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured. More than 40 per cent. of motor-cyclist
  586
  casualties are under 20 years of age. Those statistics have provided us with a six-point package of measures to make motor cycling safer.
  First, next year all motor cyclists will have to undergo basic training by qualified instructors before they can take their motor cycles on to the roads. Secondly, they must then take the test for a full licence within one year, rather than the two years that are currently allowed. Thirdly, as from 2 October, the test is now more demanding, with the examiner following the candidate around the test course on a motor cycle. Fourthly, we are supporting a proposal by the European Commission to restrict newly qualified riders to lower-powered machines for the first two years after they have passed the test. Fifthly, car drivers will have to undergo the same basic training as other motor-cycle and moped riders before their provisional entitlement comes into effect. Finally, learner riders will not be able to carry pillion passengers.
  Mr. Ronnie Fearn: Is the Minister aware that at present there are not enough examiners to carry that out?
  Mr. Atkins: We are taking urgent steps to ensure that we obtain enough examiners. I cannot wave a magic wand and solve the problem overnight, but it is certainly a priority.
  Pedestrians are among the road users at greatest risk, yet are the most difficult to protect. More than a third of all people killed on the roads—over 1,700 each year—are pedestrians, and a large proportion of those are children and elderly people.
  One of the most important ways of protecting pedestrians is to slow down the traffic in residential areas. I have already described the urban safety project involving the use of speed-reducing techniques. We shall shortly be introducing regulations to make it easier and cheaper for local authorities to provide road humps, and we shall also be relaxing the regulations for pelican crossings. I shall be inviting views on the possibility of more widespread use of 20-mph speed limits in conjunction with area-wide "traffic-calming" schemes.
  Many pedestrians are run over because they are not seen by car drivers. Last Wednesday I launched a conspicuity campaign on the theme "See and be seen", directed at persuading vulnerable road users—pedestrians, cyclists, motor cyclists and horse riders—to wear or carry something that can be seen easily by drivers. Pedestrians, however, must also be taught to look after themselves.
  That brings me to the third identifiable group of vulnerable road users—children. Their vulnerability, and its tragic consequences, was highlighted in the BBC television programme "Watchdog" earlier this week. Education and training must be the key to improving our record on child safety. Good pre-school road safety training can help to avoid casualties among children as they grow older. We are about to launch a pilot "traffic club", in co-operation with the General Accident insurance company and local authorities.
  Let me record the thanks of my Department—and, I think, those of road users generally—to companies such as General Accident and the many others that take such enormous trouble and put so much effort into supporting and encouraging such schemes, particularly those involving children.
  Mr. Tony Banks: That's the commercial over.
  Mr. Atkins: The hon. Gentleman is extremely cynical, but I think that I understand what he is saying.
  The pilot scheme will provide parents with road safety material suitable for their child's age. The project will cover some 500,000 children, who will receive an initial package on their third birthday and another every six months until they start school.
  Once at school, children can be taught road safety as a subject in its own right. I welcome the initiative shown by some head teachers in introducing road safety into their school curricula, and I hope that more schools will follow. Together with the motor-cycle industry, we provide support for former motor-cycle ace Dave Taylor, who tours schools throughout Britain bringing home the road safety message to both pupils and teachers.
  Mr. Banks: Have the Government considered putting road safety into the national curriculum? Ensuring that children are educated in road safety would then be a legal requirement, and would no longer be left to the more progressive and far-seeing teachers.
  Mr. Atkins: As the hon. Gentleman will understand, that is a matter for the Department of Education and Science, and I am in regular contact with the Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Mr. Howarth). We certainly intend to see what we can do to bring road safety into the formal structure of the curriculum. I am delighted that it is being given its present degree of priority, but the hon. Gentleman has made a fair point with which I have considerable sympathy.
  It is possible, then, to make road safety part of the wider curriculum. Last month we launched a "Safe Journey to School" competition, aimed at pupils aged between eight and 12. Children, parents, teachers and school governors will work together to devise alternative, safer routes to school. In the process the children will become more aware of traffic hazards, and will develop skills and techniques to deal with them: thus the general awareness of the school community of traffic danger will be enhanced. An inter-active video will make children more aware of road hazards generally.
  We are also developing teaching resources for use in the national curriculum. By using road safety statistics in mathematics or vehicle stopping distances in physics, children will gain a heightened awareness of road safety while studying core curriculum subjects. Regulations making compulsory the wearing of seat belts by children in the backs of cars came into force on 1 September and constituted a major step to improve child safety. More than 60 children are killed and more than 7,000 injured each year while travelling unrestrained in the rear of cars. Three quarters of those lives could be saved and two thirds of those injuries avoided if all wore restraints.
  Cycling is another activity in respect of which we are concerned predominantly with child safety. The cycling proficiency team organised by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, aimed at teaching children aged nine or more to ride bicycles safely, is to be relaunched as "Cycleway". I am assured that it is not going to be scrapped, as some press reports have suggested. About 300,000 children pass the test each year—almost 50 per cent. of the age group—and I am sure that that initiative, which will involve teachers more closely, will result in
  588
  more children being better prepared for our roads. ROSPA will continue to award certificates and badges to children who pass the test.
  Mr. Corbyn: The Minister will be pleased to learn that I passed my cycle test at school. Will he have discussions with the cycle dealers and their associations to ensure that when children in the appropriate age group buy a bicycle, or one is bought for them, they are given the maximum possible encouragement to undergo training and to take a test?
  Mr. Atkins: I am fairly certain that that happens a good deal already, but if we can improve on the present position I shall be happy to do so. My own children, aged 13 and 10, both own cycles, and have been told in no uncertain terms that they must take the test. I hope that other parents will tell their children the same, particularly with Christmas coming up and the possibility, indeed probability, of more children being given bikes. I should add that, as my children already own bicycles, they will not feature among the presents that they will receive this Christmas. I hope that they will not read this!
  The County Road Safety Officers Association, with the help of my Department and of General Accident, has provided a highway code for young road users which provides sensible advice on safe cycling. We are currently working on the production of a public information film to encourage the wearing of cycle helmets, particularly by children. I shall continuing to give high priority to improving child safety, and to developing the necessary measures with the help of all concerned.
  Last but not least among the most vulnerable road users are the elderly. Almost 30 per cent. of all pedestrians killed on the roads are over the age of 60. The new proposals for traffic calming will be of particular benefit to older people—both pedestrians and motorists—as will other measures announced in our pedestrian safety package last spring.
  Many interesting and important ideas were aired at a seminar that I addressed last Tuesday on the subject of the older driver, arranged by the Automobile Association. I look forward with keen interest to receiving the report and proposals aimed at improving the safety of older motorists on which the AA and the Medical Commission on Accident Prevention are now working.
  What is clear from all these activities and initiatives to which I have referred is the important role which everybody, both as individuals and through the institutions of which we are part, can play in improving road safety.
  A moment ago I mentioned vehicle manufacturers. They have done much to design safer cars and make available safety features, such as anti-locking brakes, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde (Mr. Jacks) referred so cogently. But the impression given by vehicle advertising is that there is only one manufacturer who sees safety as a primary selling point. It seems to me that all too often the central feature of the promotion of a new car is its acceleration, or the extent to which it is capable of exceeding the legal speed limit. I do not think that it is enough to say, "That is what people want". Indeed, I note some countries have agreed a code of practice with their industries to avoid purveying such a message. Advertising forms attitudes as well as responding to them.

  589
  There is also a role for insurance companies. If, as in the United States and Sweden, they published accident and casualty rates of different makes and models of cars, the consumer would be able to make an informed choice. Of course there are other factors. No doubt sports cars have a worse record than family saloons because they are driven by different types of people, but that is no reason why someone who is in the market for a family saloon should not have information on the relative safety records of different models.
  I very much welcome the voluntary agreement of the motor insurance industry to bring to an end policies which provide protection against the consequences of disqualification from driving for alcohol or drug-related offences. Similarly I welcome the clear signal given by Pearl Insurance in withdrawing cover from drivers involved in accidents when their blood alcohol level is above the statutory limit. I hope that others will give equally clear signals to the drinking driver.
  Mr. Robin Squire: My hon. Friend referred to excessive speeds. Would he dare to think the unthinkable and explain to the House why motor vehicles are produced all over the world that are capable of being driven at 120 mph? Is it perhaps for use in people's driveways, or is there some other area that has escaped my notice where such speeds can be attained in this country?
  Mr. Atkins: My hon. Friend has asked a very good question. It is one for the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders as much as for me. I used to drive a little old sports car quite quickly. I have since realised the folly of my ways, but I think that acceleration forms as much a part of it as the high speed at the top of the range. However, my hon. Friend has made a fair point which he should continue to address both in public and in private to those who are in a position to answer.
  There have been other notable initiatives. Autoglass has provided splendid prizes for the "Safe Journey to School" competition and 3M has given its support to the conspicuity campaign. Britax has helped us to publicise the child seat belt law and Kwik-Fit has run an award winning campaign promoting the use of child restraints. There must be many other private companies with an interest in road safety. I hope that they can be persuaded to take an initiative in support of the national effort to cut casualties. After all, enlightened self-interest is a great motivator for improvement.
  I welcome, too, the splendid support for the campaign against drinking and driving given by the drinks industry. The brewers, publicans and soft drinks manufacturers have not only reinforced our message that drinking and driving do not mix but also can take credit for making it socially acceptable to decline to drink alcohol. They have introduced and promoted a range of alcohol-free and low-alcohol beers, wines and ciders which make it possible for a driver to feel socially at ease while avoiding alcohol. This is particularly important to young men, who are the main target of our publicity against drink-driving.
  Finally, there is a group with perhaps the most important role and responsibilities in road safety—the local authorities. Without question, even with all the support and goodwill of the private sector, achieving the target of reducing road casualties by one third will depend
  590
  on the commitment and co-operation of local government. Seventy five per cent. of all casualties occur on local roads. Bus and train users are as vulnerable as—indeed, more so than—car users as they cross roads at each end of their trips to reach their destinations. Only local highway authorities can implement safety schemes on these roads. The local authority road safety officers are on the front line of education and training, providing education material to schools and promoting road safety projects.
  From my experience on a local authority, I can say that the status of road safety officers is not always what it ought to be. Too often they are stuck in offices at the back end of the building, and the committee to which they respond comprises members of the authority who perhaps are not in the forefront of day-to-day council activity. That must change. The road safety officer must be one of the most important people among council officers. The road safety sub-committee must become a committee in its own right and must have a say in all matters relating to transport.
  The local authority associations have recommended that each authority should set a local casualty reduction target and produce a road safety strategy for meeting that target. They have produced guidance to their members on how to go about this in their "Road Safety Code of Good Practice". This is an excellent document which I recommend hon. Members to read, if they have the time, and which I wholeheartedly welcome.
  I am currently engaged in a round of regional meetings with local councillors and their chief executives and have been struck by their interest and commitment. To provide the missing link between the national targets and these local targets we agreed to set regional casualty reduction targets and to monitor progress towards achieving them at the next and subsequent regional consultative meetings.
  In a wide-ranging speech, for which I make no apology, I have outlined at some length the Government's approach to tackling the scourge of road casualties. There are two aspects which are of the highest importance. First, there is the hard-nosed process of identifying where our record is poorest, concentrating on proven casualty reduction measures, analysing what is achievable in numerical terms, setting targets and monitoring what has been achieved.
  Secondly, there is the need to change attitudes throughout society, to bring home to people the scale of the human disaster that is going on around us, to make them recognise that this is not someone else's problem but that of the whole of society.
  Every individual road user must be made aware of his or her duty of care to others and to himself or herself. Parents must instil in their children the fact that the roads are the most dangerous place where they are ever likely to be. Teachers in the classroom, doctors in their surgeries, Members of Parliament in their constituencies, the press and television all have a responsibility to advise and educate. Vehicle manufacturers can make their products safer and can market safety in their advertising. Every private company in this country can improve road safety by ensuring safer driving by their employees. Some can contribute directly by developing and marketing new safety products. Others can sponsor road safety projects both locally and nationally.
  I can assure the House that the Government are committed to playing their full part in the war against this senseless loss of human life; but that war can be won only by the concerted effort of every company, every institution

  591
  and every individual in this country. Without that, 3 million people will die or be injured on Britain's roads over the next decade.
  10.17 am
  Ms. Joan Ruddock: In recent years under this Government transport safety has become a major focus of public concern—not, regrettably, because of their attention to road safety, which we acknowledge, but because of the unprecedented series of transport disasters: in the air, at sea, on the railways and on London Underground. While these tragic events serve to concentrate the mind on specific safety issues and on what we believe to be the Government's neglect of the public sector, it is the relentless toll on our roads that must rightly occupy our thoughts today.
  For every minute that we are debating the matter this morning, one person will be injured in a road accident. Furthermore, as the Minister has acknowledged, the victims of road accidents are, disproportionately, the most vulnerable members of our society—children and the elderly. The Opposition are acutely aware of the fact that we have some of the worst safety statistics in Europe when it comes to children on our roads. We acknowledge that attempts are being made to reduce the number of accidents in Britain and we wholeheartedly welcome the Government's target to reduce accidents by one third by the year 2,000. I am happy to join the Minister in paying tribute to the former Minister, the hon. Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley), for his work.
  However, as the Minister has reminded us, during 1988 over 5,000 road users died and over 300,000 were injured in road traffic accidents. In addition to the enormous emotional cost of this tragic loss of life, the social cost is in excess of £4 billion. The accident figures could be dramatically reduced if a variety of measures were put into practice.
  Road safety is an equity issue. At present, cyclists and pedestrians run a disproportionately high risk of being killed or seriously injured as compared with people who travel in cars or on buses. Pedestrian injuries are increasing. Last year, nearly two fifths of all people killed on the roads were pedestrians and cyclists. Furthermore, as the Black report showed, children from economically deprived backgrounds are most at risk from road accidents. Surely it is ironic that the most inherently safe and environmentally benign modes of transport—walking and cycling—produce the most casualties.
  The Government have responded to the particularly pressing problem of child accidents on the road with a programme of education which the Minister has outlined today. While we commend the launch of the major pilot on pre-school traffic clubs, we believe that there is a case for a general duty to be placed on schools to teach road safety. My hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) and I hope that road safety will be introduced into the national curriculum and that the national curriculum will not interrupt the programmes that some schools have already started.
  However, there is a fear that those good measures will be lost in the wider measures of Government policy. Educated children would not only be aware of their own safety needs, but would recognise the huge deficiencies in Government transport planning which directly impinge on safety. The reductions in Government financial assistance
  592
  to public transport are a scandal. High prices and poor standards of service and safety resulting from the cuts in subsidy force people to make more journeys by private car. Indeed, the Minister's own advisers predict dramatic increases in private car use in the next 20 years.
  What real hope can there be for achieving the Government's targets on road safety when they have no coherent policy for public transport? Only yesterday, British Rail and London Regional Transport announced average price increases of 9 and 10 per cent. Perhaps the Minister will tell us whether he expects any increase in road accidents as a consequence of those price rises. In London, when fares were increased by 100 per cent. following the Law Lords' ruling on the GLC's Fares Fair policy, accidents increased in London by 3,000 per annum. An expert study carried out by Professor Allsop of University college concluded that there was a linear relationship. Thus, we expect an increase in road accidents as a consequence of yesterday's fare increases. Not only will those increases deter people from using public transport by price; they will also result in a poorer service. As the Minister knows, the Government's decision to cut public money in revenue support led the operators to seek increases 50 per cent. higher than those announced yesterday. Clearly, they believed that increases of twice the rate of inflation were required to finance the improvement and investment programmes they seek to undertake without Government support.
  Does the Minister honestly believe that the state of public transport in Britain, particularly in London, will not continue to force people onto the roads and into private cars? That is not the only area of Government policy which is at odds with their commitment to road safety. Where is their real commitment to traffic-calming measures and accident investigation and prevention? The Minister has said much about experiments and future good intentions, but we want to see them in practice. Not nearly enough is being done. Experts from the Association of Metropolitan Authorities, the Association of London Authorities and the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety have all pointed to the vital importance of local measures in the urban environment that can save lives. Sadly, the Government's laudable aim of reducing accidents by one third by the year 2000 is unlikely to be reached because their general philosophy in transport is profit first. It also appears that there is a certain amount of inertia in the Government in implementing new legislation.
  The Minister referred to the White Paper "The Road User and the Law" which could make many useful contributions to road safety, but will anything on it be included in the Queen's Speech? It would be highly regrettable if it were not and I hope that the Minister will assure us that that vital piece of legislation will be included in the coming Session.
  The Opposition welcome some of the proposals for changes in road and traffic law set out in the White Paper, particularly the proposal to replace the reckless driving offence with offences that relate more closely to actual standards of driving. We also favour proposals for retesting, retraining and rehabilitating offenders, and we believe that the Government should reconsider their omission of drunk-driver offenders from the retesting proposals. We were surprised by and did not understand the exclusion of drunk-driver offenders from the retesting proposals.

  593
  We are firmly committed to reducing the number of drink-driving offences. While we appreciate the success that has been referred to this morning in the fall in the number of fatal accidents involving drivers over the limit, we believe that a comprehensive package of measures should be introduced further to reduce those figures. More has to be done to devise appropriate sentencing and treatment programmes for high-risk offenders. In line with the EC, the Opposition believe that the current legal level of alcohol consumption for drivers is too high and should be reduced to 50 mg per 100 ml of blood. It is commonly believed by those who have researched these matters that the test used in 1967 to set the present limit is now inappropriate.
  We believe that, along with the reduction in acceptable levels of alcohol, an agreed system of random breath tests should be introduced. At the moment, the chances of drunk driving being detected are too low, ranging from one in 250 trips in one locality to one in 4,000 trips in other parts of the country. The police are making up the rules as they go along. There is no consistency and no justice. Therefore, it is time that a new system is put in place. However, we are absolutely clear that such tests would be acceptable and civil liberties would be protected only if rigorous standard guidelines were set out for the police so that in no way could they be used to victimise certain groups in society.
  Mr. Hugo Summerson: The hon. Lady talks about the police making up the rules as they go along. What evidence has she to substantiate that?
  Ms. Ruddock: The evidence is in the statistics that demonstrate that there is no consistency in the numbers of people being stopped randomly, which vary enormously and depend on the rules adopted by individual constabularies. I am afraid that there is also evidence that there is disproportionate stopping of young black people in many parts of London. If we really want to tackle the problems, we must legitimise random testing and that means that we must legislate.
  There are many ways in which random breath testing could be better implemented. Many groups would need to be consulted before a firm course of action could be taken, but we are convinced by research abroad that it can make an important contribution to the reduction to the numbers of drivers over the limit. We look forward to the promised report from the Home Secretary. Other legislation could also be implemented if the Minister is really serious about trying to meet his targets by the year 2000.
  The Minister mentioned improvements in vehicle safety standards. We agree that they could play a part in reducing casualties. Pedestrian-friendly car fronts, side impact protection in cars and front under run guards on heavy goods vehicles would significantly improve a person's chance of survival when involved in an accident. However, we require more than the Minister's fine words. If motorists are to be forced to do what we know could be significant in saving people's lives, action is required.
  I ask the Minister to give his attention to second-hand vehicles. Perhaps he could refer to that subject when he sums up. The maintenance and repair of vehicles is important for the prevention of accidents. We are concerned about the continuing illegal practice of clocking
  594
  so that cars record a lower mileage. We are also concerned about the rebuilding and selling of cars that have been destroyed in accidents.
  Mr. Atkins: I am interested in this idea and it is one that has been bandied about, but I am aware of the problems involved. Would the hon. Lady like to develop her theme —I do not want to put her on the rack—and say how she thinks that recorded mileage can be checked without the introduction of a substantial bureaucratic operation which will make life more difficult for those who buy and sell cars?
  Ms. Ruddock: I am delighted to respond to the Minister's invitation as it gives me an opportunity to advertise the Labour party's transport document. The Minister has obviously not had the time, or perhaps the inclination, to read it.
  The document says that the Labour party will ensure that all motorists inform the driver and vehicle licensing centre of the mileage of their car when relicensing it or when a car is destroyed or acquired. Motorists would have access to the DVLC records in Swansea and that would be the first step towards establishing it as a consumer protection body, and towards protecting the interests of motorists.
  Mr. Atkins: Perhaps I fell into that, but I do not object to having done so, as it allows us to pursue the debate. How would the hon. Lady control what people put down as the mileage on the form? Most people in Britain are law abiding, and they would put down the right amount, but the people she is trying to catch would not put down the correct amount.
  Ms. Ruddock: Clocking is not usually done by individuals who own and drive cars. The offence is committed by second-hand car dealers. If we can assume that people who legally own and drive the cars are, as the Minister says, honest, and if they inform the centre as we propose, that will give a continuous record and is likely to expose illegal operations when the car gets into the hands of crooks.
  Mr. Corbyn: I should like to help my hon. Friend as I have had unfortunate experiences of second-hand car dealers altering the recorded mileage. It is a fairly common practice among lower-level second-hand car dealers. I am talking not about the big dealers but about the type with wire netting compounds.
  One way to prevent that abuse would be for the car mileometer and speedometer to be in a sealed unit stamped with the same number as is stamped on the car body. It would then be impossible to change it without fiddling the body number on the unit. If one bought a second-hand car one would have to check that the body number corresponded with the number on the sealed mileometer unit. That would not be foolproof, because some people are smart, but it would certainly help.
  Mr. Atkins rose——
  Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): Order. We cannot have an intervention on an intervention.
  Ms. Ruddock: It may be helpful if I continue, but I appreciate the intervention of my hon. Friend as it was most helpful. If the Minister wishes, we would be delighted to carry on correspondence with him to pursue the issue.

  595
  To return to improving pedestrian safety—I acknowledge the contribution that the Government have made, but I believe that it is piecemeal. Much of the emphasis has been on making pedestrians more mindful of cars. The Minister reiterated that this morning. Scare tactics have been used to alert children to the perils of the roads. The slogan
  "One false step and you're dead",
  which was issued in a Department of Transport press release, suggests to me that the car is supreme in the hierarchy of road users. Pedestrians are treated as second-class citizens, who must watch their every step. Their needs are not given priority, despite the fact that in central London, for example, 40 per cent. of all trips are made on foot.
  Britain's figures for pedestrian safety give cause for alarm. In general, the number of reported pedestrian casualties has fallen over the years throughout most of Europe. Only Spain, Portugal and Greece have a worse fatality rate than the United Kingdom. After motor cycling, walking has the highest casualty rate per kilometre travelled. Sadly, we predict that pedestrian accidents will not decrease at the rate the Government desire, because motor vehicles are involved in pedestrian accidents. Clearly the Government have no policy to discourage car usage. On the contrary, the Minister again boasted of the huge road-building programme that he wishes to institute.
  Mr. John Maples: Does the hon. Lady know what percentage of accidents, in which pedestrians are killed, are the fault of the pedestrian, rather than the driver of the vehicle involved? It seems to me, as a driver, that many pedestrians wander around the roads as though cars were made of marshmallow. I suspect that accidents are often their fault. Perhaps an educational programme directed at children might improve pedestrians' road behaviour. The emphasis ought to be placed there, rather than on the driver.
  Ms. Ruddock: It is unclear where the emphasis ought to to be placed, but I suggest that, by putting the onus on the pedestrian, the car user is allowed to believe that it is the pedestrian who must take care. Clearly there is equal responsibility between pedestrian and driver.
  From my observations of the work of the Department of Transport and from its press releases, I consider that, by putting the emphasis on the pedestrian, the Department has, to some extent, let the driver off the hook. Perhaps the Minister is planning to do something about that. He said that he had just launched a new scheme. Is it intended that the scheme will improve the behaviour of drivers?
  In urban areas, far too many drivers think that the pedestrian should get out of the way. There is important evidence to show that people are being knocked down on pedestrian crossings where they should have priority. There is a great deal of evidence that that priority is not observed by drivers, and accidents and fatalities occur.
  Mr. Tony Banks: The statistics show that one third of all pedestrians who are injured in motor accidents, suffer injuries when they are on the pavement. It is a bit much to ask a pedestrian to keep out of the way of a motor vehicle when he is on the pavement. Pedestrians are safer on the pavement, but clearly they are for pedestrians and not for motorists.
  Ms. Ruddock: As always, my hon. Friend has made a useful comment.
  Mr. Maples: Presumably, as one third of pedestrians are injured on the pavement, the other two thirds are injured on the road. Where they should not be.
  Ms. Ruddock: I was pointing out that pedestrians have the right to cross the road at a crossing. The hon. Gentleman says that they have no right to be on the road, but I remind him that most pavements are intersected by roads. One cannot have continuous pavements. Pedestrians have to keep crossing the road, even if they are not mad enough to walk into the road in the path of a car.
  The rising volume and speed of traffic over many years has caused parents to impose increasing restrictions on their children's unaccompanied travel. That creates a burden on parents who must accompany their children on trips.
  As I have said, young and old are made vulnerable by the fact that we have road intersections at which people must contend with drivers who are often inconsiderate to the needs of pedestrians. One in seven pedestrian casualties occurs on pedestrian crossings where people are supposed to have priority. We believe that serious and sometimes dramatic measures must be taken if any attempts, other than cosmetic ones, are to be made in the future especially given the rising traffic density.
  A reduction in speed limits must be enforced in some urban areas and more traffic-calming measures must be implemented in residential streets. Experiments and experience in Scandinavia and the Netherlands suggest that measures taken to reduce through-traffic and the speeds of vehicles, while improving facilities for cyclists and pedestrians, can be successful in reducing road traffic accidents. They claim a success rate of over 50 per cent. in previously traditional urban layouts. We applaud such measures.
  The Government's response to such traffic calming has been lukewarm. However, we are delighted that the Minister has suggested that there will be an increase in the Government's enthusiasm for introducing such measures. Ninety-five per cent. of pedestrian casualties occur in urban and residential areas. In those areas the balance between the needs of vehicles and pedestrians must be addressed more equitably. Evidence that cars do not slow down in front of schools is particularly worrying. In residential areas, traffic calming and the enforcement of speed limits can be used to reduce noise and air pollution, increase safety and play a part in creating a more environmentally friendly community.
  Another area requiring more Government attention and support is that of accident investigation and prevention. As the Minister said, it is a low-cost way of saving lives. It is a systematic procedure for identifying sites where high accident rates occur, and implementation of low-cost measures can follow. Local authorities are clearly aware of the enormous benefits of accident investigation and prevention schemes and they have been urging the Government to change the way in which those schemes are financed. Quite simply, not enough money is being made available to them at the moment. I hope that what the Minister said this morning will overcome those problems.
  I shall be in a position to test him out. My local authority of Lewisham has identified vital traffic measures within the borough, covering road safety, traffic calming and measures relating to pedestrian safety. The total cost involved would be about £750,000. Within that figure it

  597
  made a bid for £50,000 for the AIP schemes—it got £25,000. Overall it has just £50,000 to meet needs costed at £750,000. Who sets those spending limits? It is certainly not the people of Lewisham who are fed up with frightening road traffic conditions and who are afraid for their children and old people. The limits on capital spending and accident prevention are set by the Government.
  More resources that are better targeted are urgently needed and I was glad to hear what the Minister said about the transport supplementary schemes. Again, we are disappointed that he cannot give us a time scale. We shall be monitoring closely his response and the speed with which he is able to make those changes.
  As we all acknowledge, local authorities have a vital role to play in securing a safer environment. Road safety has always been high on the agenda. I intended to recommend to the Minister the local authority association's code of good practice for road safety. However, I am delighted to know that he has read the document and is supporting it so thoroughly.
  I urge upon the Minister—although it may not be necessary—the need to ensure that none of our good practice is lost in the wake of changing legislation in 1992. I refer particularly to areas that worry us both, such as motor cycle helmets, for which we have excellent safety standards which are not met in the EC. Where we do have good national mandatory safety standards, we must ensure that our good practice is not reduced to a lower level by EC regulations.
  The Government have issued a challenge to themselves —that of reducing accidents by a third by the year 2000. We applaud that target and welcome everything the Minister has said that could help positively to achieve it. However, because of the overall direction of Government transport policy, we feel regrettably, that it is unlikely that their targets will be met. We shall continue to urge the Government to give a much greater priority to public transport finance and to support for transport systems that provide the safest mode of carrying people in Britain. We will also continue to urge the Government to give local authorities the backing that they deserve and seek, because it is within local democracy that some of the best ideas and plans have been laid for improving road safety.
  10.47 am
  Sir Bernard Braine: I warmly welcome this further opportunity to discuss the important subject of road safety. All of us welcome the constructive way in which the debate was opened by my hon. Friend the Minister and by the hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms. Ruddock).
  It has been rightly said that because road accidents do not occur all at the same time and place in one single, dramatic pile-up of deaths and injuries, they constitute an "invisible massacre". The startling suggestion made by the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) that a high proportion of accidents occur to pedestrians on pavements—is a frightening statistic. It is salutary for us all to remember that the overwhelming majority of transport-related deaths and injuries occur on our roads.
  598
  Indeed, road accidents make up 40 per cent. of all accidental deaths. As individuals we run a one in 10 chance of being killed or seriously injured in a road accident.
  Hon. Members will know that I have a long-standing interest in alcohol misuse, particularly in regard to drinking and driving. Having taken part in so many debates and discussions over the years, I must confess to a sense of déjà vu. It is 13 years since the publication of the Blennerhassett report which recommended additional breath-testing powers for the police and an extended and improved procedure for managing the high-risk offender.
  I am proud of the fact that as far back as 1974 the then National Council on Alcoholism, of which I was the chairman, recommended changes in dealing with high-risk offenders. During the Second Reading debate on the Transport Bill of 1981 I recall expressing disappointment that the Government had not included such changes in their Bill. However, I was assured by the then Minister of State that administrative powers under existing legislation enabled such procedures to be implemented. I am pleased that since then the Department of Transport has developed such procedures and that the interdepartmental ministerial group on alcohol misuse has recommended that these should be strengthened further.
  I acknowledge therefore that progress has been made in the 1980s. In Britain, as in most other developed countries, there has been a slow but steady reduction in the number of deaths and injuries caused by road accidents. Consistent with that has been a gradual decline in the proportion of fatal accidents in which the driver was in excess of the legal limit for alcohol—a decline from 33 per cent. in 1978 to 23 per cent. in 1987. While that improvement is welcome, it should be recognised that it provides no justification for complacency. I applaud the Government's target to reduce accidents by the year 2000, but the general public want a faster reduction and the necessary legislation to implement changes as quickly as possible. For there are still thousands of unneccessary and avoidable injuries and deaths each year, and alcohol remains their single main cause.
  There has been a welcome change in public attitudes. The convicted driver is no longer regarded as an unlucky victim of over-zealous policing but as a potential killer whom it is the duty of the police to stop. Much of that change of attitude should be credited to the campaign against drinking and driving and to the media, who have succeeded in bringing home as never before the message that the drinking driver is a threat not only to himself but to everyone in his vicinity.
  There was, however, an inexcusable aberration by the then Secretary of State for Transport, who sanctioned the "Stay Low" Christmas campaign, which was so disastrous. The firm rejection of that dangerous notion, and a firm reaffirmation of the message, "Don't drink and drive" is a fine legacy bequeathed to the Minister by his predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley).
  The Government have clearly discerned and responded to the shift in public attitudes and have begun to strengthen their campaign publicity accordingly, but there is still some way to go, particularly in regard to legislation. On that so far there has been much talk but little action. It is time for Government rhetoric to be superseded by effective action and for the Government to catch up with public opinion.
  There is no room for complacency, because well over 300 of the 1,500 drink-related deaths annually are innocent

  599
  victims of someone else's drinking and driving. By being in the wrong place at the wrong time, an innocent person is killed every clay on our roads by another's drinking and driving. If those 300 people were, by some impossible set of circumstances, to be killed in Whitehall this morning, the Minister would be rushing to the scene and plans would be laid to rush in legislation to prevent a similar massacre in the future. However, as matters stand, innocent people are massacred in silence, and there are no headlines, messages of sympathy or offers to raise national distress funds. The Institute of Alcohol Studies has rightly said:
  "No wonder the families of the victims feel anger for there are few other crimes in which the victims receive less consideration than their assailants."
  I was therefore much encouraged by the proposal in the White Paper "The Road User and the Law" to introduce a new offence of causing death by careless driving while over the limit. This reform is much overdue. It has been warmly welcomed by hon. Members and by the country. What is now required is an assurance that the reforms recommended by the North committee will be implemented. I know that there is some anxiety among the road safety community that the Bill may not be included in the Government's programme for the forthcoming Session. May I say quite gently but firmly that such a failure would be a cause of considerable disappointment and anger among many hon. Members and beyond? My hon. Friend the Minister, who is sensitive to opinion in the House, will be aware of this anxiety and of the necessity to put it to rest at the earliest opportunity.
  Mr. Atkins rose——
  Sir Bernard Braine: Has the Minister any advance information that he can give us?
  Mr. Atkins: My right hon. Friend is vastly more experienced than almost any hon. Member in these matters. He will know full well that neither I nor any other Minister can predict what will be in the Queen's Speech. I am sure that the fact that my right hon. Friend has raised this matter will mean that it will be drawn to the attention of those august people who decide these matters.
  Sir Bernard Braine: I am grateful for my hon. Friend's courteous intervention. I have been a Minister and know perfectly well that he is unable to say anything at this stage. The mere fact that he rose to his feet only momentarily suggested to me that he had some advance information. I say to him, with the utmost friendliness, that I hope that I shall not be castigating the Government for any omission following publication of the Queen's Speech later this month.
  I hope, too, that my hon. Friend the Minister will take the opportunity provided by this debate to give the House an assurance that the Government are giving the most serious consideration to two measures which were not included in the White Paper, but which many of us regard as the most important of all—random breath testing and a reduction in the legal limit for driving. The arguments for random breath testing have been rehearsed many times in the media and elsewhere over recent years, and we are all familiar with them. The main considerations seem to be entirely clear. First, the representative bodies of the police service have asked for additional powers to administer
  600
  breath tests to increase the deterrent value of breath testing. I speak as someone who has held an advisory capacity to senior police officers for many years.
  Secondly, almost all expert opinion is convinced that random testing would save hundreds of lives and prevent thousands of injuries each year and regards it as probably the most effective counter-measure still available to reduce the number of drinking drivers on our roads.
  Thirdly, we know that the public overwhelmingly support the introduction of random testing. Opinion surveys show consistently that random testing is supported by 80 per cent. or more of the population, while experience in other countries shows that it becomes even more popular after its introduction and as its benefits become evident. We know that the majority of submissions in response to consultation on police breath testing powers, which were called for by my right hon. Friend the former Home Secretary, were in favour of the police being given additional powers.
  It is true that in debates on this issue there often appears to be some confusion between "unfettered discretion", which would allow the police to stop and test any driver at any time, and the more limited power of random testing, which would allow the police to test drivers without "reasonable suspicion" only at specially designed roadside checkpoints.
  It is abundantly clear to me that the consensus has formed around and in support of random testing mainly because the checkpoint system can more easily be governed by a code of practice designed to prevent police powers bearing down unfairly on individuals or groups. That is a crucial point because the police want to carry public opinion with them, but they are having an increasingly difficult job. When I was a youngster, a police officer being killed or wounded by the public was unthinkable. I can remember only one case of a police constable being murdered in the 1930s, the case of police constable Gutteridge who was shot to death in Billericay —a constituency that I once represented. Since the war, and particularly over recent years, the police have come under increasing pressure. They are therefore most anxious to have clearly defined powers that will carry the public with them, and for that reason, and for no other, are effective.
  Mr. John Marshall: At the risk of widening the subject of the debate slightly, does my right hon. Friend agree that this is probably not unrelated to the abolition of the death penalty for the murder of police officers?
  Sir Bernard Braine: I have my own views on that subject, but, with respect to my hon. Friend, it would be wrong of me to comment on that in this debate. We are discussing the extremely serious issue of giving the police the necessary powers to deal with drinking and driving.
  There is simply no point in clarifying and endorsing powers that are poorly designed for the purpose for which they are intended. In other words, existing police powers must be reconsidered. Even clarified and endorsed, the existing powers of the police permit them to carry out only a poor man's version of random testing, a procedure both more cumbersome to operate and less efficient than random testing proper, and therefore less likely to be carried out. What possible advantage could there be in taking such a step?

  601
  The support for random testing is now so strong that it is difficult to understand why the Government are still dragging their feet. I do not expect my hon. Friend the Minister to answer this question now, but I must ask, of what are the Government afraid? It seems clear that their reservations are based solely on anxieties about the possibility of impaired relations between the police and the public. Such anxieties are entirely misplaced. I have already referred to the abundant evidence showing that the overwhelming majority of the public support the introduction of random testing. Indeed, the police would not have requested additional powers if they believed that there was any significant danger of alienating the travelling public. They are fully alive to the need to retain the confidence of the travelling public.
  I do not wish to speak too long, but there is one other important point which has not yet been raised. I am saddened by the Government's negative and insular response to the European Commission's draft directive, which proposed a maximum permissible blood alcohol level of 50 mg from 1 January 1993. The Commission's view was endorsed by the European Parliament's committee on Transport. At this stage, I shall not enter into the argument about whether this is an appropriate matter for Community legislation, other than to point to the obvious fact that more and more people are travelling from one member country to another—the purpose of the Channel tunnel is to accelerate that movement—and it therefore makes sense to have a common policy in Europe, in the interests of safety.
  What disappoints me is that the major part of the evidence on which the Commission based its directive was drawn—believe it or not—from the findings of my hon. Friends's own Transport and Road Research Laboratory. In my Second Reading speech on the Transport Bill in 1981, I emphasised those findings as they applied to young people. Impairment of driving ability among young people begins at the low level of 30 mg. I said:
  "At 50 mg., a young person is three times more prone to accident than before. At 80 mg., he is six times more prone."
  I implored the Minister then and I do so again. I said to him:
  "For the sake of protecting the young people of this country … I urge my right hon. Friend to look again at lowering the limit for all motorists."
  I went on to say that I was glad that the then Minister had
  "wisely retained the power in schedule 8 to the Bill to vary the limit."—[Official Report, 13 January 1981; Vol. 996, c. 881.]
  Why does not the Minister use this power? The major cause of death for a young person between the ages of 16 and 24 is a road accident with a raised blood alcohol level. The Minister could at a stroke reduce the incidence of such tragedies. It is a commonplace that the 80 mg legal limit is not in any sense a safe limit. There does not appear to be a safe limit anyway. Guidelines issued since the advent of the evidential breathalyser mean that drivers are not normally prosecuted until they exceed 40 microgrammes of alcohol in the breath, which in terms of the blood alcohol level is equivalent not to 80 mg but to over 90 mg. In other words, the introduction of the evidential breathalyser has led to a de facto raising of the legal limit. Thus there is a strong case for reducing the legal limit simply to account for that factor.
  If the limit is to be reduced, it would seem sensible to reduce it to 50 mg, which the consensus of scientific
  602
  opinion regards as the maximum blood alcohol level compatible with public safety on the roads. The former Secretary of State for Transport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Southend, West (Mr. Channon), rightly stated that even one drink can kill. A 50 mg limit would be far more consistent with the educational message contained in the anti-drink-driving campaign of the Department of Transport. Public opinion surveys show majority support in favour of a reduction.
  I want to know, and I think the country wants to know, what is preventing the Government from attuning the law more closely to their message. I understand that 3,000 of the responses to the Home Office consultation favoured random testing while only 400 were opposed. Who were those 400? They must represent a very powerful vested interest if they can block the overwhelming majority's view. The House has a right to know who they were. Were they individuals, organisations or vested interests? How could they block the views of the overwhelming majority?
  Certainly I welcome the steps that the Government have already taken, or announced their intention to take, to reduce the menace of the drinking driver. The whole House supports them. The progress that has been made in recent years provides a sound basis for the introduction of these additional measures which, if taken, will make a substantial contribution towards achieving the Government's goal of reducing road casualties by one third by the end of the century. Yet I am still impatient. I want to see much faster progress, as I think we all do. the opportunity now exists to reduce by an even greater amount the most preventable accident of all, that which is alcohol related. It will be a tragedy if the Government decline to take it.
  11.6 am
  Mr. Tom Cox: I am sure that we have all listened with great interest and respect to the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine), the Father of the House, because his are the kind of comments that come to us via our postbags week by week. I hope that consideration will be given to the valuable points that he made to the Minister. Without doubt, on whichever side of the House we sit, we wholly agree with virtually everything he said.
  This has been an interesting debate. I congratulate the Minister and his Department on initiating it and I congratulate the Minister on many of his comments. I am sure that, wherever we live or wherever we represent—whether a large city constituency or a rural area—road safety and all the issues linked to it are important matters.
  The problems inlude increased traffic on local roads, large lorries going through residential areas, difficulties in finding somewhere to park and the indiscriminate way in which cars and lorries park. I was interested in the exchange between the Minister and my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms. Ruddock) about parking on pavements. Despite laws under which motorists who park on pavements can be prosecuted, there is still too much of it.
  Much comment has been made about children and young people. Parking on pavements is equally a problem for the elderly, the disabled and the blind. Like many hon. Members, I still see a great deal of parking on pavements. Another problem, which I see repeatedly, occurs when large lorries park at road junctions. A motorist trying to

  603
  come out of a road has to make his way into the flow of traffic to see what other traffic is coming along. Something needs to be done.
  Mr. Robert Key: Does the hon. Gentleman agree that one of the biggest problems faced by the elderly and the hard of hearing occurs at pelican crossings? The speed at which people are expected to cross the road is unreasonable, especially if they are elderly. For many people, the bleepers attached to those crossings are inaudible. Does the hon. Gentleman think that it might be better to have a flashing light—as opposed to just the image of a flashing person—on each pole?
  Mr. Cox: The hon. Gentleman's three points are all valid, especially the first about the speed with which cars travel and the disregard that they often show for crossings. He also made an important point about people with defective hearing who, sadly, cannot hear the bleeping noise at crossings, and his suggestion about flashing lights is relevant. The great benefit of debates such as this is that the exchange of views between hon. Members of all parties brings up points that could he of benefit to the overall issue of road safety.
  The double parking of cars, especially at night, is a problem in many parts of London, and probably in other areas as well. Double parking often takes place in the day, but the double parking of cars with no lights on in residential areas at night is the main problem. The Minister's Department must look at that problem in detail. Double parking is one of the many complaints relayed to us which involve road safety.
  The Minister has made many comments about how his Department sees progress being made to improve road safety. Sadly, from my experience, the problems of road congestion is becoming worse, especially outside the rush hour periods—and one has to accept that there will be much congestion in our major cities and large towns in the rush hours. My hon. Friend the Member for Deptford, also touched on this point.
  Many of us say that we must try to reduce the number of cars on our roads, but the announcement this week that rail and Tube fares will rise will drive many people who normally would be happy to use public transport to consider seriously whether they will continue to do so. I will quote briefly from a letter dated 23 October which I received from a constituent. He says:
  "I see in last week's Press that there is every likelihood that Public Transport fares may soon increase again, by more than the current rate of inflation. This will serve only to force more people to use their cars to get to work and back, thereby making the situation on the roads that much worse."
  I am sure that all of us will hear such comments from our constituents this weekend.
  Whatever criticisms we may make about Government policy overall, the subsidies for public transport, whatever help may be given, are wholly inadequate for existing needs. Let us consider the systems in other European countries. We hear a great deal about the French system of subsidising public transport; subsidies, whether at national, regional or local level, are enormous. The French have proved the benefits that can accrue to a country from the improved movement of people and goods. We need to consider such systems in far more detail.
  I want to concentrate on one or two issues that have not been given the prominence they deserve in this debate. All of us are aware of the rat runs of vehicles being driven
  604
  through residential areas and the problems that that causes. The Minister referred to the development of road humps and sleeping policemen. I find that the vast majority of residents would like to see such humps installed. There are requests for such humps throughout the borough of Wandsworth and, in fairness to the borough council, it is seeking to put road humps in rat run areas. One proplem is that it takes a long time for their installation to be approved and there is often a difference between the attitude of the police and that of the local authority on whether a particular road is suitable for the installation of road humps. Another problem is cost. I do not know whether the Minister has seen the figures, but I must tell him that I am amazed by the cost of the installation of road humps. It does not seem to be technically difficult development, but the delay in obtaining permission to install road humps and the cost of installing them should be looked at.
  We should also consider street parking in greater detail. I know that swoop squads of traffic wardens drive around ticketing every vehicle they see illegally parked. I do riot criticise that, but I do not believe that it gets to the root of illegal parking. We should seek a system whereby we have a community traffic warden—very much like a community policeman—who could cover a local area. Such a warden would not necessarily give a ticket to, or fine, every motorist badly parked at road junctions or double parked, but would try to build up a relationship within the community so that he could say to such a motorist, "Your parking is dangerous and is causing problems. If you do not stop, my job will be to give you tickets and you may find yourself facing court action because of your attitude." We should consider such a system because in our larger cities, as I am sure that the Minister is aware, the problem is worsening.
  We have legislation for bus lanes, but it is often riot enforced. We are told that bus lanes are intended to ensure the early movement of buses and taxis. Only a few yards from here, along Millbank, there is a bus lane with a notice saying that the bus lane is operation from 7 am until 7 pm. Yet at any time one can see car drivers and lorry drivers using that bus lane and holding up buses. We have the legislation for bus lanes. We have the right to ask the Minister and his Department when the rules that govern their use will be enforced. Those rules do not seem to be enforced in many other areas of London in which bus lanes are operating.
  In my constituency this Tuesday, I was driving along the road at about 10 pm. I saw in the distance a light and I believed that a motor cyclist was approaching. It was riot until I was about 10 yards away from the light that I realised that it was a van with defective lighting. Defective lighting is bad enough in the summer months, but in the winter, the police should rigorously enforce existing legislation on motor vehicles being driven with defective lighting. That is especially important to protect the elderly and young children. There are far too many vehicles with defective lighting.
  The provision of cycle lanes has not been given sufficient attention this morning. More and more people are using bicycles, whether to go to work or for general travel, and whether they live in a local area or travel from outside it. There are very few cycle lanes in operation in Westminster, although one sees many cyclists. Many hon.

  605
  Members cycle to the Palace, I believe. I see the hon. Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Summerson) in his place; I gather than he is a keen cyclist.
  Mr. Summerson indicated assent.
  Mr. Cox: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree that we are not paying sufficient attention to the protection of cyclists and that we should be developing cycle lanes.
  Mr. Corbyn: I often cycle to this place. It is impossible to get here entirely on cycle routes from north London, which is where I live. The last part of the journey, which takes me down Whitehall, is very dangerous. The problem with cycle lanes is that although the lanes themselves are fine, and relatively safe, unless priority or safety measures are provided at junctions, they are of no value. A cycle lane along Whitehall would be of no use because the cyclist would be exposed to enormous danger on reaching Parliament square, and the same thing applies to almost every cycle lane.
  Mr. Cox: I agree with my hon. Friend, who has highlighted the importance of giving more protection and consideration to cyclists, whose numbers are increasing. I take my hon. Friend's point that it is no good having cycle lanes without junction priority measures because cyclists are then exposed to even greater dangers. I am sure, however, that the Department of Transport and local authorities could examine the matter in detail and develop better strategies for the protection of cyclists.
  The Minister is responsible for the road options now under consideration, and that ties in with the general issue of road safety. I see that the Minister is laughing, and I can well understand why: he is thinking, "Good gracious, not again." In any debate on road safety we should take the opportunity to voice our constituents' deep concern about the road assessment studies that the Minister and his officials are considering. Whichever assessment study the Minister and his Department eventually approve, it will no doubt bring many thousands of extra vehicles into residential areas. Our constituents are deeply concerned not only for their own safety but about the possible effects on their environment.
  I beg the Minister and the Secretary of State to listen to what the people of London are saying about the road options. The Minister told me on Monday that a statement would be made in December. I could give him countless examples of letters that have come my way, but I shall quote only one from one of my constituents:
  "I fail to see how the capital's transport problems can be solved by building new roads which past experience has shown merely attracts new traffic, thereby changing the pattern of congestion not solving it. Surely it must be obvious that encouraging private vehicles can only worsen the problem which can best be solved by offering a true alternative through a radical, comprehensive programme of genuine investment in public transport."
  That sums up the sentiments expressed in the many letters that London Members receive about road options, and I beg the Minister to pay the greatest possible attention to what the people of London are saying, before decisions are made by him.
  I am sure that all hon. Members will find this an interesting debate. We all want people to be allowed to use cars and people now expect to have the right to do so. But the safety of the general public should continue to be our
  606
  priority. Although much progress has been made, much remains to be done. As my hon. Friend the Member for Deptford said, we are not happy with the Government's attitude. My hon. Friend said that cuts in grants had deprived her local authority of the opportunity to make road safety provision, and I am sure that all of us could give similar examples. We may back the aims of the Minister and his Department but improvements will not be achieved on the cheap. They will entail not only the involvement and understanding of the general public but financial commitment by the Government. Unfortunately, many of us do not see evidence of complete commitment in the Government's policies on public transport and transport generally and especially on road safety.
  11.25 am
  Sir Philip Goodhart: Like the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox), I have made representations to the Minister about the road assessment studies. I entirely endorse the hon. Gentleman's remarks about the importance of dealing with illegal parking and of the more widespread use of road humps.
  Next weekend many of my hon. Friends will be attending Remembrance Sunday services, which will have particular significance this year as it is the 50th anniversary of the outbreak of the second world war, during which 265,500 service men and women were killed in action. Since the war ended in 1945, 267,000 people have been killed on our roads. In other words, more of our people have been killed on our roads since the end of world war 2 than were killed during it.
  During the past 11 months there have been four major transport tragedies, and hon. Members have been brought to the House to listen to statements about Clapham and Lockerbie. Four hundred people were killed in those disasters—the average number of people killed in one month on our roads.
  What hon. Members say and do can have a substantial impact on those awful figures. Twenty years ago the number of people killed on our roads hovered at about 8,000 a year. Now it has been reduced to about 5,000 a year. There were two parliamentary reasons for that substantial decline—the first was the introduction of the breath test in 1967 and the second was the introduction of seat belts at the beginning of this decade. More work remains to be done on both those matters.
  In his admirable speech opening the debate, my hon. Friend the Minister stated that there have been 25,000 unrestrained rear seat casualties in cars of which 4,000 involved death or serious injury. The Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety believes that the most effective way of reducing casualties for car occupants is to make the wearing of seat belts compulsory for rear seat passengers. I hope that that will happen.
  The next major step forward in relation to the two vital issues of seat belts and the breathalyser relates to random breath testing. My right hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine), the Father of the House, has just made a powerful plea about that.
  It is clear now that the police are solidly behind the extension of breath testing to include random testing. There can be no doubt that public opinion continues to swing in favour of random tests. The Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, of which I am delighted to be a member, recently carried out a public

  607
  opinion poll on that issue, undertaken by National Opinion Polls market research. Such testing was defined as:
  "giving the police the authority to set up special roadside checkpoints and to routinely breathalyse any driver passing through."
  In that poll, 81 per cent. of the public were in favour of that step which would massively increase the deterrent power of breathalysing. Those in favour covered all sections of the community—male and female, young and old, rich and poor. I hope that the Government will soon take the final step along the road which has already saved so many thousands of lives over the past 20 years.
  Speed is another problem. We can now curb speed on main roads through the introduction of speed cameras and on back roads and lesser roads through the wider use of road humps and other traffic-calming measures. A few weeks ago I spent some time driving in the United States of America. America has a more violent society than ours, but the Americans are infinitely better behaved on their roads than we are. The American general traffic speed limit is 55 mph and occasionally 65 mph. Those limits are largely enforced by radar. In the many hours that I spent driving in America, I did not see a car exceed 70 mph. That has had a dramatic impact on the number of road casualties in America since the limits were introduced about 20 years ago. The road accident fatality rate in the United States is about half the rate in this country. I believe that the legislation of speed cameras could be enormously helpful.
  The North report recommends:
  "The fixed penalty system should be amended by legislation to allow a fixed penalty to be sent to an offender identified after inquiries flowing from an automatic speed detection check."
  The Transport and Road Research Laboratory estimates that that step would reduce fatalities by at least 5 per cent. a year and PACTS believes that the figure could be a little higher because the high-speed accident would be most affected. The North report also recommends that the law should he changed to enable cameras to be used in traffic light offences. That would also produce a substantial reduction in the number of fatalities. It would certainly reduce the number of fatalities by about one a day—at least 365 a year. However, we need legislation and I hope that such legislation will not be delayed. I add my pleas for legislation to those that have been made already.
  I want to commend the Minister on two points. He and I attended a conference on the older driver organised by the Automobile Association earlier this week. Every expert who spoke at the conference underlined the importance of visibility. I am delighted that the Minister has already announced an extension of lighting up time. However, I was not entirely clear from his statement whether that was intended to apply just to vehicles or whether street lights would be turned on for an extended period.
  Mr. Atkins: Perhaps I can clarify this point. As my hon. Friend is a year older today than yesterday, I take this opportunity to wish him a happy birthday. The extension applies only to vehicles, not to street lights.
  Sir Philip Goodhart: I hope that in the very near future my hon. Friend the Minister will come to the Dispatch Box and tell us that the extension will apply to street lights as well as to vehicles.
  I was delighted by the Minister's announcement of a loosening of the restrictions on the introduction of road
  608
  humps. They play a most important part in curbing speed in residential areas. The initial restrictions on their use were far too tight and I am glad that they are to be reduced. The Minister referred to the casualty rate among school children. I hope that road humps, almost as a matter of course, could be placed outside primary schools where they are on back roads, as they almost always are. I welcome my hon. Friend the Minister to his new duties and I hope that in the coming Session he will have a substantial legislative load to bring before the House.
  11.38 am
  Mr. Ronnie Fearn: I am pleased to address the House in my new capacity as Liberal Democrat spokesman on local government and transport. Both local government and transport are particularly relevant to this debate and can be linked, as I hope to show.
  Road safety touches us all and we should all be concerned about it. This debate has proved that. As my party's outgoing health spokesman, I have also had a keen interest in any reduction in the number of accidents on our roads. Obviously, such a reduction would reduce pressure on the National Health Service. In a parliamentary answer on 28 November, the then Minister said:
  "It is estimated that the cost of road accidents to the National Health Service due to hospital treatment in 1987 was £146 million."—[Official Report, 28 November 1988; Vol. 142, c. 164]
  I am sure that we will see an increase in that estimate this year.
  Road safety is not only about financial cost; it is about human cost—death, injury and destroyed lives. The present scale in this country is far too high a price to pay, whatever benefits there may be from the age of the motor car. It is the Government's declared and welcome intention to reduce road accidents by one third by the year 2000, but until there is a change of direction in overall transport policy, things will not greatly improve. Our island—I include Northern Ireland—is far too small to allow 50-odd million people to own or travel in cars. Our roads are already far too congested. Overcrowded roads produce stress and impatience in drivers and can lead to poor attitudes which manifest themselves in dangerous driving manoeuvres. Attitudes such as "this is my piece of road and I am sticking to it" and, "Get out of my way, I am in a hurry" end in disaster. Too often, innocent pedestrians, cyclists and passengers suffer as a result of pure selfishness or a need to feel a sense of power.
  A young police constable to whom I spoke not too long ago, summed up another aspect of driving attitudes. In a discussion about whether people were less caring today, he said, "Of course they are. You have only to look at the way they drive to see that. There is not a thought for others. They are determined, no matter what the cost, to get to wherever they are going in the least possible time. People don't give a damn." That is a damning statement, and we should take it to heart and consider how we can change the current trend.
  Crowded streets crammed with parked cars are a danger to all pedestrians. Without a clear view of oncoming traffic, crossing the road can be extremely hazardous for some groups, such as the young and the elderly. A hazard may be even worse when trees are planted at the edge of pavements. Tree-lined streets are pleasant from an environmental point of view, but they obstruct pedestrians' views. I am referring particularly to

  609
  small children who can appear from behind a tree right out of the blue. There was a tragic case in my constituency of Southport. The council debated whether to increase the speed limit from 30 to 40 mph on a tree-lined street. I and. to their credit, many other councillors said, "That can cause accidents. We must be careful about whether we increase the speed limit, because that is a tree-lined street." Within six months, a four-year-old boy came out from behind a tree and was killed. I wanted to say, "I told you so," but I did not, and the road safety people in Sefton recommended that trees be removed from the edge of the roadway in that area. That happened, and the environmentalists did not protest.
  Pedestrians and drivers alike should be made aware of the unexpected dangers. I would not object to a few more signs, caution lights and other physical aids if they prove to be beneficial in making our roads safer.
  To build bigger and better roads to ease congestion is not the answer. The debacle of the M25, with its traffic jams and high accident rate, is a testament to that. It is now called the biggest car park in the world. We will never be able to meet demand. The more roads we build, the more cars people will buy to fill the empty spaces, and any massive road-building programme will undoubtedly lead to an even poorer public transport system. The previous Secretary of State's ideas about tolls, super highways or fast lanes will not do, either. If tolls are set at such a price that it is worth collecting them, there will be stretches of motorways, blighting the landscape and without a car in sight.
  Mr. Maples: I understand the hon. Gentleman's argument about never having enough roads to take care of potential demand in cities. However, the hon. Gentleman appears to be saying that that is his party's national policy. The hon. Gentleman will have to find some way of suppressing people's right to use their cars on those roads. How does he propose to do that?
  Mr. Fearn: I do not intend to suppress any car user's right to use a road. Car users have that right, and I hope that it will continue. Some people may not purchase cars because the public transport system would supplement the road system. That does not interfere with the right of urban motorists who use their cars a great deal.
  When road congestion worsens, roads fall into disrepair. Local authorities and rural communities do not have the cash to repair roads, and that is causing further accidents.
  Mr. Gerrard Neale: Does the hon. Gentleman accept that if we were to double the capacity of British Rail over the next 12 months, we would barely do more than take up the anticipated growth on the roads in that period? That is the scale of the problem. The hon. Gentleman seems to treat it as though it could be dealt with simply. We would have to continue doubling the capacity of British Rail every year to deal with the growth.
  Mr. Fearn: I accept that. Therefore, the Government's problem is to find a public transport system and a road system for the whole country.
  There are great difficulties with the toll system in Spain. I understand that some of the new road systems are a joy to travel on because there are so few cars on them. Many
  610
  Spaniards boycott the roads because they are unable to pay the high tolls. I hope that that would never happen here.
  I question whether a move to faster lanes would be wise. Although the relationship between the number of accidents and speed is unclear, we know that the severity of road accidents is related to the speed of impact. I accept that the speed of impact is not necessarily the speed of travel, but an analysis of the 1986 accident figures shows that fatality rates are higher on high-speed roads. That proves that it is not too far-fetched to conclude that speed is a significant factor in road accidents. In 1987, 54,352 serious accidents resulted in 64,293 serious casualties. Any move to increase speed limits cannot fail to produce far higher numbers.
  Although I recognise that there is no simple formula for improving the accident rate on our roads, there is much that we can do to develop a much improved, safer and more efficient public transport system. As my party's spokesperson on this matter, I hope that I will have numerous opportunities to debate how that can be done. However, I do not hold out much hope for safer public transport. If the Government can allow one of their pet projects to be derailed—I refer to the Channel tunnel link —there is little hope for the rest of us. The delay in developing a London link will have a knock-on effect on roads in the south-east, making it even more difficult to travel on them.
  Mr. Maples: That point ties in with what the hon. Gentleman was saying about improved public transport. My constituency and that of the hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms. Ruddock) will be affected by the Channel tunnel link. The proposed public transport system would substantially relieve road congestion in Kent, yet opposition to it in our constituencies is almost overwhelming.
  Mr. Fearn: The hon. Gentleman has made his own point about that.
  Ms. Ruddock: I understand the rules of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and because there is a diffculty here, I shall address my remarks to the hon. Member for Southport (Mr. Fearn). I do not wish to be associated with any suggestion that Labour Members disapprove of the Channel tunnel rail link, because it is a public transport infrastructure which we very much support. The disapproval that we have all voiced is that public money has not been provided to make the project environmentally sound.
  Mr. Fearn: The hon. Lady has made her own point.
  Improvements in the public transport system cannot be achieved quickly enough to ease the urgent road problems. The time for action is now. I welcome some of the Government's most recent initiatives, including doubling the spending on local road safety schemes, about which we heard a little from the Minister. However, I ask the Minister whether extra street lighting resources are to be provided for local authorities and for schemes to eliminate black holes on motorways. We all know as we travel home —some of us travel last thing at night along the M1 and the M6—how suddenly we are confronted with the black holes in the lighting system. I am sure that accidents would be reduced if we had lighting all along our motorways.

  611
  In Sefton, where I am a borough councillor, work is currently being carried out into local and regional comparisons of road safety accident figures. I am pleased to report a 50 per cent. reduction in the number of fatal accidents and a significant reduction in the number of serious accidents in 1988. I do not want to put too much stress on statistics because I know that they can be misleading and, in some instances, can lead to complacency. I hasten to add that Sefton borough council, which includes Southport, is in no way complacent. In April 1988 is launched a massive education programme in its infant and junior schools and undertook non-school-based road safety talks, film shows, exhibitions and displays, especially for elderly people. As part of its programme for the elderly, it issued a booklet with the aid of Age Concern, entitled "Keep Living". I have no doubt that the Minister has seen it, but if he has not I recommend that he does so. It can be obtained from the County Road Safety Officers' Association, Age Concern and local road safety officers. It reports cases of elderly people who had accidents, and deals with the reasons for those accidents. It is simple, and easy to read and understand. I hope that at some time all elderly people will read it.
  Education is an important part of any campaign to improve road safety. I was, therefore, interested to read in last Sunday's edition of The Observer that the child cycling proficiency test was to be scrapped. The article stated that
  "a new road safety scheme designed to embrace modern teaching methods and to fit in with the national curriculum"
  was due to be introduced next spring. The Minister has reassured me that the test is still with us and I welcome that. It is frightening for people to read such untrue articles in the press. The article was twisted and I am glad to know that the Minister is minded that the test should continue. If there is to be a new scheme, I can only hope that it will prove a better way of ensuring the safety of the many thousands of child cyclists who form part of the Department of Transport's statistics on fatal and serious accidents.
  Our residential streets are no longer the safe back roads that they used to be. Children can no longer go out to play in our streets or ride on their bikes as a pleasant pastime. Cycling to and from school has become a major hazard. I note that the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents is campaigning for single-double summer time which it believes would benefit young children coming home from school.
  Some children have taken to cycling on the pavements which proves hazardous, especially to disabled and elderly people. Local byelaws then come into play. They are vigorously enforced in some authorities, leaving the young children in no man's land. There is no doubt that cyclists are an especially vulnerable group on our roads. It is estimated that there are now 13·5 million cycles in this country. It is perhaps time that we encouraged the provision of more cycling paths for travel and for recreational cycling for children.
  Education is an important factor in other areas also. Road safety instruction at infant and junior level is to be welcomed. However, perhaps we should be going much further. We need to wake up to the fact that we are a nation of car owners and will continue to be so. For more and more young people—some still at school—getting behind the wheel of a car will be their only method of transport in the future. I should like to see a programme
  612
  that introduces some form of safety education into our senior schools. The emphasis in such a programme could be placed on safe driving habits, attitudes and proficiency.
  We should also look at ways of making our driving test more in keeping with the real world. It seems ludicrous that five minutes after passing a test, the newly qualified driver is allowed on to motorways of which he or she has no experience. To drive on a multi-lane motorway at 70 mph is not something to be taken lightly.
  The same law also allows people to take a driving test without a single lesson from a qualified driving instructor. The test itself is far too short for the examiner to observe any bad habits that may have been formed from driving with friends or other drivers such as relatives. That area of the law needs to be investigated with a view to making the driving test and the regulations surrounding it more stringent.
  Over the years, a number of tragic events have led to the loss of many lives, to severe injuries and to hardship. Hon. Members have mourned with the rest of the nation and have called on the Government to act quickly to improve the safety standards for members of the public, yet every year we seem content to allow untold numbers of people to suffer from the most terrible consequences of road traffic accidents. As I said earlier, I know that there is no simple formula, but I hope that the Government are taking their responsibilities seriously. I hope that they will provide the resources necessary to enable us to reach the target for the reduction of accidents that the Government themselves have set.
  11.57 am
  Mr. Conal Gregory: As so many traffic movements are effected by road, it is vital that we
  work towards the greatest safety measures possible. As vice-chairman of the Conservative parliamentary transport committee, I welcome today's debate and apologise to the House for my croaky voice.
  Clearly, the Government have given a high priority to road construction and maintenance. In North Yorkshire, the benefits will amount to almost £40 million-worth of road schemes in the 1990s. That is vital when we see the carnage on the A 1. Only last month, the death toll on North Yorkshire's roads reached 100, against 86 for that period last year.
  I should like to suggest four changes in policy that would save lives and be extremely cost-effective. First, there is a need for seat belts on buses and coaches, and my hon. Friend the Minister referred to that in his imaginative and wide-ranging speech. The lives of young people are put at risk when they are on school outings. There have been some appalling accidents where, I am confident, children would have been saved had they been wearing seat belts. The matter requires the urgent attention of the House; only a small measure would be needed, but it would have great effect.
  Secondly, there is a need for adequate insurance cover. We all know of constituents who have suffered terrible injuries from cars whose drivers have not been insured. We should require every car to display a valid insurance disc on either the windscreen or the bumper so that, at a glance, the police and other motorists can see it. The Road Traffic Act 1988 requires the user of a vehicle to be insured. It should be a simple procedure to require evidence of that insurance to be prominently displayed. All car owners

  613
  must show a valid insurance certificate each time that they renew a vehicle licence, but there is no deterrent to someone later that day going to his broker and reclaiming the funds. A simple display disc, which would have to be redeemed to recover funds, would be a simple and effective solution.
  My third area of concern is tyre safety, and I declare an interest as I am a consultant to the tyre executive committee of British Rubber Manufacturers Association. I am glad that the tread size is moving from 1 mm to 1·6 mm on 1 January 1992 at the latest. After all, my hon. Friend's official vehicle has its tyres changed before they reach that level, and we surely would not want a duality of standards. There should be two further developments. First, the tread depth should be measured across the whole tyre and not just across 75 per cent. of the width. It is a curious British anomaly. Will my hon. Friend re-examine European Community directive 89/459 and ensure the greatest road safety criteria? Will he also ensure that there is a concerted campaign to make the new law well known? My hon. Friend the Minister for Public transport said in an Adjournment debate on 26 May that the Government would give their support to that. I urge my hon. Friend to join with the newly created Tyre Industry Council and agree to fund half the costs of such a campaign. If the council contributed £500,000 and the Department matched that sum, there would be a very effective campaign and motorists would soon realise that there was a new law and that they must change their tyres.
  Secondly, action must be taken on the sale of second-hand tyres. There is no law that states that second-hand tyres have to be safe. Second-hand goods are not covered by the general duty requirement of safety. A survey of tyres on sale to the public, recently carried out by trading standard officers in Yorkshire and Humberside, revealed a staggering 32 per cent. failure rate. Defects ranged from nails embedded in the tread to leaks from the valve base, side wall damage and severe weathering. Calls for strict controls to protect motorists and other road users have gone unheeded. I hope that that latest evidence will persuade the Government to impose tight controls that will give the road user the additional protection that is needed.
  Motorists should exercise extreme caution when considering the purchase of such tyres because the apparent financial saving is not worth it if safety is reduced. It may come as a surprise to the House to learn that when a trader in tyres is found guilty, or pleads guilty, to supplying faulty tyres, the court does not order the seizure and destruction of those tyres, but ensures that they are returned to the negligent trader. Where do those faulty tyres go? I urge my hon. Friend to hold discussions with the Lord Chancellor so that that horrifying loophole can be closed.
  The fourth, and perhaps the most important, issue is the standard of garages. The public puts enormous faith in garages to ensure the safety and maintenance of cars and other vehicles. Last year, trading standards officers received 100,000 complaints, the majority—57,000—relating to second-hand cars and 15,000 relating to service and repair. The public puts its confidence in garages that belong to the Motor Agents Association, a trade body with a membership of 13,600 garages that proudly display
  614
  the association's logo as a sign of respectability. Many hon. Members will have seen it on doors and on invoices and other documentation. That confidence is, sadly, unwarranted. Despite the number of garages pleading guilty, or being found guilty, of vehicle-related offences, only two members a year had their membership of the MMA cancelled in 1986, 1987 and 1988, yet the association has some 10,000 complaints annually. It is a whitewash. It is hardly surprising that only 26 to 28 per cent. of the public consider motor traders to be legal, honest and decent. The vast majority know that they are quite the contrary.
  We must have much tougher penalties. I realise that I am in danger of not being the guest of honour at the association's next annual banquet, but we must expose the problems. We need tougher penalties to combat the unroadworthy vehicles that are sold, the clocking of speedometers and the moving of vehicles without the speedometer being engaged, inadequate servicing and the problem of garages unfit to offer credit but still attempting to do so. Last year, my county, the North Yorkshire county council, prosecuted 15 dealers for 34 offences. I praise the vigilance of its officers, but the penalties amounted to a derisory £12,900 and will not be an adequate disincentive. Therefore, I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will discuss raising the penalties to deter such traders from dicing with death. I trust that he will ensure that the mileage can be recorded on the driver and vehicle licensing centre form when the annual licence is renewed. It is nonsense that the DVLC can hide behind red tape as a reason for not introducing this most useful safeguard.
  As many garage applications for consumer credit licences are refused or revoked by the Office of Fair Trading, it is incredible that that august body, the Motor Agents Association, does not expel such companies from membership. I hope that the Government will have urgent discussions to end this anomaly and restore public confidence in the credit facilities offered by garages.
  These four measures—coach safety belts, an insurance disc, better tyre regulations and more responsible garage trading—will ensure improved road safety and greater confidence of the motoring public and those who use our roads.
  12.2 pm
  Mr. Tony Banks: I assure the hon. Member for York (Mr. Gregory) that I shall always want to purchase, and will have the confidence to purchase, a second-hand car from him. I should have liked him to make another point about garages and garage forecourts. The inaccuracy of the tyre pressure gauges on many garage forecourts is frustrating. If tyre pressures are important to the safety of vehicles, garages should do more to ensure that the gauges are accurate. The hon. Gentleman should perhaps say something about that to those friends and organisations that he represents so ably.
  I found the Minister's speech most constructive and well worth listening to. It was also unnerving because I always considered him to be one of the original Tory bootboys when he was first elected, along with the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth). It shows that office has a way of imposing certain disciplines on the most unruly of hon. Members, making them appear both statesperson-like and highly responsible. It is worrying to

  615
  see the way that office destroys thuggery and individualism. I am glad that there is no way in which office will taint me.
  Mr. Atkins: The hon. Gentleman is unlikely to hold office.
  Mr. Banks: That point is regularly made to me by the leader of my party.
  On this issue, the Opposition entirely support the Government. It is unusual for them to come up with something so constructive as measures to cut road accident casualties by the year 2000. The Government have our support in that objective, but their other activities and policies, particularly those that affect London, militate against them achieving it. One is the Government's policy on public transport.
  The greater emphasis that is given to public transport, the greater the level of road safety because public transport is far safer than private transport. The Government are far from encouraging greater use of public transport. Only yesterday it was announced that London Underground fares are to be increased by 10 per cent. That is more than the rate of inflation. Every time that fares go up more people stop using public transport and start using their private vehicle, if they have one. If not, they make alternative arrangements. Greater use of private vehicles leads to an increase in the number of road accidents.
  The University of London undertook a study which showed a correlation between fare increases and the number of road accidents. When fares increase, the number of accidents increases. The Government should put greater emphasis on public transport in London and Britain's other cities as a positive way of reducing the number of road accidents.
  We have a better record on road accidents than much of Europe. In the light of the Government's new road building schemes and of predicted traffic increases, it is clear that the rate at which the volume of traffic increases will exceed the decline in the number of road accidents. The Minister must address that problem. If more and more urban motorways are built, there will be a greater possibility of accidents occurring. The forecast increase in traffic levels of between 80 and 140 per cent. by the year 2015, in the absence of other changes, will lead to a doubling of the number of road accidents. The Government are in a dilemma because they are pursuing the worthwhile objective of reducing road accident casualties by a third by the year 2000, while pursuing wide-ranging policies that militate against that objective.
  I said that our record on road accidents is good compared with the rest of Europe, but our safety record for pedestrians and cyclists puts Britain among the least safe countries in Europe. Research carried out by the Metropolitan police, among other organisations, has shown that 60 to 70 per cent. of accidents among motorists, pedestrians and cyclists are the fault of the motorist. The number of pedestrians involved in accidents and how such accidents can be avoided have been mentioned. It is difficult for a pedestrian to avoid an accident if he is run down on the pavement. Indeed, a third of all accidents involving pedestrians happen on the pavement. It is unreasonable to say that pedestrians should be more wary of cars on the pavements. One does not normally expect to meet a car coming the other way when going about one's lawful activities on the pavement.
  616
  I noticed recently that the borough engineer of Kingston was injured by a car driving on to the pavement in September, shortly after he had opened a new road safety exhibition. That was an extremely unfortunate thing to happen, both to a borough engineer and to someone who had just done something so worthwhile. Perhaps he was following the example of dear old Mr. Huskisson, who achieved notoriety in a way that none of us would wish to do. If the Government are serious—and I accept that they are—about improving road safety, they must introduce safety measures to prevent vehicles riding on to the pavement of urban roads. We ask for more positive proposals.
  The Government make a virtue of continually announcing the construction of more roads on the basis of increased vehicle speeds and increased manufacture and use of vehicles. That, in my view, is entirely wrong: the Government should be discriminating against the construction of new roads, especially in the inner cities. Of course we need to do something—indeed, we must do something—about road maintenance, for London's road system is now in an appalling state. Local authorities, with Government support, must act as soon as possible, and the Government themselves must do something about the trunk roads.
  Mr. Atkins: I do not wish to interrupt the flow of the hon. Gentleman's speech, or to delay the debate. I would, however, be interested to hear his comments on the fact that many of his hon. Friends—as well as mine—come to see me to press the case for constituents who want more bypasses. How does the hon. Gentleman relate that to his suggestion that we should not build more roads—that, indeed, we should discriminate against the motor car?
  Mr. Banks: Such discrimination should, I think, take place in the cities. I support the idea of improved motorway systems, although I should like the Government to push more and more heavy freight on to the railways, rivers and canals rather than encouraging its movement by lorry.
  I was suggesting that the Minister should not become involved in major schemes to finance inner-city roads, although ringways and bypasses are certainly important. We should do as we would be done by. If I lived in a small town or village with numerous cars and heavy lorries thundering through every day, I should certainly be in favour of a bypass. Speaking as a London Member, however, I am not in favour of more urban motorways; I want to see fewer of them, along with more discrimination in favour of the pedestrian and of public transport.
  I welcome what the Minister says about the financing of accident remedial measures through the transport supplementary grant. We were going to ask him to make a statement about that, but he anticipated our reasonable demands; all credit to him for that. I hope that the Government will not take long to consider measures which we all agree are highly desirable so that local authorities can get on with their implementation.
  I know that many hon. Members wish to speak, and I wish that a few more of my hon. Friends were among them. I cannot wait to hear the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn), who always speaks good sense.
  Mr. Corbyn: My hon. Friend will not be here then.
  Mr. Banks: Unfortunately, I shall not, no, but I shall read my hon. Friend's speech in Hansard with great interest on Monday.
  The matter of enforcement does not directly affect the Under-Secretary of State, but it certainly affects the Home Department. I am sure that there is much discussion between the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues in that Department about the need to get London's police to do more to enforce traffic measures—to deal with, for instance, bus and cycle lanes and parking restrictions. The police will say that they have not the necessary resources, but, in this place, if we will the ends, we must also will the means.
  Opposition Members have said many times that, if the Government come up with proposals to increase the number of police and the resources available to them so that they can deal with traffic restrictions, bus priority measures and all the other enforcement measures that are necessary in London, they will certainly obtain our support. We can pass all the measures that we want to pass in the House, but unless we give the enforcement agencies the resources to back up those measures, we are wasting their time and ours. I am sure that neither the Minister nor I would want that to happen; nor, I believe, would any other hon. Member who has taken part in this morning's useful debate.
  12.18 pm
  Mr. John Maples: I agree with much of what the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) said about the inner cities. The hon. Member for Southport (Mr. Fearn) totally failed to draw a distinction between roads in the inner cities and roads in the country.
  There is usually an unexpected bonus if one speaks in a Friday debate—the pleasure of seeing what my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones) is wearing. Often it is an infallible guide to what was worn by a well-dressed Tory MP at country house lunch parties in the 1930s. Unfortunately, however, we do not have that pleasure today.
  Mr. Corbyn: Or a shooting party.
  Mr. Maples: I think that the hon. Gentleman is confusing my hon. Friend the Member for Watford with my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Mr. Soames). Both are infallible guides to their respective styles. I think that my description was right.
  Mr. Corbyn: They also offered to be my clothing adviser in the age of television. I have been taking their advice, as the hon. Gentleman can see.
  Mr. Maples: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman could do with some advice, but I do not think that I would choose either of them, if I were he.
  There have, however, been a couple of bonuses today. The first has been to hear my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble (Mr. Atkins) at the Dispatch Box outlining the Government's policy on road safety. We look forward to his making regular appearances on the "Today" programme and seeing whether he can beat his predecessor's record. We shall also look forward to seeing whether he can pull a longer face over Christmas than his predecessor.
  The second bonus was to hear about the Liberal Democrats' policy, and I am sorry that their spokesman,
  618
  the hon. Member for Southport is no longer here because it seemed to me to be thoroughly confused. We are a nation of car owners, he said, which presumably means that he realises that people want to travel around the country in their cars, but he believes that we should not build any more roads for them. I do not know what they are supposed to do with their cars if we do not build more roads for them. He failed to draw a distinction between roads in the country and roads in the cities. He suggested that public transport could take all the strain. That may be true in the inner cities, but that is not true about the country. British Rail's capacity to take people where they want to go in the country is very limited.
  The hon. Member for Newham, North-West mentioned Mr. Huskisson. That made me think that he, with his deep prejudice against all forms of modern transport, might make a better Liberal Democrat spokesman on transport than their current spokesman. A point made by the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox), by my hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham (Sir P. Goodhart) and, if she had had time, I am sure that it would also have been made by the hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms. Ruddock), so perhaps I can deliver it to my hon. Friend in quadrophonic sound, related to the representations that are being made about the South Circular study. I join the band of those who are opposed to more motorways, or anything approaching motorways, being driven through the middle of London.
  The road accident statistics are awful. Many of the accidents occur in London. An interesting statistic is that 70 per cent. of all accidents occur on local urban roads, many of them in London and the south-east. The cost is estimated at £4 billion. We know who the vulnerable groups are. That problem affects those who represent urban constituencies rather more than others. The Government have made several good proposals about improving road safety and the accident record. I shall not dwell on them because they have already been addressed by many other speakers. In the inner cities, however, we should examine the whole question of congestion and rat running and whether, by reducing the amount of traffic on the roads we could reduce the amount of rat running and the number of accidents.
  The CBI estimates that the congestion on our roads costs £15 billion, two thirds of which is incurred in London and the south-east. There is an enormous suppressed demand for road usage. The argument that roads create traffic in London is true, although I deny that it is true about movements between urban centres outside London. We cannot expect to solve the problem of commuter traffic on London's roads by building more roads. People are prepared to accept a certain speed of about 11 to 12 mph. More roads in London would generate more traffic, which would bring the speed down again to that level.
  To improve the traffic flow we should improve the lighting, increase parking restrictions and introduce local schemes. However, we need to consider creatively the problem of commuter traffic on London's roads.
  External costs are caused by congestion, a problem that is not taken into account. Delays caused by one driver impose costs on other drivers. Pollution and environmental consequences affect other people. Congestion also causes accidents, the subject of our debate. If traffic is moving at 10 mph, an additional car in that traffic for one minute imposes a two-minute delay on all the other cars. There is a geometric progression. Some 67 per cent. of

  619
  London's traffic is accounted for by cars. They carry 15 per cent. of the commuters, whereas buses represent I per cent. of the traffic and carry about 30 per cent. of the commuters.
  We need to move away from using cars towards using public transport, which in the short term has to be buses because the improvement programmes planned for the Underground inevitably will take some time. The fact that public transport is safer should not be ignored. Obviously, we are all desperately and deeply shocked by disasters such as the King's Cross fire and the Clapham Junction accident. However, we kill far more people one by one on the roads than we do in public transport accidents.
  In the Department of Transport document "Transport for London" published earlier this year, the Government agreed that there was no case for major new roads in central London. Their aims were to divert through traffic and create good orbital roads to tackle congestion. It would be a good idea to find a way of increasing traffic flow, improving bus speeds and perhaps raising some money to pay for improved public transport.
  One way of doing that is road pricing, which is mentioned in the Department of Transport's document. The document says that there are practical difficulties. I am not sure whether that is right. It also says that there are theoretical difficulties, which is certainly true. It does not rule it out, but says that further research is needed. I used to think that road pricing was a bad idea, but we shall have to ration commuter space on London roads somehow. Either people sit in queues moving at 11 or 12 mph with all the external costs that that imposes on other people, or we impose some way of pricing roads to make people choose whether they want to use them, bearing some, if not all, of the economic costs of doing so.
  I do not know whether my hon. Friend is aware of the pamphlet published by the Institute for Policy Research entitled "A Cleaner Faster London". I was interested that the hon. Member for Deptford did not mention it in her speech because it emanates from the new think tank that is supposed to be injecting a little perestroika into the Labour party under the chairmanship of Lady Blackstone. It contains some rather creative ideas. Perhaps the hon. Lady did not mention it because it proposes a market solution to a social problem. Perhaps perestroika has not gone quite that far. I recommend the pamphlet to my hon. Friend the Minister, although the hon. Lady does not seem to take it seriously enough to mention it in her speech.
  Ms. Ruddock: I should like to say for the record that I attended the seminar on road pricing organised by that body before it reported. If the hon. Gentleman would care to read the Labour party policy document on transport, he would see that that was one of the ideas we were prepared to consider as we recognise that there has to be a solution to congestion.
  Mr. Maples: I am interested that the hon. Lady should say that. I hear most of the Labour party's policy on transport from the lips of the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott), who seems to be about as anti-car as possible in the circumstances. I certainly have not heard anything creative along the lines of the pamphlet which I recommend to my hon. Friends on the basis that, if other people produce good ideas, it is an excellent idea to steal them. There is nothing wrong with plagiarism in politics.
  Mr. Atkins: If road pricing is to work, it has to hurt. so it has to be of such a nature and at such an expense that it dissuades people from coming into London or any other major city. In those circumstances, does my hon. Friend agree that there is a very real possibility—I issue the challenge to the Opposition as well—that those who are least well-off will suffer most?
  Mr. Maples: One would have expected that point to be made in a pamphlet published by a Left-wing think tank, but the author of the study says that that is not so because anyone commuting in a car is reasonably well off and the costs that those people are imposing by creating congestion on the roads impacts poorer sections of the community such as pedestrians and those using buses. The study suggests that a charge of about £3 a day for bringing a car into central London would reduce traffic to such an extent that, instead of moving at an average speed of 11 mph, it would move at between 16 and 19 mph. The benefits would be enormous not only for those who decided to pay money and use the road; it would reduce the amount of traffic and the rat running which is a problem in so many urban constituencies, and it would enable buses to move faster and reduce the number of accidents.
  Mr. Corbyn: I am not persuaded of the virtues of road pricing because it discriminates against poorer people. Commuter motoring in and out of most major cities is heavily subsidised by the Exchequer through company cars or expense account travelling, which is not very different. Commuter traffic moving in and out of London is heavily subsidised by the Exchequer through company cars and expense account travelling. Another way to tackle the problem would be to stop people who work in the City being given a free car to drive to work from Muswell Hill.
  Mr. Maples: I agree with the hon. Gentleman, but one cannot deal with everything in a short speech. The Government have the right approach, as they are moving towards full taxation of company cars and benefits. Because of the enormous sums of money involved, the problem cannot be solved immediately, but we are slowly getting there.
  In a pamphlet, Patricia Hewitt, who I believe has some connection with the Leader of the Opposition, says:
  "Road pricing is the most efficient, environmentally beneficial and fairest form of traffic restraint available."
  I do not normally find myself in agreement with her, but that seems to be fairly good authority for the proposition that it is not unfair. The system has been used in a cruder form in Singapore, where there is a flat charge to get into the city centre. A trial of electronic pricing, by which one pays a variable amount of money, depending on whether one is using a busy road or a less busy one, was tried out in Hong Kong and will be introduced there. Holland will introduce a system in 1990 which uses a smart card, like the phonecard, and logs an element off it. That has a lot to be said for it.
  People who choose to pay will travel quicker and buses will therefore go faster. The study also suggests that benefits of approximately £190 million would accrue. If that money was spent to improve public transport in London, initially largely on improvements to the bus service, as that is the form of transport that benefits most from traffic moving more quickly, the total value of the

  621
  benefits would increase to some £310 million. That is a significant sum: it is about the same as London Regional Transport's capital investment programme.
  A road pricing system would help people who choose to pay to go quicker and would benefit buses and people who travelled on them. It would help to finance the improvements to public transport that need to be the correlative of the policy, and the external costs of delay by pollution, accidents and rat running would be reduced. The system would not be unfair because the poor would benefit as buses would move more quickly.
  I suggest to my hon. Friend the Minister that the idea is worth further study by his Department as it would reduce accidents and traffic and would help to finance improvements to public transport.
  12.32 pm
  Mr. Jeremy Corbyn: It is a pleasure to speak after the hon. Member for Lewisham, West (Mr. Maples) because he too is against road-building schemes in London. That is now the majority view of hon. Members who represent London constituencies, irrespective of their party. The Minister was a councillor in Haringey at the same time as I was, and I hope that he will recognise the strong feeling in London that urban motorway building is not on. It does not solve London's traffic problems or increase people's mobility. I hope that the Minister will remember that when he makes a decision.
  Road safety is very important. Last year, 5,000 people died and 63,000 suffered serious injury as a result of accidents on the roads. I hesitate to say that all those accidents and fatalities were avoidable, but a large proportion were avoidable, as they were due to defective vehicles, speeding, drunken driving and a range of other things. As most of those causes are due to human error, it should be possible to avoid a large number of accidents. I welcome the proposal to reduce that number by one third, although I hope that it will be more.
  I represent an inner urban area where the incidence of car ownership is low. It is below the London average, which is below the national average. The community suffers from the large amount of traffic that goes through the constituency. We have the eternal problem of rat-running commuters. Every morning, I feel angry about the amount of pollution that the people I represent have to suffer, as car after car goes by with one person in it, holding up a bus carrying 60, 70 or 100 people. Cars are more dangerous than buses and they cause greater inconvenience.
  We have to take a more sensible approach to public transport. I welcome the proposed safety measures to protect pedestrians. For too long in traffic planning measures, road traffic engineers have taken the view that their only responsibility is to get traffic moving as quickly as possible through an area. They have ignored the needs of the majority of the population. Everyone is a pedestrian at some point.
  Most people are at some time passengers on public transport and a minority of people are private car users. However, much road safety planning encourages greater use of private cars. My hon. Friends the Members for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) and for Tooting (Mr. Cox) mentioned the horrifically high casualty figures for
  622
  cyclists in London. There has been a rapid increase in the number ofcyclists in London—rightly so—as cycling is cheap and does not pollute the environment. However, it is dangerous.
  The Greater London council adopted a good policy of trying to introduce 1,000 miles of cycle lanes, but that has not been achieved. I hope that the Minister will accept the demands for increasing the number of cycle lanes and cycle priority measures at junctions. There are several major junctions in London—Hyde Park corner, Marble Arch and Trafalgar square—where, with a bit of ingenuity, life could be made much safer for cyclists. However, very little has been done. If one thinks of the real cost of providing safe cycle lanes compared to the cost of major road junction improvements to benefit cars, one sees the benefits of it.
  I hope that the Minister will recognise that the resources put into public transport are important, as is the mobility of transport in London. London is now a slow place in which to get around. The average speed of traffic in central London is about 11 mph on a good day, 8 mph on a bad day and zero mph on a very bad day. Things are getting worse because of the promotion of people driving in and out of London by private car and the slow journeys that buses have to make. Often a bus journey is curtailed because it is so far behind schedule that if it is not curtailed, the route behind it will be denuded of buses. We need bus priority measures rapidly and they must be enforced strongly.
  I believe that in many cases the Metropolitan police opposed the introduction of certain bus lanes or bus priority measures and have not bothered to enforce them. If nothing is done about a car illegally parked in a bus lane it may make life more convenient for that individual driver or delivery vehicle but it will hold up at least 50 people on each following bus and that should be multiplied by the problems those people face as a result.
  We must look at the Government's overall strategy. I endorse entirely all the road safety measures and the strongest possible action against drunken drivers and drivers of unsafe cars. Anyone would do that. Anyone who has seen the hurt and trauma of a family whose small child has been killed in a road accident knows that the hurt does not go away. It often remains with the parents for the rest of their lives. The strongest possible measures to improve road safety should be taken and I obviously support that.
  As my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West said, the Government are proposing to reduce casualties by a third in the next decade, but they are calmly presiding and vaguely planning for an 80 per cent. growth in the number of cars over the next 16 years and a 100 per cent. growth over the next 20 years. By the early part of the next century there will be double the number of road vehicles although it is impossible to double the number of road spaces. It is ridiculous even to think of doing so. There is a need for an overall transport strategy designed to increase the mobility of the mass of the population but not to increase the number of private cars.
  I also oppose urban road building. Anyone who lived in or represented my constituency would do so, as it is to be torn apart by whatever east London assessment study is accepted by the Government. We should reject all those studies as they would all lead to a road building option that would destroy part of my constituency and bring more cars into it.

  623
  I agree with the opposition to urban road building because of all the safety arguments that have been put forward, but it is not sensible to say that there is a difference between urban and rural road building. If road capacity between urban centres is improved, when a person reaches his destination he will not park his car and get on a bus. If someone drives from London to Birmingham, he expects to drive into the centre of Birmingham and park his car. The Government's overall strategy must include improving rail and public transport. Governments over the past 25 or 30 years are to blame for the problem because of their short-sighted approach to rail investment and development. It is amazing to read in rail magazines the proposals for building new lines and reopening lines and stations that 20 years ago were declared redundant.
  I hope that the Government will reconsider their transport policies and stop promoting private car ownership, stop the subsidy on business-owned cars and encourage better use of and more investment in public transport. I have often said that support from the public sector for transport is the lowest in western Europe, and it is envisaged that it will fall even lower. We must reverse that trend and invest more in public transport, which is a safer and environmentally far more sensible means of transport compared with cars. Is it a good idea to pollute our cities and countryside with more vehicles when it is possible to increase the use of railways, which are a far safer form of transport than any other available?
  When road accidents occur, as tragically they often do in London, one rightly expects the emergency services to be on hand. One expects the police to direct the traffic and perform emergency first aid if necessary, the fire service to cut people out of the wreckage and prevent fires and the ambulance service rapidly to take the victims to hospital. Under the standards laid down for ambulance collection for emergency calls, the ORCon—Operational Research Consultants—standards, which were laid down some years ago, 50 per cent. of 999 calls had to be answered within seven minutes, and 95 per cent. within 14 minutes. The current figure is that only 84 per cent. are answered within 14 minutes. The trend appears to be downwards, and we are nowhere near meeting the ORCon standards. If an ambulance cannot quickly offer the best medical attention, there is a likelihood of further loss of life.
  There are a number of reasons for the delays, such as road congestion in London. One can imagine the problems of trying to get a fire engine or ambulance rapidly through the centre of London, where traffic speeds can be as low as 11 mph. I recently had a discussion with the regional secretary of the Fire Brigades Union in London, who graphically explained that a half a mile an hour slower traffic movement in London can add two or three minutes to the journey of a fire engine across central London. Ambulances experience similar problems and that clearly can lead to loss of life.
  We must recognise that the Government adopt differing attitudes to the emergency services. They have given considerable pay increases to the police force, and the establishment level of the Metropolitan police is yet again being increased at a cost of about £1 billion a year. The fire service has not had such increases in expenditure, and it is proposing to remove many pumps from stations and reduce the availability of fire engines throughout London.
  Mr. Squire: We recognise that this is not the centre point of the debate, but I know that the hon. Gentleman would wish to be fair. Does he agree that a number of proposals in that same report call for an increase in the number of appliances, as well?
  Mr. Corbyn: I accept that. It is true that there will be an increase in the number of appliances in some places. I think, however, that the hon. Gentleman will accept that overall there will be fewer pumps available across London than at present and that there are likely to be fewer fire stations and engines in the long run. Couple that with traffic congestion and the necessary safety provisions and we can begin to see a grim future.
  Likewise, as I said, the ambulance service is having difficulty meeting the ORCon standards in responding to 999 calls. It is also having difficulty in recruiting staff, partly because of the enormous pressures faced by ambulance controllers. They need to decide immediately who has the greatest priority—a person with a heart attack or a road accident victim. They are under great psychological pressure. Understaffing leads to people working excessive hours, resulting in increased sickness rates. It is disgraceful that, even now, the Government are not prepared to increase the 6·5 per cent. pay offer to ambulance staff. They are allowing the pay differences between fire and ambulance staff to get even bigger and are threatening to bring in the Army to break the resolve of the ambulance workers, rather than solving the dispute as we would wish. I would hope that in a road safety debate the Minister would at least be prepared to recognise the value of the ambulance service as an aid in making roads safe, albeit after accidents have occurred, and a means of preserving life. I hope that he will do everything that he can to ensure that the ambulance workers are properly remunerated. Instead of hearing pious talk and seeing crocodile tears, ambulance workers should be given support and recognition for their efforts in providing a service of which we would all want to avail ourselves when necessary.
  This debate is valuable because it has provided the opportunity to discuss overall policies as well as individual, more localised, road safety measures. I hope that the Government are prepared to look again at their overall transport policy. I hope that they will look towards public transport development rather than continue the obsession with the private car. That would be a major contribution towards road safety as would the traffic relieving and safety measures outlined by other hon. Members.
  12.47 pm
  Mr. Hugo Summerson: I should like to echo some of the problems that have arisen during this interesting debate. There are many narrow streets in my constituency of Walthamstow, which was not designed with the motor car in mind. Many of those narrow streets are blocked by parked cars, leading to the danger of children running out between cars as well as frustrating drivers who cannot get through. Because the major roads are blocked, we, too, experience the unattractive phenomenon of rat-running. For example, Century road, which should be a quiet residential road, has 1,000 vehicles an hour going through it at peak times.
  I welcome the new roads that the Government propose, but I do so selectively. They are obviously very much

  625
  needed outside our towns and cities, but they would be a disaster in Greater London. I draw attention particularly to the proposition to build a new trunk road down the Lea valley. It is to be built across Walthamstow marshes, one of the few open spaces that my constituents have and an area which has been untouched for over 2,000 years. Now we have this horrific proposal to build a whacking great motorway across the middle of it. My constituents will not have it, and neither will I. We will fight against it.
  These problems are mirrored across London to such an extent that many people are taking to their bicycles, as has been said during the debate. I echo what the hon. Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn) has said. When I come to the House on my bicycle up Whitehall, I stop if the traffic lights at the entrance to Parliament square are green, even though I have to ensure that I am not rammed up the backside by a bus coming into the bus stop there. I know that to cross those lights at green and to come straight on is suicidal, so I wait until the lights turn red and break the law by crossing the red light, going on about 10 yards and stopping. As soon as the light turns, one has to pedal like mad to get ahead before the maniacs behind come whizzing up to turn left into Bridge street. On occasions I have been sworn at merely because I am on a bicycle.
  Mr. Corbyn: It is because the Member is a Tory.
  Mr. Summerson: Someone swore at me the other day when I was dressed like the hon. Gentleman, so no one could have mistaken me for a Tory. I was sworn at because the man was driving a van and I was on a bicycle. I am afraid that many people's personalities change as soon as they get into their motor cars and they become incredibly dangerous. I do not know why, but that is what happens.
  Far too many problems are caused by the sheer volume of traffic in London, which is caused by the excessive number of motor cars. We must consider that problem. I believe that use of the private car should be sharply curbed and that people living outside London should not be permitted to bring their cars into London. That would give more traffic to British Rail, which would mean that it should be able to provide more trains. British Rail would have more revenue, so it should provide a better service. Once in London, if people knew that there was a good public transport system with smoothly operated, comfortable and efficient buses giving good service to the passengers and coming along at regular intervals in sharply defined bus lanes in which unloading and loading were not permitted, they would use public transport far more. That would be greatly to the benefit of the capital and the people who live here.
  I had the misfortune to drive up the M1 last Friday afternoon, which was an extremely foolish move on my part. I had to leave at 3·30 pm. Three hours later, at 6·30 pm, I had covered all of 52 miles. I thought that something was wrong, but when I pulled into a service station and chatted to some of the people there, they said that nothing was wrong and that everything was usual. One sees so many examples of the bad use of motorways. When you drive up to your constituency, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure that you do not sit in the middle lane all the way with no vehicles in the inside lane. Many idiots sit in the middle lane, even though there is only one car every
  626
  quarter of a mile in the inside lane. The result is that much of the motorway is grossly underused. We need more education of motorists in that respect and perhaps the police should be told to prosecute some of those people. Word would pretty soon get around that one does not have to be idle on a motorway and just sit there. People should use the inside lane and overtake if necessary. That may mean that people have to use their right finger from time to time to operate the indicator, but the benefits would be great and we should have far better use of the existing motorways.
  Where is the courtesy in driving today? It has gone out of the window. Twenty years or so ago, the first car I bought was a mark VI Bentley of 1948 vintage. [HON. MEMBERS: "Your first car?"] I promise you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that it was my first car. I paid the enormous sum of £60 for it. When I tell the House that at the time, I was an agricultural student earning £9 a week and having to pay £5 a week to the farm manager's wife for board and lodging, hon. Members will realise that it took a long time on £4 a week to save up 60 quid to buy the Bentley.
  I bought it in the end and one of the finest things about it was the handbook, which I discovered in a neat slide underneath the dashboard. I opened it and saw that its first words were:
  An owner would do well to instruct his driver as follows:
  "For me, that advice was completely redundant. The handbook also instructed one to dip one's headlight",
  thus
  "extending safety and courtesy to passing traffic".
  That phrase has stuck in my mind ever since. Today, all that has flown out of the window, and many of us turn into aggressive maniacs when we get into our cars. I believe that the answer to that lies in education.
  My final word is on the subject of the internal combustion engine in our towns and cities. When Henry Ford invented the Model T, it was his idea that it would be used by farmers out in the countryside. He never intended cars to be used in towns and cities. All cars pollute most terribly. When I walked here this morning —I walked, Madam Deputy Speaker —I once more had occasion to realise that. I am an asthmatic and I found it most distressing. The number of people with asthma and similar conditions increases every year. The internal combustion engine is not suitable for our towns and cities. We need a new design of electric vehicle that is quiet and pollutant free. I should like to see the return of the trolley bus, because it was quiet and efficient and non-polluting. If we do all that and ban the internal combustion engine, our towns and cities will be healthier and safer places for everybody.
  12.56 pm
  Mr. Robin Squire: After listening to a debate for nearly three and a half hours, one often starts to hear all the arguments again. That has not happened this morning and it is to the credit of hon. Members on both sides of the House that we have covered a number of different issues. I endorse the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Summerson) about his desire to reduce the impact of the motor car in our cities, although I am not clear whether he would bring in an exclusion clause for 1948 Bentleys. A similar message has emerged during several hon. Members' speeches.

  627
  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Minister, as this must be the first full day's debate that he has had to handle. Like the rest of us, he is now required to sit here throughout. Having known my hon. Friend well for more than 20 years, I wish him great success in his new job. He is already finding that it carries a higher profile than his previous post, but I hope that along with the inevitable kicks there will he some passing moments of satisfaction.
  I strongly endorse what the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine), said about drink-driving. There has been a significant change in social attitudes to drink-driving, and, like smoking, it increasingly causes great offence. Drink-driving can also cause injury and loss of life and the connection between accidents and the consumption of drink is now so clear that my right hon. Friend's message should be listened to carefully, especially by the Government. He talked about the need to consider reducing the limit, and I judge that we should follow that course, because we must reflect, and sometimes lead, changes in social attitudes, and there is now little public sympathy for the person who thinks it clever to go out drunk in charge of a powerful vehicle and thus to threaten the life and limbs of innocent people.
  I want to concentrate on the problem of excessive speed, and, in particular, excessive speed of heavy goods vehicles on motorways. Some hon. Members will be aware that all new coaches in this country, as they are brought into use, must be fitted with speed limiters—and a jolly good job too, say I. However, hon. Members may not recall that that step was decided upon only after a spectacularly ghastly accident on the M6 in 1985 in which 13 people were killed—[Interruption.] My hon. Friend the Minister for Roads and Traffic will be aware of this because it occurred in his constituency.
  My right hon. Friend the Minister for Overseas Development, when she was at the Department of Transport, introduced the requirement for speed limiters on coaches. I was her Parliamentary Private Secretary at the time. As you are well aware, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that is an exalted post of enormous power, but of scant recognition. The implementation of the requirement was followed through by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr. Bottomley) in his previous post at the Department of Transport.
  From 1 April this year all new coaches must have speed limiters and progressively over the next two years all existing coaches will similarly be required to use them. The limiters restrict coaches to 70 mph, which most of us would consider to be an ample speed for a vehicle of considerable size.
  In comparison, what requirement exists for lorries? There is no requirement for heavy goods vehicles to carry a speed limiter. However, none of us travelling on motorways or trunk roads can be unaware of the reality of driving beside, in front of or sometimes totally surrounded by heavy goods vehicles. We receive regular reports that, because coaches are limited to 70 mph, they are often overtaken in the inside lane by heavy goods vehicles which are allegedly restricted to 60 mph, but which in practice thunder along well in excess of that speed.
  What is the justification for not trying to control the maximum pace at which juggernauts can interfere with our lives?
  Mr. Key: Can my hon. Friend recall the last occasion on which he spotted a heavy goods vehicle driving on a single carriageway road at 40 mph?
  Mr. Squire: Not without notice. Even after pausing for reflection, I have difficulty in recalling such an occasion. My hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key) lends some currency to the gist of my comments.
  In the other place recently, Lord Brabazon stated that surveys conducted by the Department of Transport show that the number of HGVs exceeding the speed limit on motorways, which in 1983 had been calculated at 39 per cent., had dropped to, 22 per cent. in 1987. That is a welcome reduction. However, even on the basis of that survey, we must realise that more than one in five heavy goods vehicles are using excessive speeds and, in doing so. endanger the public and sadly cause loss of limbs or death in accidents.
  There is no technical reason why limiters should not be fitted to heavy goods vehicles. All HGV manufacturers offer some kind of speed limiter as an option. The German vehicle manufacturer MAN fits speed limiters automatically to all its vehicles. I do not put that foward as an advertisement. I am simply showing what good, forward-looking manufacturers are doing.
  According to my latest information, of 60,000 new HGVs registered each year in this country, about 10,000 are voluntarily fitted with speed limiters. That is one in six. Of course, Britain has no jurisdiction over coaches and other vehicles from Community countries. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister will note that remark and see whether we can achieve standardisation across the Community.
  I have spoken so far only about comparative safety arguments. There are now environmental arguments why we should reduce speed. The fuel efficiency which drivers would achieve if they drove at a more reasonable pace would be in the interests of the country. If we could control the discharge of greenhouse gases, we would help in our battle against global warming.
  In France, all new goods vehicles over 10 tonnes must be fitted with speed limiters. I hope that the Minister will pay good, sound and long attention to my suggestion. There are only two objections, and both are of only limited weight. One is that speed limiters would slow down the passage of freight. They would do so only marginally, but one could say that if we stick to the rules it would slow the passage of freight. If lorry drivers are breaking the law, speed limiters are a proper course of action. If it is considered possible to shift some freight only by lorries travelling at excessive speed, we should examine even more closely transferring freight to rail, and wake up British Rail's freight department to carry non-time-sensitive freight. If time is unimportant, British Rail's freight personnel do not seem to be interested. They should jolly well be interested and we could then make a small environmental gain.
  The cost of fitting a speed limiter must be small, or one in six operators would not be voluntarily fitting them.
  I explained the tragic circumstance in which speed limiters on coaches were introduced. Let us not face the possibility of a similar tragedy before we realise the need to control juggernauts before they destroy more lives.
  1.7 pm
  Mr. Gerrard Neale: I listened with interest to my hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch (Mr. Squire), and I shall return to one or two of his points in a moment.
  One must bear in mind that heavy vehicles are far better designed than they used to be. They have many more mechanical aids which enable them to travel at speed. If my hon. Friend were to come to my part of the country, he would hear hauliers explain the great value of heavy vehicles being able to move at a sustained speed, but within the speed limit, to deliver goods that are produced or grown in Cornwall.
  Several London Members have spoken. I am not a London Member, so I hesitate to cast more than a brief comment on some of the points they raised. Nearly every hon. Member who has spoken in this interesting debate seemed to recognise the need for a much better motorway network between our cities. It was not until the hon. Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn) spoke that it was admitted by a London Member that, if there are more motorways, more vehicles will go to places such as London and that the drivers will expect to get their vehicles very close to their destinations. However unfortunate that may be, it is an important aspect of this matter and must be borne in mind.
  The hon. Gentleman will understand that I do not agree with him on many issues, but I agreed with him when he said that we have to pay much more attention to the ways in which we can integrate the motorway system into our public transport network. As a Cornish Member, I find it interesting that far more was not made at the time of the suggestion that there be a rail link from Heathrow to Paddington and that there is not a single stop on that line where it passes either over or under the M4. Massive car parks could have been provided where people could park and then travel in. Similarly, it has always surprised me that there is no provision at the Brent Cross service area at the end of the M1 for people to drive over the north circular and into a massive car park from where they could travel by rail on the "Bedpan" line to either Farringdon or Blackfriars in a matter of either 10 or 12 minutes.
  I know that rat-running must be hideous and recognise that it places enormous pressures on the remaining road links in London. My hon. Friend the Minister has obviously taken that point into account, but he must be much more ruthless about parking on such runs and realise that if we stop rat-running, which is extremely unpleasant for residents, an inordinately greater pressure is placed on the roads that we must keep open. If we are to take some of those routes for bicycle or bus lanes, our roads are constrained still further.
  My first general point deals with the fact that all the statistics that are produced on road safety deal solely with injury to health. I do not deny for a moment that we should address ourselves strongly to this matter. Indeed, there has been agreement from hon. Members of all parties that we should reduce the number of deaths and injuries. I am struggling to remember in what context the expression, "the tip of an ill-concealed iceberg" was used, but it is apt in today's debate. The statistics relating to injuries and deaths hide the fact that a colossal number of accidents involve injury to property. Those accidents also
  630
  involve a tremendous number of people who are shocked by what happens although not "injured". It is important that we remember that bad road safety involves injury to property as well as to persons.
  I appreciate that my second point is to remind the House of the obvious, but when we learned to drive—looking around the Chamber I suspect that that was some years ago for most of us and indeed, rather more years in my case—the level of responsibility and skill then required by the driver was far less than it is now. I know that my hon. Friends will have been taken by the point made by the Minister when he addressed several of these issues. The behavioural study is certainly important.
  I turn now to two areas relating to the level of responsibility to be displayed by the Government. In my first point, I shall unashamedly use constituency issues. We have no motorway in Cornwall and have certain stretches of unlinked dual carriageway. My right hon. Friend who is now the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry gave an undertaking when he was Secretary of State for Transport that the A30 into Cornwall would be dualled. As my hon. Friend knows, that is now proceeding. Although I hesitate to suggest that he might extend his tour and the commitments that he has entered into today, if he can find the time to come to Cornwall, we should love him to do so. The stretches of A30 that remain undualled are very dangerous. Indeed, the busiest part of that road is still undualled, which creates a great danger for drivers —especially those who are tired because of long holiday journeys and those who are caught behind heavy goods vehicles. I urge my hon. Friend to press for the extension of dual carriageways to be carried out piece on piece, not in bits here and bits there. It is dangerous if drivers are at one moment on a dual carriageway, then down to single track and back to dual carriageway.
  My next point relates to the part of the A30 that runs through the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for St. Ives (Mr. Harris) and also to the A303 in Somerset. In this day and age it is quite crazy to contemplate building single carriageway trunk roads with three tracks rather than dual carriageways. I hope that my hon. Friend will realise the sense of that.
  Mr. Key: The Department of Transport is also considering building the A36 Bristol to Southampton Salisbury bypass link as a three-lane single carriageway, even though there has been a 37 per cent. increase in traffic on that road in two years.
  Mr. Neale: I endorse my hon. Friend's remarks. It is crazy to build trunk roads as single track, even if they are three lanes. They should be dual carriageway. We have a similar problem with a bypass in my constituency. I understand that 75 per cent. of accidents occur in rural and local areas, where there are bottlenecks and traffic diverts around narrow lanes with which drivers are not familar. That can be extremely dangerous. We must adhere to the road improvement programme, and I was pleased to hear that additional expenditure on that is anticipated.
  I wish to deal with some of the points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch about motorways. Speed, of itself, is not dangerous. I am not suggesting that the speed limit on motorways should be increased above 70 mph, but the grave differentials in speed on our motorways are dangerous. My hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Summerson) said how infuriating

  631
  it was to be behind someone driving slowly in the middle lane. There should be signs on the motorways saying, "Keep to the inside lane unless overtaking". I have a high regard for the Department's officials. They have provided a great deal of statistics under successive Governments to which, unfortunately, Ministers do not always listen. I suspect that they would suggest a trial on particular stretches of road. I am sure that that would help to educate drivers to keep to the inside lane.
  We must consider whether there should be a minimum as well as a maximum speed limit. Unless there are signs saying that the maximum speed limit is lower than 70 mph, such as in areas of road works, it might be sensible also to impose a 50 or 55 mph minimum speed limit. I am sure that I do not need to tell my hon. Friend the Minister that traffic on motorways bunches around slower moving vehicles, especially those that dwell in the middle lane. That is dangerous, especially in bad weather. I urge him to look at that point. In addition, more traffic speed signs would have to be installed along the motorways to inform drivers. That would be an extremely welcome measure.
  Mr. Squire: I am listening to my hon. Friend's proposal with great interest. He has not, perhaps wisely, suggested a minimum speed. Therefore, I wish to press him a little as to whether he has thoughts on that. Is he thinking of, say, 40 mph?
  Mr. Neale: I did give a speed, but perhaps my hon. Friend was not here. I suggested between 50 and 55 mph as a minimum speed. However, as my hon. Friend said earlier, heavier vehicles may be unable to sustain such speeds. As a result, my hon. Friend the Minister will have to think seriously about segregating traffic. I hear that a new motorway, probably privately constructed, will be running between Birmingham and Manchester and it will not be too long before my hon. Friend the Minister will have to think about providing one motorway link for lorries and commercial vehicles and a separate one for cars. My hon. Friend will find that, unless the motorways are built extremely wide, with many lanes, the disparity between the speeds of vehicles will mean that he will not get the lane use that would otherwise be obtained with a lower disparity of speed between vehicles.
  The hon. Member for Islington, North rightly pointed out the Department's projections for a doubling of traffic in the next 20 years. My hon. Friend the Minister will have to look at many different problems. I urge him to consider the imposition of a minimum speed limit on motorways, even if it is only on a trial basis at first.
  1.21 pm
  Mr. Michael Jack: I am glad to have the opportunity to take part in this far-ranging debate. I compliment all the hon. Members who have taken part on the range of subjects that have been covered.
  The enormity of the subject in these debates is a bit like reading those magazines on car mechanics, when every week a new part of the servicing that is required for one's vehicle is revealed and after 52 weeks one wonders how one's car keeps going. There are so many potential hazards on our roads. We must pay tribute to the fact that, generally speaking, our record on road accidents shows us to be a relative safe country. That is not to say that we cannot do better. In welcoming my hon. Friend and near parliamentary neighbour to his new post, I congratulate
  632
  him on the scope and scale of his speech. When one has the chance to listen to a Minister talking extensively on an area of his responsibilities, one realises how wide is the Government thinking that has already gone in many of the subjects that we have discussed.
  I shall try to put the debate into the context of transport policy. Our debate is about what I would call the consequences of mobility. One of the greatest developments, as our well-being has increased, has been people's ability to decide on their freedom of movement. The economic prosperity occasioned by the Government's policies has enabled more people to buy cars and use other forms of public transport to go on journeys. Underlying the debate and this development in transport must be the allowance of increased choice and of alternative systems of transport.
  In public transport, we should not lose sight of the fact that the Government's policies have encouraged the development in our cities of light railway transport systems. We are seeing the renaissance of public transport, including trolley buses returning in certain towns. That is not to say that there is not a need for more public investment in local rail, underground and other forms of service. The Government cannot be criticised for inactivity in this sector.
  My hon. Friend the Minister knows of the problems of travelling to Lancashire, and I shall focus on that county in a moment. First, I congratulate him on choosing today for this debate. When I woke up this morning to the "Today" programme, instead of hearing the usual bulletin for "Friends of the M6", I was greeted by the news that today was the most dangerous day for road accidents. I took care when I drove to the House. This is an appropriate day for a debate on transport safety.
  I wish to put on record my praise for the work of the local authority, the county police services and local road safety groups in Lancashire, and to thank my hon. Friend's predecessor, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley) for supporting a road safety poster campaign in my constituency. His personal letter was a great boost to young people in my area, telling them that someone in the Government was bothered about their anxieties and interests. The new Minister, who is a compassionate, family man, must understand the need to acknowledge such local road safety initiatives.
  More than 20 people are killed or injured on the roads of Lancashire every day. One police officer described that as the equivalent of a Hillsborough every week. Other hon. Members have tried to put road safety in context and we must never lose sight of the human element. We are not dealing with mere statistics. In 1988 there were 7,331 accidents in Lancashire compared with 7,088 in 1987 and 7,338 in 1986. I quote the figures for three years because I do not wish the House to think that the trend is sharply upwards, although, sad, to say, recent figures suggest that there is a rise in the number of accidents in Lancashire. Given the increased volume of traffic we must take some comfort from the fact that the statistics have remained at roughly the same level and have not increased dramatically.
  The statistics on the cost of road accidents hammer home the enormity of the problem. The Department of Transport's own figures impute a cost of £97,217,000 to accidents in Lancashire. That alone would justify investment in schemes to reduce the number of accidents. Many victims of road accidents end up in hospitals which

  633
  face ever-increasing pressures on their medical services. There would be an excellent rate of return on any investment aimed at reducing accidents.
  Mr. Neale: Does my hon. Friend accept that one of the main problems in proving the danger of a road is that the majority of road accidents are never reported to the police?
  Mr. Jack: That is an important point. Although we know that 92 per cent. of accidents are the result of human error, that statistic relates only to those that are reported.
  Any accident involves cost and trauma to the people involved. The average cost of an accident is just over £12,000. The overall cost of dealing with accidents and the suffering and trauma that they involve is double the annual budget of the Blackpool, Wyre and Fylde district health authority, which serves my constituency.
  Of the accidents that occurred in 1988, a total of 1,133 involved pedestrians crossing the road. Several other hon. Members have drawn attention to that problem. Children's safety and the relationship between motor vehicles and pedestrians are of major importance. If 92 per cent. of road accidents are caused by human error, we need training to overcome that human fraility. Training should not stop at schoolchildren; it should take place in the workplace, the home and wherever else it is necessary.
  I am told by Lancashire county council that the area has the highest rate of pedestrian deaths among children between the ages of six and nine per 100,000 of the population. That is higher than the rates in Sweden. Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Greece, Norway, Denmark, France, Belgium and Germany. It is not a record to be proud of, and it highlights the need for hard work on road safety education in schools, and I welcome my hon. Friend's commitment to continuing his dialogue with his colleague in the Department of Education and Science to establish whether such education can be incorporated more fully in the school curriculum.
  I hope that, when the debate is reported by the media, it will—if nothing else—alert parents to the need for responsibility on their part.
  I am pleased to observe the efforts already being made to deal with the problem in Lancashire. Last year the local police visited more than 3,200 schools, addressing 210,000 school children on the subject of road safety, and they are continuing to develop interesting initiatives. Only this year it was announced that Lancashire would receive an additional seven police officers. We know, from every debate in the House, about the pressures on police manpower, and this excellent tale of education and advice is now under stress. I ask my hon. Friend in all sincerity to request the Home Office to consider the returns—in human terms—that can be obtained from ensuring that police resources enable that programme of education to continue.
  I noted my hon. Friend's comments about bicycles. In the course of their school visits, the police examined 1,343 bicycles, and found that 335 were defective. It is up to mum and dad to check their children's cycles sometimes: simple acts of maintenance in the home can clearly prevent some accidents.
  The Lancashire police have an interesting maxim, which they call the "three Es" approach: education, enforcement and engineering. I shall come to enginering in
  634
  a moment; we have already discussed education. As for enforcement, my hon. Friend has proposed a wide range of measures to assist the police force, which I entirely support. Let me, however, underline the message that hon. Members have already delivered on the subject of the law.
  I support wholeheartedly the recommendations of the North report, especially those that apply to crimes connected with drink-driving. When I was campaigning during the last election I met a man called Alec Monteith, and later learned in graphic terms of the tragedy that he had suffered: he had lost his wife, a nurse, in a desperate accident involving a drunk hit-and-run driver who had caused a multiple accident at 10 o'oclock one night.
  Alec Monteith has now come to terms with the loss of his wife, at least in a day-to-day context—no one can bring back Jean Monteith. Nevertheless, being visited time after time by a constituent campaigning on behalf of those who oppose drink-driving, being shown the photographs of the accident—I do not criticise my constituent one jot for that —and being told of his frustration that the law could not bring an action at the time against the person who was later arrested for for the crime underlines to me in graphic detail why we must press ahead with the reform of the law.
  As for the county council's engineering role, I was pleased to receive a copy of the local authority associations' road safety code of good practice. The preamble says:
  "There is a need for local authorities to play a lead role in helping to achieve the ambitious casualty reduction targets set by the Secretary of State for Transport."
  Many people say that the Conservative party believes that there is no role for local government to play, but this is a well-defined role which local government acknowledges and which my hon. Friend has encouraged.
  I was delighted to hear the Minister's announcement of the transport supplementary grant. However, I am worried that under the TSG arrangement the amount left for local authorities to spend on minor road works, many of which are aimed at improving road safety, is very small. Lancashire made a strong representation, following last year's good transport supplementary grant allocation, about headroom in its budget. As my hon. Friend has acknowledged the role of cost-benefit analysis within the TSG and road safety projects, will he look again at the possibility of saying to local authorities, "Please put forward a cost-benefit justification for particular levels of spending" so that excellent small projects, which may not be ones that the TSG could assist but which nevertheless are vital, stand a chance of being carried out?
  Cosmetic work is sometimes carried out. A local councillor says, "I think that we could do with a bit of road widening" so that he can then say to his chums, "I have improved the traffic flow around that junction." That may be a good and worthy cause, but it is not so good and worthy a cause as saving lives. I hope that my hon. Friend will consider applying the same approach to cost benefit so as to increase the headroom and increase the amount of money that is made available for improving road safety.
  I was interested to hear about the project that my hon. Friend's Department and the Transport and Road Research Laboratory have been sponsoring in Colne. A very interesting project, excluding the town centre, analysed the full traffic flow in that town. As a result of expenditure of £200,000, between 10 and 15 per cent. of accidents were eliminated. Therefore, 20 people a year avoided being injured. There has already been a saving of

  635
  £150,000 in accident costs in two years. That is a splendid rate of return. I wish that I could find an investment that gave me that rate of return in two years. I ask my hon. Friend to argue cogently—both to his Secretary of State and then to the Treasury—for more money to be spent on particularly effective local projects. My hon. Friend committed himself to that action in his speech. Local experience in Lancashire underlines that point.
  I almost feel that my speech was written while I was stuck in the many and frustrating jams which I, and many others, had to endure on motorways this summer. I am delighted that the Government have committed themselves to a realistic increase in motorway capacity. We live in a crowded island. Many of our journeys take us to destinations that are less than 100 miles away. We have to accept the reality that roads play a vital part in the transport system. I realise that overnight there cannot be an instantaneous "fix" of new lanes on the M6 and the M1, but I am very frustrated by the lack of information that is given to motorists about delays on motorways.
  Where on earth have the variable information signs gone? I see them standing, like dreadnought battleships about to be scuttled, on the side of motorways, inert and inactive. No information is provided that at the next junction there is a blockage, or that there has been a serious accident and I ought to slow down. Instead of that, there are the current dot matrix signs which do not give much information, and are mostly ignored by drivers who then run into major traffic jams. I ask my hon. Friend to use the variable information signs, particularly at weekends, so that people are encouraged to use vast tracts of unused roads.
  As I travel from the north, wishing to avoid the motorway I have discovered the delights of the A51 and A34. Denuded of their normal commercial traffic they speed me to the south, but if only others knew of the unused resources of our roads we would have a much better balance in the available road capacity.
  In addition to variable signs, will my hon. Friend please try to have an initiative on radio information between London and Lancashire? I used to pass three signs, but one has blown away. They display information about KHz and MHz which do not mean a lot to people with normal radios. I know that the BBC is investing in the radio data system, but most people will not be able to afford the £300 or £400 for the set and will certainly not throw away their present radios. It is time that we had a much better traffic information service on the radio so that when we drive along the motorways we know which radio area we are in and where to receive the signal. Information leaflets should be available at motorway service stations telling people where to tune for that information. The quality needs uprating enormously.
  Given the possibility of a broadcasting Bill in the Queen's Speech, will my hon. Friend ask the Home Office to consider introducing a radio channel dedicated to the dispensation of up-to-date traffic information to help people avoid accidents and make better use of the motorways?
  Will my hon. Friend look again at the regulations that the European Community and his Department have proposed concerning spray from heavy lorries? I am fed up with performing a wall-of-death act trying to pass a 38-tonne, 45 ft juggernaut at night. They do a vital job, but
  636
  they do not realise the risk that I and thousands of other motorists take in trying to get past them. The road research laboratory needs to look again at that.
  I am glad that my hon. Friend acknowledged the benefit of anti-lock braking systems. The time is right to examine the contruction and use regulations and consider whether those items could be made a requirement for cars. If Ford can provide them for its lower-cost models for £200, so should everyone else.
  We have had a wide-ranging debate. I already feel that my drive home will be more relaxed because I have got off my chest some of the frustrations that I and many thousands of other motorists experience. We are all dedicated to improved safety. I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Minister has taken such a comprehensive approach, and I hope that the debate has supplied him with greater and more persuasive arguments to get the resources that are needed to make those policies effective.
  1.42 pm
  Mr. Robert Key: We have had a rewarding and interesting debate. One of the rewards of sitting here for four hours listening to everyone else is that I can use the time available to the best possible effect, although there will not be time for me to raise more than a couple of important issues which have not been covered so far.
  My constituency, like those of my hon. Friends the Members for the Isle of Wight (Mr. Field) and for Cornwall, North (Mr. Neale), has no motorways. However, it has two major roads, the A303 between London and the west of England, and the A36, the main trunk road between Bristol and Southampton. It also has the problem of Stonehenge on which, I am glad to say some progress has been made this week. It is a delight to see officers of the Department of Transport out there with theodolites, looking at ways past Stonehenge. I hope that the road will soon be dualled and that the villages of Winterborne Stoke and Chicklade will soon be bypassed.
  It has been an interesting debate because there has been no lobbying. Perhaps it is because I do not often speak on transport issues, but I have not received a single piece of paper telling me what to say or do, so my speech is all my own work. I wish that we were allowed to make judgments more often from the Back Benches.
  I thought that I might not be able to be here today because yesterday a story about my constituency broke in the national press. It appears that not only do we have problems caused by congestion and speeding vehicles but that we also have problems from aeroplanes. A number of my constituents have had their cars spoiled by anti-freeze leaking from low-flying jets flying from Boscombe Down in my constituency. That has taken a little while to sort out. I hope that they will get due compensation from the Ministry of Defence. I am sure that no one wanted to spray anti-freeze on my constituents' cars, but, unfortunately, that is what appears to have happened.
  I have been interested in road safety for many years —since the day I did a deal with my mum when I wanted to borrow the family car, shortly after passing my driving test. She wisely said that I could borrow it when I had passed my advanced driving test. That was wise advice. I have passed it on to many people, and I have warned my children that I shall say the same to them when they have passed their driving test.

  637
  I have the honour to be the president of the Salisbury Plain branch of the Institute of Advanced Motorists. I commend it and the other branches for the important work that they do to take motorists beyond the basic driving test, which I regard as a test of competence to control a vehicle mechanically, and which is a far cry from safe, responsible driving. "Skill with responsibility" is the motto of the Institute of Advanced Motorists.
  We should be grateful for the superb engineering standards of the Department of Transport and of the people to whom it sub-contracts work—often the county councils. When one drives abroad, one notices how tatty their best roads are. They are unfinished, they do not have proper culverts at the sides, the surface is poor and there are large joins between blocks of concrete.
  The Department of Transport deserves praise for the good work it does. All the officials in the Department of Transport, from the Private Office which receives most of the fury of hon. Members, down to the regional offices —in my case at Bristol—deserve thanks for their unfailing courtesy to hon. Members who are often under great pressure from irate constituents.
  The road building programme should be welcomed. It is not concerned solely with motorways. The Government deserve thanks for their bypass programme, which during the past 10 years has added tremendously to the quality of life in rural areas. One example is the village of Steeple Langford where the bypass was finished six months ahead of schedule because of the Department of Transport's new business sense. It induces contractors to finish ahead of time and penalises them if they are late. The bypass has made a tremendous difference to that village, and I trust that many other villages will benefit.
  I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will shortly be able to announce the proposed preferred route for the Salisbury bypass. It will be of enormous benefit to one of the most ancient and historic cities in Britain.
  We cannot continue to pour more cars and commercial traffic on to congested roads. It is not just a matter of spending more money on public transport. I wish it were that simple, but it is not.
  We have to consider road pricing carefully. My hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, West (Mr. Maples) made a compelling case for that policy in London. It is interesting that there appears to be agreement among hon. Members on both sides of the House on that. It is an unpopular subject, and it is difficult, but we cannot ignore it any more. I have a horrible feeling that, if the Minister does not take up road pricing, it will soon be pinched by the Opposition. I encourage him to consider it again.
  We cannot ignore the environmental impact of pouring more concrete on to the countryside. We must consider alternatives. We can improve rail links. That would take some traffic, particularly commercial traffic, off the roads.
  I ask my hon. Friend the Minister to take up with British Rail and the Treasury the fact that, under Treasury rules, when British Rail considers investment appraisal it is forbidden to consider the cost-benefit analyses. Those are not available to British Rail and it is not allowed to make comparisons between the cost and benefit of an investment to British Rail and the cost to the community. That surely must change and I hope very much that it will.
  638
  After all, with the transport supplementary grant, cost-benefit analysis is old hat, so why is it not used when we are looking at the whole transport system?
  Although people in south-east England complain about the increase in rail fares, as one who lives outside the south-east, may I say that it is interesting to note that subsidies to commuters in that area are still running at a level twice as high as the entire Department of Trade and Industry regional aid budget. That is unacceptable.
  What is it that makes an ordinary, civilised, decent person turn into a maniac and criminal when he or she gets into a little box on wheels? Time and again during the debate we have returned to the problem of driver behaviour. There has been a remarkable success story with regard to alcohol, and I congratulate the Department of Transport on its approach. Changing public attitudes and behaviour has worked well but more has to be done.
  Speed is another problem. Again it is a question of driver behaviour and we have to decide when a speed limit is not a speed limit. On motorways it is commonly accepted that one "won't be done" unless one drives at more than 80 mph. In villages with a 30 mph limit, it is also commonly accepted that drivers can get away with 40 mph. That is not sensible.
  I live close to the village of South Newton on the A36 where there was a crash only last night. There is a crash almost weekly because thundering great lorries and silly motorists pass through a narrow twisty village high street that happens to block the way between Southampton and Bristol. As a result of those accidents and a petition given to me by the villagers, I spent a morning in an unmarked police car as a guest of the local constabulary to see the problem from their point of view. It was an eye-opener. The private motorists who were driving through the village at 45 mph were deeply offended when they were stopped by the police and warned. One driver who was doing 47 mph is to be prosecuted.
  There is no doubt that most lorry drivers are responsible professional drivers. The country's economy would grind to a halt if we did not have lorry drivers. However, the speed at which some large lorries travel is unacceptable. It is unreasonable that the lives of people in the villages should be made a misery. The professional lorry drivers have got the police sewn up. They have CB radios all the way from Southampton to Bristol and that means the police do not have a chance. It illustrates the importance of driver behaviour that when a lorry driver sees a police car he radios up and down the road so that everyone obeys the speed limit. That is wonderful, but they have other tricks. The police illustrated to me that even when they can catch a heavy goods vehicle speeding, it is almost impossible to get to it unless they are on a dual carriageway because there will be four, five, six or a dozen cars in between and so enforcement is difficult. The police cannot do it all even with radar guns.
  I welcome the proposals for new technology and the Government's response, "The Road User and the Law." The introduction of fixed position cameras will be of great benefit in recording the date, time, speed, traffic conditions and weather conditions. I hope that the law will be changed to allow such evidence to be admissible in court.
  Even that is not enough. It is clear that other sanctions are needed if we are to change driver behaviour. First there should be insurance sanctions. A section of the North report is devoted to that. Paragraph 2.8 on page 17 says:

  639
  "Fear of losing a bonus may be more influential in inducing good driving conduct than fear of penalties imposed by courts after detection and conviction of an offence; indeed court-imposed financial penalties are often lower than those involved in loss of a no claims discount."
  How true that is. Paragraph 2.17 on page 19 says that there is a perceived absence of moral principle in road law. The report says:
  "The conduct which gives rise to such offences may involve no more than carelessness, misjudgment, a lapse of concentration, a failure to be aware of or understand a relatively technical requirement—failings which are not in themselves usually regarded as morally reprehensible."
  I am convinced that most people would agree that it is morally reprehensible to make such misjudgments. There is clearly much concern about misbehaviour and such attitudes on the roads.
  Deterrence must be important, but I do not think that the law on it is right. Paragraph 2.33 of the North report says:
  "Punishment will have no deterrent effect unless the offender thinks he may be caught and have to suffer the punishment."
  Those words must be true.
  Warnings are at the nub of the argument, and clearly are essential. Paragraph 11.13 of the North report says:
  "We take the view that warnings represent an effective and efficient response to a whole range of less serious road traffic offences. We recommend that warnings be used as widely as possible."
  Those words must also be true.
  I welcome the extension of the role of Department of Transport inspectors to trained police officers, as recommended in the North report. That must help, because there are about only 200 Department of Transport inspectors throughout the country. We must allow more police officers to inspect defective vehicles. It is absurd that a police officer who discovers that the insurance or mechanics of a vehicle are defective cannot stop that vehicle in its tracks. It is allowed to proceed as long as the driver promises to have the necessary repairs carried out.
  There is the further problem of signposting dangers ahead. Little notices beside the road saying "Police road check area" or "Police speed check area" are important, yet highway authorities are reluctant to erect such signs outside villages in rural areas. I have often tried for a number of villages to get such signs erected, but it is virtually impossible. I have written to the director of highways and planning of Wiltshire county council asking for signs to be erected outside certain villages. The police asked me to ask the authorities to erect such signs, yet still they will not do so.
  advocate the use of flashing signs showing the speed of vehicles and the French solution of flashing gantry-mounted signs showing the speed limit, but such ideas are seemingly not allowed in this country. I recall some good experiments such at that on the edge of Windsor great park, where signs flash messages saying that one is too close to the vehicle in front. I believe that we must be more imaginative.
  Mr. Jack: I agree entirely with my hon. Friend about flashing signs. The most effective signposting on a motorway contraflow is on the M62. Signs flash when a motorist is travelling at more than the mandatory 50 mph limit, which has a remarkable effect on motorists.
  Mr. Key: That system must be right for motorways, and it must be right for villages.
  640
  We must not put everything on the shoulders of the police because they cannot solve the problem alone. I ask the Minister to consider whether we need a fundamental initiative. We have had the successful neighbourhood watch scheme for busting crime. Commenting on the neighbourhood watch scheme in a publication this week, the Home Office says that such schemes
  "are a way for people in an area to get together to help stop crime and make their neighbourhood a safer place."
  The most dangerous thing in villages in my area is speeding vehicles.
  We have had farm watch, a successful programme of community action to prevent crime—primarily theft, but also other crime—on farms. I believe that we now need a national speed watch campaign. A number of local residents in Wilton and the parish councillors of South Newton have discussed that suggestion with me. We suggest that the details of vehicles perceived to be driving through a village unreasonably—either unreasonably fast or dangerously fast—should be taken by volunteers and passed by the parish council to the police. They should write to the owners if they can identify them. Most lorries have names emblazoned on their sides, so they can be identified. The parish council should write to the chairmen of the companies and to the regional transport commissioners, asking them again and again to check the tachographs of the lorries. After all, those commissioners have responsibility for checking the operation of heavy goods vehicles.
  Some people would say that this is telling tales, that it is grassing, that it is un-British and that we do not do that sort of sneaky thing. But we are talking about crime. We are talking about ruining the quality of life of whole communities, about death and serious injuries on the roads. We must act on driver attitudes and behaviour, and, as the North report says, fear of detection is a crucial factor. It is socially unacceptable to speed inappropriately.
  Every hon. Member can recall stories of dangerous driving in his or her constituency. I am amazed that the big companies that let their vehicles thunder through our villages are apparently also very concerned about the environment. I regret to say that some of the greatest offenders are our big supermarket chains, which have wonderful distribution systems and are serving the consumer in their shops. Those companies are frightfully green in the shops—they have green products and say that they are environmentally friendly and reacting to social need and change. How do the goods get into the shops? They do so via great juggernauts, creating havoc in the villages of south Wiltshire.
  I hope that I can bring representatives of the South Newton parish council to discuss this project with my hon. Friend the Minister and find out whether we can take it forward, perhaps on a national basis. Perhaps the residents can be a pilot in the behavioural research project which my hon. Friend mentioned, and we can get more community action to support the police who are helping to support all of us.
  There was something else missing from the North report. Although the Crown Prosecution Service submitted evidence and the Director of Public Prosecutions gave oral evidence, that evidence was not published. All the good news about which we have heard today becomes but pious hope if we do not carefully consider what happens when a prosecution is being considered in the courts.

  641
  Two cases in my constituency in the past month or so have highlighted this for me. One involved an elderly gentleman who was walking along a street in a holiday town in Cornwall with his wife and friends. The pavement was narrow and the substantial overhang at the front of a coach went over it. The coach knocked my constituent down, broke his neck and he ended up with his head under a wheel. There were witnesses but there will be no prosecution of the coach driver.
  Imagine my amazement when another constituent came to see me to say that while he had been driving in Dorset a car had come round a bend on the wrong side of the double white lines and there had been a head-on smash. There were witnesses in front of and behind the accident. Police on the scene took measurements, cars were written off, but no prosecution will ensue. What on earth is going on?
  I tabled a parliamentary question for answer by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General, which was answered yesterday. I asked whether he would
  "list the criteria used by the Crown Prosecution Service in deciding whether or not to prosecute in respect of traffic offences."
  My right hon. and learned Friend said:
  "In deciding whether or not to prosecute of traffic offences…the Crown Prosecution Service has to satisfy the two criteria set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors…These require that there is sufficient admissible, substantial and reliable evidence to afford a realistic prospect of conviction and that the public interest requires a prosecution in the circumstances."
  I should have thought that both cases which I have described fitted those criteria perfectly.
  I realised that that was not all. One of my constituents sent me a copy of a letter from the chief superintendent of the Devon and Cornwall constabulary, which stated:
  "The Branch Crown Prosecutor indicates that the public interest does not call for a prosecution in every case where it appears that there is a realistic prospect of conviction. He goes on to say that proceedings should not be instigated or pursued unless there is reliable evidence of a substantial degree of blame-worthiness."
  He said that in the accident involving my constituent there was no evidence of a substantial degree of blameworthiness, but rather an honest error of judgment.
  I spoke to my chief constable and asked what was meant by having to weigh up blameworthiness versus errors of judgment. It could mean that if I went out into the street and mowed down a lot of children, and if I could show that it was only an error of judgment, I should get off scot-free to do it again. Someone who makes such an error of judgment is likely to do so again. Both cases I have described involved professional drivers—one was a coach driver, the other a commercial traveller—yet neither is being prosecuted.
  My chief constable tells me that the Crown Prosecution Service has said that to all chief constables and that careless driving prosecutions have diminished dramatically as a result. One is not allowed to consider the consequences, only the initiator and his state of mind at the time of the accident. People have been killed in Wiltshire, yet no action is taken against those who kill others when they are in a car.
  I welcome the new offence of dangerous driving which is proposed in the North report. I hope that the state of the driver's mind will not be relevant in such cases, but that the
  642
  consequences of the driver's actions will be. I accept that prosecution in the criminal courts is not concerned with revenge. I am not a lawyer, but I am sure that a lawyer would confirm that the civil courts are there to wreak revenge in financial terms through suing.
  Deterrence is so important in road traffic offences that we should consider carefully the action of the Crown Prosecution Service in pursuing complaints by the police. Yet again, the police feel that it is not worthwhile to go to all the trouble of measuring up road accidents and carrying out their other tasks at the scene of accidents if the Crown Prosecution Service is going to say that the police should not proceed with the prosecution. This is a question of public confidence, and if we intend seriously to improve road safety there must be public confidence as well as public involvement. I urge my hon. Friend the Minister to consider that point urgently.
  2.6 pm
  Ms. Ruddock: By leave of the House, Madam Deputy Speaker I shall speak briefly. I concur very much with what the hon. Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key) has just said. The mother of one of my constituents was mown down in the street. She has suffered the same problems with the Crown Prosecution Service and feels deeply aggrieved.
  This interesting debate has produced many ideas and suggestions and I look forward to the Minister's response. I hope especially that he will have time to respond on the issue of drink-driving offences and on what action should be taken. There are strong feelings in the House on the matter and, of course, on the other matters that the North report has drawn to our attention.
  I was delighted to find that the hon. Member for Lewisham, West (Mr. Maples) joined us in our outright opposition to new road building in London. I cannot stress too much how strongly London Members feel about the proposals in the London assessment studies for new road building. We are joined, regardless of party, in seeking to persuade Ministers at the Department of Transport that those plans should not go ahead.
  I was interested to hear the remarks of the hon. Member for Hornchurch (Mr. Squire) on speed limits. I am sorry that the hon. Member for Cornwall, North (Mr. Neale) is not still with us. He was wrong when he said that speed was not a factor. There is substantial evidence to show that when speed limits are reduced, there is a corresponding decrease in accidents. Although much of that evidence comes from other countries, it is notable that when we reduced our motorway speed limits from 70 mph to 50 mph because of the oil crisis in 1973, there was a 33 per cent. decrease in the number of accidents. For those reasons, we very much agree with the sentiments of the hon. Member for Hornchurch and that is why we have said in our transport policy that we shall be prepared to consider reducing speed limits on major roads in certain cases. We should remember that someone who crashes at 50 mph is twice as likely to die as someone who crashes at 40 mph. The House cannot ignore the hard statistical facts.
  Of other Tory Members' speeches, I commend in particular that of the hon. Member for York (Mr. Gregory) who made some interesting comments. He gave us much food for thought about the condition and safety of vehicles. His view accords with the Labour party's policy on the need to tackle the market in second-hand

  643
  vehicles and the danger that they can present to the travelling and driving public. I hope that the Minister will respond to those remarks.
  It will come as no surprise that there is unanimity on the Opposition Benches. We believe that there is a conflict between the general direction of Government transport policy and the Government's aim of reducing road casualties.
  Mr. Atkins indicated dissent.
  Ms. Ruddock: The Minister may shake his head, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest that profit comes first in the Government's policy, and the profit-first principle is in direct conflict with the safety-first principle. The Government will have to reorientate many of their transport priorities and accept the ideas advanced by the Opposition. They cannot escape the fact that most people would be much safer travelling by public transport than they could ever be travelling in their private cars. We need better finance and support for public transport. We need to make a comparable cost-benefit analysis between decisions on railways and roads rather than adhering to the simple judgment that has already affected so many decisions about building new railways—the judgment that there must be an 8 per cent. return on investment.
  We wish the Minister well in his endeavours to achieve the road safety targets that he has set before us. It is four years since the House last had the opportunity of a full debate on road safety. I hope that the Minister will get back to us on these matters before another four years have elapsed. If he leaves it that long, he may not have the opportunity. We look forward to finding out what effects his announcement will have in practice and we want to test his sincerity on the transport supplementary grant and on other measures that local authorities have been canvassing. The Minister has acknowledged that much more needs to be done. We join him in seeking improvements and ask for more support to be given to local authorities and to public transport where we believe the solution to road safety problems lies.
  2.12 pm
  Mr. Atkins: With the leave of the House, perhaps I may draw the debate to a close. This has been one of the best debates that I have attended in my 10 years in the House because of the constructive approach that all hon. Members, without exception, have adopted to a subject that concerns all of us.
  There is no difference at all between us on the objective that we wish to attain, merely perhaps some discussion—and it is constructive discussion—about the way in which we should achieve it.
  We have covered a wide variety of issues. When I opened the debate I sought to set an agenda and to inform the House, and through the House the country, of the Government's thinking on this most important question of road safety. Inevitably, I shall not be able to cover all the details in my speech but I undertake to ensure that, where possible, I shall write to hon. Members to deal with specific problems when I have had a chance to examine them more closely.
  I agree with the hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms. Ruddock) that one of the most interesting speeches was that made by my hon. Friend the Member for York (Mr. Gregory), albeit in croaking form. I have enjoyed
  644
  hearing his views on transport matters on many occasions. He knows what he is talking about, as was clear for all to hear today. He raised several topics which I shall examine closely. Indeed, I am already examining some of them closely and I hope to comment on them further in due course. I was also delighted by the cameo speech from my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Summerson). We all enjoyed his speech. However, he made some serious points. My daughter is an asthmatic and she raises similar points with me, but in slightly less elegant terms than my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow. None the less, I note his points about cycling.
  You, Madam Deputy Speaker, will not be surprised to learn that I was especially pleased by the contribution by my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde (Mr. Jack). He always makes a point of trying to pinch my thunder and quite rightly so. We are parliamentary neighbours and friends and he quite reasonably referred to Lancashire.
  As I represent an area close to my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde, I have every reason to support him. Also, the headquarters of the Lancashire constabulary is in my constituency. I spent last Friday with the Lancashire police and we discussed a wide variety of matters affecting road safety. I had an opportunity to try the skid pan, I spoke to the driving school instructors and went on patrol on the motorways. We discussed many matters relating to road safety and I am delighted to support the remarks made by my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde about the police, particularly in relation to my hon. Friend's message about the quality of information on our roads.
  I drive on motorways almost as much as my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde. Indeed, since I have assumed my new responsibilities, I have perhaps travelled more. I cannot agree more with my hon. Friend about the quality of information given to motorists. It is one of my prime objectives to try to improve the quality of that information so that people understand what is going on. I firmly believe that the British people are very patient souls. They will wait in queues almost anywhere. However, they become cross when they do not know why they are waiting. We should be able to tell them more so that they understand and appreciate the reasons for the congestion whether that be for an accident, maintenance or for road improvements.
  As my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde rightly said, we have had problems on our motorways. I am aware of that because part of the junction involving the M6, M61 and M55 is in my constituency. To that extent, the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch (Mr. Squire) about speed limiters on lorries are all the more pertinent to me. The accident to which he referred occurred in my constituency so I am aware of the grief and suffering which arose as a result of that accident although none of my constituents was involved. However, I am well aware of the fine work of the emergency services and the police in particular in dealing with that accident.
  The point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch about speed limiters is very important. At the moment there are speed limiters on coaches and buses because they are public service vehicles and the pressure for limiters is great because of the number of people they carry. Detailed discussions are being held within the EEC at the moment about limiters for lorries. It would be invidious of us to set our limits before they are complete, largely because there might be a difference in attitudes to

  645
  speed which might lead to confusion. However, that does not mean that we are opposed to the idea of limiters on lorries in principle. I am considering that along with a wide variety of other issues which hon. Members from both sides of the House have put to me.
  I am aware of the problem and hon. Members will know that one of the largest truck manufacturers—Leyland-DAF—is in my constituency. I know that it is interested in the subject of limiters and I will raise that subject with it, and also ensure that the discussions within the EEC are brought to a satisfactory conclusion as soon as possible.
  Although congestion in London is not fundamental to our debate, it is very important. The hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) and many of my hon. Friends including my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, West (Mr. Maples) have referred to the London assessment studies and the available options. They will understand that, when my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I came to this task, it was the very first issue on our desks—in my case, it was on my desk within an hour of my walking in the door. Therefore, I was made quite certain of the concerns and problems of hon. Members across the political spectrum.
  It is my intention and that of my right hon. Friend to ensure that the uncertainty that surrounds the discussion of the London assessment studies is brought to an early conclusion. I have informed my right hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Sir B. Hayhoe) that my right hon. Friend intends to make an announcement in the early part of December when the reports have been received and examined in detail. I emphasise that there has never been any consideration of motorways in the accepted sense of the word. I am sure that the expression is often used entirely inaccurately. The options that are being considered are in draft form from consultants, not from the Department of Transport. We intend to make a statement in early December and relieve Londoners' uncertainty and concern.
  Mr. MaplesWill my hon. Friend confirm that his Department will publish the consultants' report before coming to its own conclusions so that there is time for public debate and representations before the Secretary of State comes to his decision?
  Mr. Cox: Will the Minister give an assurance that there will be adequate time for local communities to make their observations known? When the reports are published, will they be realistically priced so that local communities and individuals can buy them if they wish?
  Mr. Atkins: I assure the House that we will do everything in our power to ensure that local authorities, local Members of Parliament and local residents have the chance to comment on the proposals. We intend to do that as quickly as we possibly can, bearing in mind the need to ensure that the information that comes to us is right.
  The hon. Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn) said that I am a former London borough councillor. I am only too well aware of the difficulties involved with roads. When I joined what is now the London borough of Haringey council in 1968, the biggest problem was the Archway road. When I left in 1976, it was still the Archway road, and when I came to the Department of Transport it
  646
  was yet again the Archway road. I recognise the pressure upon hon. Members and the concern being expressed in various parts of London.
  As those who are expert in these matters will know, the transport supplementary grant is being examined at precisely this moment. I have already had a preliminary canter through it. We intend to invite local authorities to make submissions for road safety projects in the 1991–92 round. I hope that it will give them plenty of time to examine the possibilities.
  One of the most important parts of this debate, which I emphasised in my opening remarks and which was addressed in his own distinguished way by the Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine), is drink-driving. My right hon. Friend's views on these matters are forceful and have been held by him for many years. Obviously, there are differences of opinion between hon. Members about drink-driving. However, there is one matter on which we are all united, and that is that drink-driving is simply unacceptable. All the pressures of public opinion and the effects of the advertising through my Department under my predecessor demonstrate that the change of opinion on these matters is constantly increasing against those involved in such an unacceptable activity. As I said in my opening remarks, breath testing is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. He is treating the matter with some urgency. I hope that, as it affects my Department and others, he will be able to come to a conclusion in the near future.
  On a personal basis, I have considerable sympathy with my right hon. Friend's points. The idea of random breath testing, guided by a senior police officer at certain check points, seems to have great merit. I stress that that remains my personal view, but it may yet become the view of more people.
  On the subject of the alcohol level, at the moment I am not yet persuaded—I am open to giving the matter some consideration—that there is any enormous advantage in reducing the alcohol level. I say that openly for one main reason—we have spent a lot of time, with some degree of success, trying to get across to the public the level at the moment. The present level is set on a scientific basis and I confess that I do not have the time to go into that now. It was set after a considerable amount of research and was picked because it seemed to fit the requirements of safe driving. I recognise that there is some concern that it should be changed and, believing that it is worthy of consideration, I shall consider that matter. However, as it stands, the level must stay the same if only because it helps us in our continuing campaign against drink-driving. Well over half the convictions in this area involve a level well in excess of the present level. Therefore, while not completely agreeing with my right hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point and colleagues, I recognise the concern and will keep the matter under constant review.
  I am surprised that one particular matter did not arise during the debate and, although it did not, I shall address it because I have prepared myself so to do and it is worthy of being put on the record. I am referring to the publicity that has recently surrounded drivers accompanying learner drivers. Some of my hon. Friends and other hon. Members will recognise the case of Mrs. Vicki Stone, whose daughter and a friend were sadly killed in a dreadful accident. There is some discussion about this matter. I recognise the concern and have made urgent arrangements

  647
  for my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley, West (Dr. Blackburn) to bring in his constituent, Mrs. Stone, so that we can discuss the matter at some length.
  Obviously, this subject is not capable of as easy a solution as some of us would like to think. We know from experience that learners who have had the opportunity to practise their skills as well as having lessons with a professional instructor, do better when taking their driving test and are likely to be better drivers. We do not want to limit that or to take away the opportunity for learners to gain valuable experience, but we must ensure proper supervision. I have therefore already indicated my willingness to look into this to see whether there is a case for a change in the regulations on accompanying drivers. I hope that the House will recognise that the Government and my Department have reacted swiftly to this cause for national concern to which we might be able to find a solution.
  We have addressed a wide variety of areas in the debate. We have even discussed Liberal policy which, I suspect, will be discussed at even greater length in the days to come. It appears that the hon. Member for Southport (Mr. Fearn) believes that there is no way in which we can impinge on the right of individuals to buy more cars, yet his party is not frightfully keen on building more roads to cope with them. That is a fundamental dichotomy that the Liberals will have to address because if they do not, we shall force them so to do. Nonetheless, the hon. Member for Southport made an interesting speech and I am grateful to him for being here because he, like me, represents a north-west constituency and knows of the difficulties involved in travelling back to one's constituency on a Friday afternoon.
  This has been an important debate. I take the point raised by the hon. Member for Deptford that we have not
  648
  debated this subject for some time and I hope that it will not be long before we discuss it again. Road safety is one of the most important matters facing us—Parliament and the British people. The constant number of deaths and injuries on our roads—albeit reducing year by year—is unacceptable.
  I can say with some justification that Britain's record on road safety is better than many other countries in Europe, but as long as one person dies on our roads, our record is not good enough. It is my determination that we shall continue to press strongly in road safety, to improve and to reduce those dreadful statistics and to cut out the dreadful carnage on our roads. I hope that the debate has served to allow the Government to put their case and hon. Members to address the subject in their own way because, as a result, we shall gain.
  It being half-past Two o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without question put.

  Road Safety

    BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
    Ordered,
    That, at the sitting on Thursday 9th November, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Orders No. 14 (Exempted business) and No. 15 (Prayers against statutory instruments, &c. (negative procedure)), Motions in the name of the Prime Minister relating to Shipping (Dangerous Goods) or in the name of Mr. Neil Kinnock relating to Merchant Shipping may be proceeded with, though opposed, for one and a half hours after the first of them has been entered upon; and if proceedings thereon have not been previously disposed of, Mr. Speaker shall then put the Question already proposed from the Chair.—[Mr. Durant.]

    AGRICULTURE
    Ordered,
    That Mr. Tim Boswell and Mr. David Curry be discharged from the Agriculture Committee and Mr. Alan Amos and Mr. Christopher Gill be added to the Committee.—[Sir Marcus Fox, on behalf of the Committee of Selection.]

  Royal British Legion Housing Association
  Motion made, and Question proposed That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Durant.]
  2.30 pm
  Sir Marcus Fox: I am sorry to intrude upon the Minister's weekend activities by asking him to realise—as I am sure he will by the end of this short debate—that there is a deteriorating relationship between the Royal British Legion housing association and the Housing Corporation. It is quite unnecessary and it can be rectified virtually immediately. I hope that common sense will prevail, which is all that I ask.
  I regret that the Housing Corporation has not lived up to the expectations that many of us had at its inception. There is a feeling that it has become bureaucratic and that some of its officers behave autocratically in their examination of certain housing associations, and I am not restricting that criticism to the Royal British Legion. It is a great shame, because, after all, those who serve housing associations are volunteers. They give of their time because they feel that they are fulfilling an important social need. Anything that gets in the way of the good relationship that should exist should be carefully examined.
  The debate is dealing with a housing association that is attached to the Royal British Legion, hence its title. I wish to use the debate to highlight one area of concern. The management committee consists of a majority of people from the Royal British Legion, as we would expect. I must declare an interest because I am a consultant to the Royal British Legion—although, I hasten to add, unpaid—and so is the right hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Rees), who would have been here to support me had that been possible.
  The more that I know of the Royal British Legion, the more impressed I am by its wonderful work. If this House were packed, and it never is for an Adjournment debate, I should be surprised if there was any dissent from that statement. The Royal British Legion cares for those who gave so much not only in two world wars but in the other conflicts since then. I am thinking especially of the grievous problems in Northern Ireland and the suffering that has been caused. The timing of this debate could not be better because we are approaching Remembrance Day.
  Some 25 years ago, in August 1964, the British Legion—as it was then—decided to take advantage of recently introduced legislation to form a housing association. The intention was to provide well-designed and well-built housing for ex-service men and women who had reached retirement age and needed to spend their remaining days in warden-assisted sheltered housing. Only two types of property are involved—single bedroom accommodation for a couple and bedsit accommodation. In other words, the accommodation is restricted to the sort of people who would need it.
  I am sure that it will be generally accepted and appreciated that those who have served their country in the armed services have a special distinction and a disciplined approach to life's complexities. I am not sure that I can speak for both my hon. Friend the Whip and my hon. Friend the Minister, but two of us have served in the armed forces. I apologise if I have wrongly left out my hon. Friend the Minister, but he looks rather young to have been in the armed services. It is quite traumatic for service people to return to everyday civilian life where they have
  650
  to make their own decisions and do not have that comradely feeling that there are others who care and who are in close contact. If that is the case when people come out of the Army after three years, think what it is like after a lifetime of service.
  Therefore, the conditions created by the Royal British Legion housing association are ideal. These courts provide the perfect conditions for ex-soldiers, sailors and airmen and their spouses or widows. There are two of these homes in my constituency and I know how well they are appreciated. One has been particularly well sited because it is next door to another development for retired licensed victuallers, and they seem to have a bit in common.
  It is of interest that the original rules laid out when the housing association was formed are:
  "The objects of the society shall be to carry on the industry, business or trade of providing housing and any associated amenities for ex-servicemen, their wives, widows and dependants and ex-service women, all of whom are of limited means."
  On that foundation, it is not surprising that in the next 22 years, the housing association built 12,586 flats and houses. It is now the landlord, and an acceptable one, for some 19,000 ex-service men and women. It has for several years been the second largest voluntary housing association in the country. By 31 March, it had invested £212 million.
  Among housing associations, the legion is unique in that each housing court has its own local dedicated band of workers, mainly ex-service personnel and members of the legion. These committees are in daily touch with the warden and residents and thus are able to ensure their proper welfare on a regular basis. Considerable sums have been raised by each of the local committees to provide communal furnishing and amenities for the tenants' benefit. This is an almost perfect way to manage such housing, because it relieves the national and local welfare services of much of the stress in establishing need. Because all the legion's benevolent and welfare services are available, this is a model association for others to emulate.
  In accordance with the Housing Acts—it is important for the Minister to remember this—from its inception the Royal British Legion housing association has continued to hold 50 per cent. of its tenancies available to nomination by the local authorities concerned. In the majority of instances, local authorities have selected as their nominees those ex-service people on their waiting lists whom they considered to be in need of sheltered housing, recognising the comradely atmosphere of the legion's courts. The legion's philosophy is—at first gradually, and then increasingly fast—over the next two or three decades to seek tenants from outside the service community, to enable the developments to be filled. This is the right policy to meet the considerable costs of development.
  In 1986, the Royal British Legion housing association was subjected to undue pressure by the Housing Corporation, which wished it to amend its rules. The clear message was that failure to comply would mean the dropping of funding for new projects. The association had already, in 1982, amended its rules to provide that where no suitable ex-service tenant was forthcoming, it would house a non-ex-service man or woman in housing need. Some 8 per cent. of its tenants are not ex-service people.
  In 1986, because of the pressure from the Housing Corporation, the legion reluctantly adopted the following rule:

  651
  "The object of the society shall be to carry on the industry, business or trade of providing housing by way of family housing, sheltered housing and higher care housing for persons in housing need and on appropriate terms giving consideration, where reasonable, to the ex-service community."
  The effect was to open up all the association's tenancies to all civilian classifications and to relegate ex-service men and women to an afterthought.
  In the circumstances, it is not surprising that the increase in finance, which it was suggested would be obtained when the rules were changed, has not materialised. The stance of the Housing Corporation is that because the association draws its development funds from public sources, its tenancy selection process must be completely open. That denies the fact that there are tens of thousands within the ex-service community who would qualify to end their days in housing such as the RBL makes available. To emphasise the size of catchment area, the RBL reminds us that the ex-service community, inclusive of immediate family, totals 20 million people, or one third of the population.
  A majority of those on local authority housing lists are ex-service people. In view of its stance, it is strange that the Housing Corporation is in the habit of stating its desire to be of special service to categories of people who meet with difficulty in life, such as one-parent families, time-served offenders and immigrants from the ethnic minorities and those suffering disability. It seems strange that housing associations are being set up to deal with some of those categories while the RBL is denied the right to look after ex-service people, when that is its prime intention.
  The RBL and I would be happy to accept that when ex-service people cease to be available to take up tenancies the community at large should benefit from its imaginative initiative. Places could be filled by other deprived people who need housing.
  In future, the RBL, like most other housing associations, will have to finance its borrowing needs in the private sector. It has much still to offer as a wise, skilful and successful association, but it sees no future if it cannot serve those who served us in such a remarkable way. It wishes to return to the position that obtained prior to the 1986 amendment to the rules, and proposes a reversion to the 1982 rule which allowed it to concentrate all its efforts in the ex-service sector.
  The RBL expects its request to be listened to carefully. It is anxious to play a leading role in resettling ex-service men and women and wishes to do so, even for those who came out of the forces with less than 21 years' service.
  I hope that the Minister will give the Royal British Legion housing association hope and will recognise that it has fulfilled a worthwhile role and wishes to continue to do so.
  2.43 pm
  The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Christopher Chope): I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Sir M. Fox) for raising this subject because it gives me an opportunity to praise the work done by the Royal British Legion housing association and that of housing associations in general, with the help of public subsidy. He also mentioned the Housing Corporation, although not in glowing terms. The House will recognise that the Housing corporation plays a major part in promoting the work of the housing association movement and has a vital role in securing the
  652
  best use of funds from Parliament. I congratulate my hon. Friend on the timing of this debate. It occurs during the annual poppy appeal. In the week leading up to Remembrance Day services across the land, the importance of the Royal British Legion's charitable work is very much in our minds.
  We should bear in mind that the Royal British Legion housing association is constituted as a body separate from the Royal British Legion itself. The housing association is a registered charity in its own right; it is a registered friendly society; and, under yet another statutory provision, it is registered with the Housing Corporation.
  My hon. Friend has illustrated the scale of the work done by the housing association, which is one of the largest in the country, with more than 12,500 dwellings. They are let mainly to elderly people, and to those who need various forms of personal care. A high proportion of the tenants are ex-service men or their dependants. The association's housing can be found all over the country, with several hundred separate schemes or courts, usually with a resident warden service.
  My hon. Friend has the advantage of me, as his constituency contains two such schemes; mine contains only one—Ironside court, in the centre of Southampton—which I know to be very popular and extremely well run.
  My hon. Friend referred, modestly to the organisation. He also referred to the role of the right hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Rees). The fact that two such distinguished Members of the House give of their time freely to the association is a futher indication of its importance, and of the high esteem in which it is held.
  I hope that today's debate has given an idea not only of the scale, but of the quality of the service that is provided. As my hon. Friend has said, the association harnesses the generous voluntary help given by more than 3,000 unpaid helpers, who are organised through local "house committees". The result is a very high standard of service to tenants. My hon. Friend described it as an almost perfect way of managing this type of housing, and that, I believe, is also the verdict of the Housing Corporation, which has a statutory responsibility to monitor the performance of housing associations. It has, I know, been most impressed by this aspect of the association's service.
  Let me say a little about the work of the Housing Corporation and how it relates to individual housing associations. My hon. Friend expressed reservations about the corporation's actions. Far be it from me to deny that there are elements of bureaucracy and autocracy within it, although, if the corporation contains unsatisfactory elements we should certainly know about them with a view to discussing them with its chairman. Dealings that I have had with it, however, suggest to me that the corporation is a very well-run organisation with a team of dedicated employees, and that it is doing a very important job. I hope that my hon. Friend's remarks refer to particular examples, and are unrepresentative of the true picture.
  The function of the Housing Corporation is to supervise a massive capital programme to provide new subsidised housing. This year it is running a programme of over £800 million in public funds for investment in housing associations that are building new homes for rent, renovating older housing stock or helping people on low incomes to get on to the first rung of the home ownership ladder. That capital programme is set to rise substantially in future years, with more and more private finance being drawn in to help the public investment to go further.

  653
  Housing associations are now in the forefront of providing new homes for people who could not otherwise afford them, and the Housing Corporation has a responsibility to ensure that the best possible results—in terms of value for money and meeting genuine housing needs—are achieved from the increased investment.
  The Housing Corporation is also responsible for paying public subsidy—known as housing association grant—towards the schemes carried out under the capital programme. The grant that the House votes towards such expenditure currently averages about 75 per cent. of the capital cost of a housing association scheme. That is a generous level of subsidy, and it helps to ensure that accommodation is accessible to those in housing need at rents within their reach.
  The Royal British Legion housing association has had enormous financial support from public sources over the years. During the last five years I understand that some £20 million of new public investment has been channelled through the association. In terms of grant, to date well over £150 million in cash terms has been paid from voted funds towards the cost of housing schemes developed by the association. That is a measure of the importance of the work that the association does. It is also, of course, a reminder that housing associations—even though they are constituted as voluntary, and often charitable, bodies—are heavily dependent on taxpayer funding. There is therefore a weighty responsibility on those who administer the funding to ensure that it is achieving the objectives for which the money has been made available. That is the task of the Housing Corporation.
  My hon. Friend questioned the role of the Housing Corporation in connection with the aims and objectives of the Royal British Legion housing association. He says that there was a change in the rules in 1986 and that he and other members of the association would prefer a return to the rules that prevailed in 1982. Any proposed rule changes would have to be discussed with the Housing Corporation. I hope that that will happen. I am prepared to discuss with my hon. Friend or other members of the Royal British Legion housing association any issues that arise from those discussions, but in the first instance the discussions should be with the Housing Corporation.
  654
  Even under the existing rules it should not be impossible to meet the objectives to which my hon. Friend referred. He says that the new rules treat ex-service men and women as an afterthought. I am not sure that that is the intention of the new rules. They emphasise that housing need has to be examined, as well as the background of those who will use the housing. It would be wrong for a housing association to concentrate exclusively on the background of the people whom it houses. It should also have to take into account their housing need.
  My hon. Friend says that a large number of ex-service men and their dependants are in housing need, but he foresees the time when there may be sufficient places in Royal British Legion housing association accommodation to accommodate those who are not ex-service men. His point, however, is that at the moment the demands of ex-service men and their dependants are so great that it is unlikely that many non-ex-service men can be accommodated. My hon. Friend also pointed out that about 50 per cent. of the nominations normally rest with local authorities and that it is within their absolute discretion to allocate housing to ex-service men and their dependants or to others.
  I hope that the objectives and purposes to which my hon. Friend referred can be achieved without a battle between the Housing Corporation and the association. The worst outcome would be for that largely voluntary organisation to find itself at loggerheads with the Housing Corporation. I shall do everything that I can to ensure that difficulties, if there are any, are soon resolved.
  My hon. Friend referred to other specialist housing associations. Certain associations concentrate on particular cultural, occupational, ethnic or religious minority groups. Their housing need is significant, but it is not fair to suggest that all those associations offer housing just to the members of those groups. When they examine their allocations they have to take into account the overall housing need. Nevertheless, if it is a specialist housing association, almost all the accommodation will be allocated to members of that particular group.
  I hope that I have been able to put the matter into context. I shall be happy to discuss it further with my hon. Friend, should he so wish. I thank him once again for raising the issue, and, once again, I pay tribute to the Royal British Legion housing association's fine work.
  Question put and agreed to.
  Adjourned accordingly at six minutes to Three o'clock.

EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

  Staff Statistics
  Dr. Hampson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many(a) civil servants with higher education responsibilities, and (b) Her Majesty's inspectors (higher education), UGC/UFC, and NAB/PCFC, have been employed in 1987–88 and 1988–89; and how many extra it is proposed to recruit in 1989–90.

  Mrs. Rumbold
  The information requested is as follows:

  11987–88

  11988–89

  11989–90

  Civil Servants with responsibility for policy on higher education

  57

  54

  51

  HMI (Higher Education)2

  150

  150

  150

  UGC

  70

  68

  —

  UFC

  —

  —

  80

  NAB

  30

  33

  —

  PCFC

  —

  —

  63

  Notes

  1 Staff in post on 1 October.

  2 The majority of HMI with responsibilities in higher education also have further education responsibilities. It is not possible to disaggregate the time spent on higher education.

  Most of the additional staff budgeted for in 1989–90 have already been recruited and are included in the third column. Any further net additions should not be significant.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

  Ministerial Duties (Mileage)
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the average mileage per day travelled by the Minister for Overseas Development in performing her official duties; and what was the figure for her predecessor.

  Mrs. Chalker
  Between mid-1988 and mid-1989 my predecessor, the right hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Patten) travelled over 100,000 miles, an average of nearly 300 miles per day, in the course of his official duties. I expect my travel to follow a similar pattern.

  Consultants
  Mr. Sillars
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the Overseas Development Administration maintains a list of approved consultants.

  Mrs. Chalker
  The ODA maintains a register of consultants but inclusion on this register does not imply that ODA approves of the firm or individual concerned, nor that they will necessarily be invited to tender for projects.

  Overseas Civil Service (Pensions)
  Mr. Stanbrook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what arrangements have been made to include Hong Kong and other colonies in the arrangements for pensioners of Her Majesty's overseas Civil Service to include pre-appointment war service in the calculation of their pensions.

  Mrs. Chalker
  Any overseas pensioner from one of our dependencies who also receives a pension paid under the terms of the Overseas Pensions Act 1973, will be eligible for consideration under the terms of the Colonial Service Officers' Pensions Addition for War Service (United Kingdom) Scheme 1989.

  We have written to Hong Kong and other dependencies whose expatriate pensions do not come within the scope of the Act, to ask if they will introduce arrangements which would parallel our scheme. Bermuda and the Cayman Islands have advised us that they have no pensioners to whom the terms would apply; we still await replies from the others, including Hong Kong whose Government have previously expressed a desire to intoduce credit for war service.

PRIME MINISTER

  Public Safety
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Prime Minister what steps are taken to encourage scientific civil servants working on areas related to public safety to draw public attention to threats to public safety.

  The Prime Minister
  This will depend on the circumstances in each case. In bringing matters to the attention of the public all civil servants are required to act in accordance with the principles concerning the provision of information set out in chapter 6 of the "Personnel Management Handbook", copies of which are available in the House Libraries.

WALES

  Disabled People
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much of the money currently spent on residential care in Wales is specifically allocated to services for disabled people.

  Mr. Grist
  The only relevant figures available are those for expenditure by local authorities on residential homes for different categories of resident as shown in the following table.

  Residential homes for

  Net current expenditure (1987–38) (£)

  The elderly

  29,623,980

  The younger physically disabled blind and deaf

  1,869,453

  Persons with a mental illness—Staffed homes

  1,168,760

  Persons with a mental illness—Unstaffed homes

  11,287

  Persons with a mental handicap—Staffed homes

  5,947,987

  Persons with a mental handicap—Unstaffed homes

  43,406

  Residential accommodation for mixed client groups

  59,883

  337

  Residential homes for

  Net current expenditure (1987–88) (£)

  TOTAL

  38,724,756

  Note—Includes expenditure on employees and running expenditure financed from relevant specific grants, rates and balances. Excludes expenditure financed by local income and non-relevant specific grants.

  Excludes expenditure associated with the All-Wales Mental Handicap Strategy.

  Farmers
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales on how many occasions during 1988 and 1989 either he, or his officials, have met representatives of the Farmers Union of Wales.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  I have met representatives of the Farmers Union of Wales on seven occasions and my officials have on 25 occasions. In addition there are frequent but irregular meetings with officials at the four divisional offices dealing with matters involving either individual farmers or of a more general, but essentially local, interest. Central records are not kept of these local meetings.

  Welsh Language
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps are being taken to monitor the linguistic rights of elderly Welsh-speaking people within private sector nursing and old people's homes.

  Mr. Grist
  It is for the individual elderly person to select a home which suits his/her particular language requirements. In exercising their responsibilities, several registration authorities have issued guidance to proprietors on how to cater for the Welsh-language needs of residents.

  Parliamentary Questions
  Mr. Haselhurst
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the subjects on which he is not prepared to answer parliamentary questions.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  It is not possible to provide a definite and exhaustive list of questions which I might exceptionally decline to answer on grounds other than cost and commercial confidence. Each question will continue to be considered on its merits.

  Welsh Water plc
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether it was with his authority that Welsh Water plc joined with Saur UK Ltd. to form a joint subsidiary company to undertake a variety of commercial activities.

  Mr. Grist
  We welcome Welsh Water's proposals to diversify its activities including its joint venture with SAUR about which we have been kept fully informed.

  Rural Housing
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list(a) those county, district and community councils which have submitted comments on
  338
  the letter dated 30 June entitled, land for low cost housing in rural areas in Wales draft planning guidance and (b) the authorities which were sent a copy of this letter.

  Mr. Grist
  The information is shown as follows:

  (a)Clwyd County Council

  Colwyn Borough Council

  Delyn Borough Council

  Glyndwr District Council

  Rhuddlan Borough Council

  Wrexham Maelor Borough Council

  Dyfed County Council

  Carmarthen District Council

  Ceredigion District Council

  Dinefwr Borough Council

  Preseli Pembrokeshire District Council

  South Pembrokeshire District Council

  Gwent County Council

  Monmouth Borough Council

  Gwynedd County Council

  Aberconwy Borough Council

  Arfon Borough Council

  Dwyfor District Council

  Ynys Môn—Isle of Anglesey Borough Council

  Ogwr Borough Council

  Powys County Council

  Brecknock Borough Council

  Montgomeryshire District Council

  South Glamorgan County Council

  Cardiff City Council

  Vale of Glamorgan Borough Council

  West Glamorgan County Council

  Neath Borough Council

  Port Talbot Borough Council

  The Brecon Beacons, Pembrokeshire Coast and Snowdonia National Park Committees also commented on the draft guidance.

  No Community Council has submitted comments.

  (b) All District and County Councils in Wales together with the three Welsh National Park Committees. The Welsh Counties Committee, the Council of Welsh Districts and the Welsh Association of Town and Community Councils were also consulted on the draft guidance.

  Mr. W. D. Harries
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when his Department will pay the agricultural capital grant of £904·55 under the agriculture and horticultural development scheme in respect of sheep fencing for holding number 55/443/16 Mr. W. D. Harries, Crafty farm, Hayscastle cross, Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire, which was submitted in May.

  Mr. Peter Walker
  Mr. W. D. Harries has already been informed that his claim has been approved for payment. He should receive his payment order by mid-November.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  EC Charter of Rights
  Mr. Hannam
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to implement paragraph 29 of the European Community charter of fundamental social rights.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  The charter has not been agreed by member states. Discussion of its implementation is therefore premature at this stage.

  Computer Centre (Livingston)
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what guarantees his Department has gained from the company EDS, awarded the contract to run the computer centre at Livingston, that a continuous service will be maintained.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  Contractual arrangements are in place to ensure effective performance by EDS. Failure to meet the agreed levels of service will result in financial penalties.

  Chief Adjudication Officer Guidance
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he will place a copy of any guidance issued by the chief adjudication officer as a result of Commissioner's decision R(SB)6/89 in the Library.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  The guidance issued by the chief adjudication officer as a result of Commissioner's decision R(SB)6/89 is contained in AOG Memo Vol. 3/22 which has been placed in the Library.

  Personal Pensions
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, whether he will publish in the Official Report a table showing, for men and women aged 16, 20, 30 and 40 years in April 1988, the ages at which it would pay the person concerned to cease contributing to a personal pension or other money purchase scheme, assuming rates of return of 0·5 per cent, and 2·5 per cent, above the annual increase in ·average earnings.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  It is not possible to give such a table because of the wide range of other factors, in addition to the rate of return, which would affect the amount of the personal pension.

  Ms. Marsha Basaj
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will investigate the circumstances surrounding the visit to Ms. Marsha Basaj by two regionally based fraud investigators responsible to the Central Office for Scotland CN (Fraud) branch.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  I have called for a report on this case and will write to the hon. Member in due course.

  Social Fund
  Mr. Patchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how much the Government have spent on social fund loans and community grants; how many people have been refused help by the social fund from its inception to date; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  Information relating to 1988–89 is contained in the Secretary of State's annual report to Parliament.

  Information for the current year is available from the national summary statistics which are placed in the Library monthly. The latest month for which information is available is September 1989.

  Mr. Patchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what action he is proposing to take about the 340
  administration of the social fund following the report by the Social Fund Commission for 1988–89; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  The Social Fund Commissioner's first annual report, which was published in July, discharged her responsibility to report annually on the standard of reviews by social fund inspectors. I was pleased to note that 90 per cent, of the decisions monitored "met fully or exceeded the required standard" and that of the remainder very few "were found to be fundamentally flawed". I agree fully with the Commissioner's conclusion that the results of her monitoring will encourage public confidence in the review system.

  The Commissioner also made a number of recommendations to the Department. These are all issues on which the Department's views have been made known to the Commissioner, or on which the Department has already taken action. I understand that the Commissioner's next annual report will refer to this year's recommendations and the Department's response to them.

TRANSPORT

  British Rail (Expenditure)
  Mr. Snape
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the following totals at constant prices:(a) capital expenditure out of the public service obligation grant to British Rail and (b) other capital expenditure by British Rail authorised by his Department for each year since 1979.

  Mr. Portillo
  The public service obligation grant 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.

  Figures for total BR investment are given in the table:

  £ million 1989–90 prices

  Total BR investment

  1979

  518

  1980

  529

  1981

  433

  1982

  352

  1983

  347

  1984

  368

  1985–86

  491

  1986–87

  475

  1987–88

  594

  1988–89

  600

  Note:—1984–85 was a 15 month financial period. The 1984 figure is the 12 month internally reported result. Figures exclude the laying of continuous welded track which BR no longer classify as investment.

  Correspondence
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information his Department has on the length of time taken to respond to letters from hon. Members.

  Mr. Atkins
  Ministerial colleagues and I aim to deal with all correspondence in three weeks.

  Manually kept records show that of approximately 15,000 letters received from hon. Members since January

  341
  1989, 378 are currently outstanding. These have raised complex questions or problems which inevitably take longer to research.

  Road Improvement Contracts
  Mr. Amos
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, further to the answer to the hon. Member for Hexham on 10 January,Official Report, column 617, if he will list (a) those trunk road improvement contracts that have been awarded since the start of the financial year 1989–90. together with the name of the successful tenderer and the value of the contract, (b) those contracts on which tenders have been invited but contracts have not yet been awarded and (c) those contracts on which tenders have not yet been invited but are expected to be let by the end of the financial year 1989–90.

  Mr. Atkins
  The following contracts have been awarded since 1 April 1989:

  Scheme and Successful Tenderer

  Contract Price £ million

  M1 J34 Meadowhall Development1— Birse Construction

  1·2

  M3 Compton-Bassett Widening—John Mowlem

  41·5

  M20 Maidstone-Ashford (Contract 2)—Wimpey Construction

  28·7

  M40 Waterstock-Wendlebury Section—Fairclough/Alfred McAlpine

  63·9

  A23 Waddon Marsh Bridge—Balfour Beatty

  2·7

  A27 Brighton Bypass (Dyke Road/Patcham)— Alfred McAlpine

  16·7

  A41 Chester Improvement—Fairclough

  17·5

  A41 Bicester Bypass State 1—John Mowlem

  4·7

  A42 Castle Donnington North (Contract 1)— A F Budge (Construction)

  24·7

  A65 Addingham Bypass—Cumbrian Industrials

  3·1

  A69 Brampton Bypass—Cumbrian Industrials

  4·9

  A127 Rayleigh Weir GSJ—Christiani and Nielsen

  11·8

  A282 Dartford Third Crossing Approach Roads—Balfour Beatty

  27·7

  A303 Ilchester to South Petherton—

  Wimpey Construction

  12·8

  A406 Chingford Road to Hale Road·Cementation Construction

  60·3

  A604 M1–A1 Link: Contract 6 (Kettering-Thrapston)— A. F. Budge (Construction)

  25·7

  Contract 7 (Thrapston-Brampton phase 1)—Tarmac Construction

  14·2

  1 Grant aided scheme.

  Tenders have been invited for the following schemes and the contracts should be awarded before the end of the financial year:
  342

  A6

  Quorn and Mountsorrel Bypass

  A16

  Boston Algakirk Diversion

  A16

  Louth Bypass

  A23

  Warninglid to Brighton (Sayers Common to Muddlewood)

  A43

  Castle Donzington North (Contract 2)

  A47

  Castor and Ailsworth Bypass

  A47

  Eye Bypass

  A418

  Leighton Linslade Bypass1

  A523

  Macclesfield Inner Relief Road

  A604

  M1–A1 Link:

  Contract 1 (Catthorpe Interchange)

  Contract 4 (Rothwell to Kettering)

  Contract 5 (Kettering Southern Bypass)

  A650

  Drighlington Bypass

  A1079

  Market Weighton Bypass

  1 Grant aided scheme

  Subject to completion of statutory procedures further tenders for other schemes may be invited before the end of the financial year.

  Cars (Anti-theft Systems)
  Mr. Haselhurst
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he has assessed whether the development of electronic anti-theft systems for cars has reached the point in cost and effectiveness at which he will consider legislation to make their installation mandatory.

  Mr. Atkins
  Every new car sold in Britain since 1978 has had to have a steering lock. Britain has developed, in co-operation with manufacturers, new standards to improve car locks and to shield window mechanisms We are pressing for these to be adopted in the EC.

  Many cars are also fitted with alarm systems. The variations in their design and location contribute to their effectiveness. The greater standardisation likely to result from obligatory installation might diminish that effectiveness. Moreover, there is a growing volume of complaints about the environmental effects of alarms set off with no apparent attempt at theft.

  Parking sensibly, locking up carefully and avoiding leaving valuables in view are all strong deterrents to thieves.

  Lorry Weights
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many inspectors are employed at ports to ensure that lorry weights from incoming vessels are within United Kingdom requirements; and how many prosecutions were undertaken in 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989 to the most recent practicable date.

  Mr. Atkins
  The Department currently has a force of 235 traffic examiners who carry out lorry weight checks at inland sites as well as at major ferry ports. Vehicles found to be overweight in ports are prohibited from further movement but are not normally prosecuted because an offence has not taken place until the vehicle has been on a public road. Separate figures for prohibitions in ports are not kept. The number of prosecutions nationally for overloading, with in brackets figures for prohibitions, in each of the years 1986–88 were, respectively, 6,400 (5,700), 5,500 (4,250) and 7,600 (7,700). The figures for the first half of 1989–90 were 3,250 and 2,900. These figures do not include offences taken by the police and local authority trading standards staff.

  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) how many of the short-span bridges on non-trunk
  343
  roads will not meet 40-tonne lorry weights; what will be the cost of repairing or replacing such bridges; and what is the estimated cost of the traffic delays arising from such work;

  (2) whether his Department has carried out an assessment of the likely extra strengthening costs in the event of the EEC directive on 40-tonne lorries being applied in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Atkins
  It was agreed at a meeting of the European Council of Transport Ministers in July that the United Kingdom's derogation from the directive permitting the use of lorries weighing 40 tonnes should end on 31 December 1998.

  In 1988 my Department began a programme—expected to last 10 years—to assess all the bridges on trunk roads and to strengthen them, where necessary, to cater for heavier lorries. The increase from 38 tonnes to 40 tonnes will require about another 400 bridges to be assessed, but it is expected to account for only a relatively small proportion of the total cost of strengthening work.

  Last December, the Government made provision through the rate support grant settlement for an additional £27 million expenditure by local authorities in England in 1989–90 so that a start could be made on the long-term programmes of work necessary on their roads. It is too soon to say what proportion of their bridges will eventually need to be strengthened, but a sample survey carried out by my Department in 1987 suggested that it might be about 20 per cent.

  In some cases, strengthening may not be the only option. It will be more appropriate to restrict some bridges to vehicles of a lower weight; in other cases, it would be possible to cater for heavier lorries by reducing the number of lanes of traffic.

  It is inevitable that there will be traffic delays while some of the work is carried out, but it is not possible to predict where these will occur or their economic cost. My Department's regional offices will assist in co-ordination of the work to help keep delays to a minimum.

  Articulated Lorries
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what research has been undertaken on the use of 16·5 m articulated lorries in the United Kingdom; what alterations will be required to existing tractor units, what design requirements will be needed for compatible tractor units for the 13·6 m trailer; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) when he expects to lay the order allowing 16·5 m articulated lorries in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement;

  (3) why he is advancing by 12 months the implementation of the EEC directive permitting 16·5 m articulated lorries; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Atkins
  Once the EC date was imposed on us, there was a serious risk of detriment to the interests of British manufacturers. We therefore advanced implementation to January 1990 from January 1991.

  The order will be laid as soon as possible, subject to the completion of the necessary detailed consultation. No specific research was carried out on the proposals leading to the EC directive. The new 13·6 m semi-trailer will require the use of a tractor unit slightly longer than the
  344
  shortest units now in use: some already exist. The shortest tractor units can still be used with semi-trailers slightly shorter than 13·6 m.

  Commercial Vehicles
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what are the total numbers of commercial vehicles in each category of unladen weight registered for 1989; what were the totals for each year from 1979; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Atkins
  Information on vehicle stock for 1989 is not yet available. Details of the number of commercial vehicles registered in Great Britain are available by gross weight and were published in "Heavy Goods Vehicles in Great Britain 1988", transport statistics report, August 1989, a copy of which was placed in the House of Commons Library.

  The number of heavy goods vehicles has fallen from 506,000 in 1979 to 462,000 in 1988 despite a 25 per cent, increase in road freight activity.

  Channel Tunnel (Rail Services)
  Mr. Aitken
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what progress has been reported to him in the provision of rail services between the Channel tunnel and London; and whether it remains the Government's policy not to subsidise this project.

  Mr. Parkinson
  British Rail is planning to spend over £1 billion on upgrading the rail network in Kent and London, on developing Waterloo station and on rolling stock, so that a full international passenger and freight service can commence on the day that the Channel tunnel opens.

  In July of last year British Rail began consultations on the proposal to build a new line which would be needed by the end of the century. On the basis of consultation on four route options, British Rail narrowed the choice to a preferred route in March of this year. British Rail also isued an invitation to the private sector to participate in a joint venture. Five positive responses to this invitation were received, and BR subsequently shortlisted two consortia.

  Today British Rail has announced that it has selected its preferred partner in a joint venture for Channel tunnel rail services, and that is Eurorail, comprising Trafalgar House and BICC. I very much welcome this announcement.

  The broad scope of the joint venture has been settled. It includes the operation of international rail services, not just the construction of the link. The details are still to be negotiated and my approval to the final agreement will be necessary. At this stage, however, I am greatly encouraged by the clear indications that I have had from the private sector that Channel tunnel rail services, including a new Channel tunnel rail link, can be financed commercially and that the new link can still be brought into operation in 1998.

  I have been greatly impressed by the confidence, expertise and commitment shown by both the shortlisted consortia, Eurorail and the Acer Group. Eurorail is satisfied that detailed work carried out on the route through Kent confirms that the route proposed by BR is the best solution. It is confident that an acceptable way can

  345
  be found of continuing the route from the outskirts of London to Waterloo and to a second terminal at Kings Cross with its excellent connections to the north.

  This confirmation of the route through Kent, on which so much work has already been done to minimise the environmental consequences, will help to end uncertainty in the county. I welcome that as I welcome the decision to bring forward immediately legislative proposals to allow Ashford international passenger station to be relocated so as to open in 1993, but to fit in with the new line. It is for British Rail and its partner to determine the best route and terminals to be included in a parliamentary Bill, and I accept that now that BR and Eurorail have reached agreement it will not be practicable or sensible for them to examine other possible alternative proposals and projects. It will be for Parliament to decide whether the route can be accepted.

  I think that it must be primarily for BR and Eurorail to judge how and when to seek the necessary legislative approval for their proposals. I accept BR's judgment that it is wiser to wait until all the details of the route through London have been finalised before introducing a Private Bill and that will also give the opportunity for further refinement of the detailed measures proposed for Kent. I welcome their stated intention to introduce a Bill in 1990.

  The provision of the Channel tunnel link is now the responsibility of BR and its chosen partner, Eurorail. I confirm that it remains the policy of the Government that no subsidy will be given to Channel tunnel rail services.

ENVIRONMENT

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many gainers and losers his Department now estimates there will be after the introduction of the poll tax in England.

  Mr. Chope
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Mr. Patten) to the hon. Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham) on 1 November 1989, at column 75.

  Lindane
  Mr. Graham Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what have been and will be the environmental consequences to the United Kingdom of the recent loss of a container of lindane in the Channel.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  No signs of lindane pollution have been detected from the continuing joint Anglo-French monitoring programme, set up immediately after the incident.

  British and French scientists are confident that any increases in lindane concentrations in the marine environment could be easily detected at levels well below those at which they would represent a risk to human health. They further agree, after having carefully considered the probable rate of dissolution of the lindane in its container and its likely rate of release to the sea, that the chances of the lindane having any significant detectable effect are very slight.

  As a precaution joint monitoring continues and if any leakage is detected this would provide important clues as to the whereabouts of the container and so assist recovery action, should this be necessary.

  Waste Recycling
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will consider giving additional incentives to councils to encourage the introduction of further schemes for the recycling of domestic waste; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Our proposals to improve waste management on which we hope to legislate shortly should encourage local authorities to promote recycling. In addition we are carefully considering what further measures might be taken to encourage recycling both at the collection and disposal stages, and are evaluating examples of current best practice and the major experiment in recycling—"Recycling City"—which is now taking place in Sheffield, with the support of the Government.

  Litter
  Mr. Conway
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to introduce legislation to allow local authorities to appoint designated officers for the purpose of taking the name and address of any alleged litter offender for subsequent prosecution.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  I am pleased to inform my hon. Friend that our proposals for legislation to tackle the problem of litter, published on 20 July, include a provision which will allow all district and borough councils to operate a fixed penalty scheme for littering. Under such a scheme an authorised officer of the authority will be empowered to issue tickets to litterers requiring payment of a fixed penalty within a set period. Failure to pay the fixed penalty will render the offender liable to prosecution. We are not, however, proposing to give the authorised officer extra powers to demand the name and address of the offender.

  Housing Finance (Leicester)
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list for the financial years 1981 to 1988 inclusive the following information:(a) the housing investment allocation paid to Leicester city council for each of the years and (b) the housing investment allocation in real terms for each of those years.

  Mr. Chope
  The following figures give Leicester city council's housing investment programme allocations and also its outturn expenditure for the years requested, in both actual and real terms.

  £ million Allocation

  £ million Outturn

  Year

  Actual

  Real terms

  Actual

  Real terms

  1981–82

  17·036

  24·628

  19·464

  28·137

  1982–83

  18·496

  24·971

  21·063

  28·436

  1983–84

  17·373

  22·416

  22·488

  29·016

  1984–85

  18·900

  23·238

  30·604

  37·628

  1985–86

  15·000

  17·482

  28·395

  33·093

  1986–87

  13·285

  15·002

  26·013

  29·375

  1987–88

  14·277

  15·319

  23·983

  25·733

  1988–89

  13·716

  13·716

  32·393

  32·393

  Parliamentary Questions
  Mr. Haselhurst
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the subjects on which he is not prepared to answer parliamentary questions.
  347
  Mr. Patten
  I would normally expect to answer questions within my area of responsibility other than those involving disproportionate cost.

  Hazardous Waste
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether Her Majesty's Government intend to ratify the Basel convention on the control of transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and their disposal.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Yes, together with our European Community partners.

  Nature Conservancy Council and Countryside Commission
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he intends to proceed with the restructuring of the Nature Conservancy Council and Countryside Commission as outlined by the previous Secretary of State for the Environment on 11 July.

  Mr. Trippier
  Yes.

  Green Belt (Derbyshire)
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give an assurance that he will uphold the terms of the north-east Derbyshire green belt local plan (paragraph 5.20, proposal 6) and reject any application lodged on appeal by British Coal to begin opencast mining in the green belt and around Barlborough.

  Mr. Moynihan
  No. I cannot give such an assurance. This would clearly prejudice the position of the Secretary of State were an application to come before him on appeal. Minerals can be worked only where they occur, but extraction, including opencast coal, need not be incompatible with green belt objectives provided high environmental standards are maintained and sites are restored to a good standard. As Derbyshire's green belt local plan makes clear, mineral working is a temporary operation which can be acceptable in green belt areas and is not incompatible with the eventual restoration of the area to an open use.

  Water Authorities (Foreign Investment)
  Mr. Patchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish in the Official Report the extent of foreign investment in British water authorities.

  Mr. Howard
  The successor companies to the nine water authorities in England are wholly owned by the Crown.

  Works of Art Committee
  Mr. Cormack
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will appoint a new member to the advisory committee on works of art in the House of Commons following the resignation from the committee of the hon. Member for Heywood and Middleton (Mr. Callaghan).

  Mr. Patten
  I am pleased to announce that, with Mr. Speaker's agreement, I have appointed the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) to the advisory committee.

  Water Privatisation
  Mr. David Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress he has made with preparations for the forthcoming water share offers.

  Mr. Chris Patten
  I have today placed in the Library the "Pathfinder" prospectus for the 10 water share offers which has been published today. It gives details of the forthcoming offers, apart from the price, share capital and related information. The share price will be announced on 22 November.

  Benzene (Toxicity)
  Mr. Andrew Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has regarding the toxic and carcinogenic properties of unleaded petrol; and what assessment he has made of the effects of using benzene in such petrol.

  Mr. Roger Freeman
  I have been asked to reply.

  We are not aware of any information to suggest that there are toxic or carcinogenic properties specific to unleaded petrol.

  Benzene is toxic at high doses and is classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a human carcinogen on the basis of data from workers who were exposed to high levels in the past. The concentration of benzene permitted in petrol is regulated under a European directive and it is not used as an additive to substitute for lead.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Scotch Whisky (Korea)
  Mr. Sims
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will seek to persuade the Korean Government to equalise the levels of duty on Scotch whisky and other spirits.

  Mr. Redwood
  It has been our objective for some time to remove the discriminatory features of Korea's tax and tariff treatment of Scotch whisky and other imported spirits, as well as other restrictions on the import and distribution of these products. There has been some liberalisation which has benefited Scotch whisky but discriminatory treatment continues to hold back sales in Korea. We have made strong representations to the Korean Government and will continue to take every opportunity to do so, both bilaterally and through the European Community.

  Scotch Whisky (Taiwan)
  Mr. Sims
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps Her Majesty's Government have taken to overcome the import restrictions faced by Scotch whisky exports to Taiwan.

  Mr. Redwood
  The authorities in Taiwan are well aware of United Kingdom concerns. Her Majesty's Government have no dealings with the Taiwanese authorities but United Kingdom concerns on this and other matters are put across very clearly in Taipei and London by the Anglo-Taiwan trade committee, a private organisation set up to promote British exports to Taiwan.

  Selling by Telephone
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry which recommendations of the Office of Fair Trading set out in the document "Selling by telephone," in 1983 he has accepted; which of these have been implemented; and what are his reasons for not implementing the remainder.

  Mr. Forth
  Two of the recommendations in the 1984 report by the Office of Fair Trading on selling by telephone were addressed to Government.

  The first related to automatic dialling equipment. Such equipment which transmits recorded messages or synthesised speech may only be used with the consent in writing of the intended recipient. Other such equipment which transmits speech or data has only been approved by the Director General of Telecommunications for connection to the public network where there are legitimate reasons for its use.

  The Government have accepted the more recent advice of the Director General of Telecommunications that the new branch systems general licence, which will soon be granted under the Telecommunications Act 1984, should contain a condition requiring anyone making telephone sales calls not to do so in respect of any user who requests them to stop.

  On the second recommendation, the Government are not convinced that there have been sufficient problems to require the introduction of a statutory cooling-off period for oral contracts resulting from unsolicited telephone calls.

  Northern Region
  Mr. Devlin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will list all offers of regional selective assistance in the Darlington area for each year since 1982; and whether he will provide the same information for(a) Stockton-on-Tees and (b) Middlesbrough.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The offers of regional selective assistance in the Darlington, Stockton and Middlesbrough areas in each year since 1 April 1982 are as follows:

  (A) Offers of regional selective assistance in the Darlington parliamentary constituency

  Company

  Amount offered £

  1 April 1982–31 March 1983

  Nil

  1 April 1983–31 March 1984

  Whessoe Projects Ltd.

  1,070,000

  Brent Chemicals International Ltd.

  40,000

  Stenga Ltd.

  25,000

  C. P. Offset

  25,000

  Darlington Pattern Making Company

  6,500

  1 April 1984–31 March 1985

  T. E. Catterall Ltd.

  20,000

  Amdega Ltd.

  50,000

  Indescon Ltd.

  35,000

  Priestgate Services (No. 29) Ltd.

  30,000

  1 April 1985–31 March 1986

  Harvey Plating Ltd.

  50,000

  Rallbar Ltd.

  10,000

  Areena Shoe Components Ltd.

  50,000

  Mech-Tool Engineering Ltd.

  70,000

  Mini-Prints North East

  15,000

  350

  Company

  Amount offered £

  F. W. Alderson

  5,000

  S. R. Steel Ltd.

  5,000

  1 April 1986–31 March 1987

  Kohlangaz Fire Co. Ltd.

  30,000

  Con-Mech Group Ltd.

  45,000

  Darlington Timber Supplies Ltd.

  15,000

  Mitre Tooling Co. Ltd.

  35,000

  Epcot Leisure Ltd.

  15,000

  BSA Foundries Ltd.

  175,000

  Baydale Engineering

  8,000

  Forge Diesel Services Ltd.

  5,000

  Amdega Ltd.

  70,000

  1 April 1987–31 March 1988

  Vector Electronics

  10,000

  Rennyco Ltd.

  5,000

  Aycliffe Paper Winding Ltd.

  5,000

  Darcham Ltd.

  65,000

  Amdega Ltd.

  100,000

  Edgeworth Electronics Ltd.

  5,000

  Harvey Plating Ltd.

  25,000

  Glassfibre Flagpoles Ltd.

  20,000

  Mitre Plastics Ltd.

  35,000

  1 April 1988–31 March 1989

  Regis Fibres (UK) Ltd.

  25,000

  BSA Engineering Ltd.

  10,000

  J. L. Moore & Sons

  75,000

  Stenga Ltd.

  90,000

  Thrivewell Ltd.

  7,500

  Shildon Manufacturing

  15,000

  Baydale Architectural Metalwork

  25,000

  Great Northern Timber Co. Ltd.

  60,000

  1 April 1989–30 September 1989

  No case details published.

  (B) Offers of Regional Selective Assistance in the Stockton North Parliamentary Constituency

  Company

  Amount Offered £

  1 April 1982–31 March 1983

  Derian Ltd.

  25,000

  Supreme Knitwear Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

  25,000

  1 April 1983–31 March 1984

  Cleveland Redpath English Holdings Ltd.

  4,000,000

  English Conservatories Ltd.

  25,000

  Supreme Knitwear Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

  25,000

  John Harrison (Stockton) Ltd.

  27,000

  Brandtex Manufacturing Ltd.

  25,000

  1 April 1984–31 March 1985

  Fine Organics Ltd.

  300,000

  Supreme Knitwear Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

  35,000

  ITM Head Wrightson Teesdale Ltd.

  400,000

  Josty (UK) Ltd.

  20,000

  1 April 1985–31 March 1986

  Brandtex Manufacturing Ltd.

  176,000

  Bellrise Fashions Ltd.

  12,500

  Supreme Knitwear Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

  25,000

  John Harrison (Stockton) Ltd.

  20,000

  Herrewege Brushes Ltd.

  45,000

  1 April 1986–31 March 1987

  Portrack Security Services

  5,000

  F. Hills & Sons Ltd.

  80,000

  C. & S. Hogarth Ltd.

  25,000

  1 April 1987–31 March 1988

  Falcon Press (Stockton on Tees) Ltd.

  35,000

  351

  Company

  Amount Offered £

  Artix Ltd.

  280,000

  Lionweld Ltd.

  255,000

  F. Hills & Sons Ltd.

  40,000

  1 April 1988–31 March 1989

  Billingham Press Ltd.

  25,000

  Spencer & Halstead Ltd.

  400,000

  BKE Ltd.

  10,000

  1 April 1989–30 September 1989

  No case details published

  (c) Offers of regional selective assistance in the Stockton, South parliamentary constituency

  Company

  Amount offered £

  1 April 1982–31 March 1983

  Parkfield Group plc

  30,000

  M. M. Knitwear 1982 Ltd.

  96,000

  Cleveland Microfilm Services Ltd.

  25,000

  Cardosi's Ltd.

  15,000

  Eyetech Group Ltd.

  95,000

  Nerco Products Ltd.

  5,000

  Hygena Ltd.

  172,628

  1 April 1983–31 March 1984

  Northdale Rotary Engineering Ltd.

  22,000

  Hygena Ltd.

  366,000

  Churchcliffe Glass

  8,000

  Panda Supplies Ltd.

  20,000

  Sanderson Chemical Consultants

  20,000

  1 April 1984–31 March 1985

  Cresstale Ltd.

  20,000

  J. G. Tinkler Ltd.

  72,303

  Tabuchi Electric (UK) Ltd.

  300,000

  1 April 1985–31 March 1986

  British Visqueen Ltd.

  400,000

  Elta Plastics Ltd.

  50,000

  Cresstale Ltd.

  75,000

  Harcros Chemicals UK Ltd.

  400,000

  Supreme Knitwear (1986) Ltd.

  25,000

  1 April 1986–31 March 1987

  Laserprint and Display Ltd.

  5,000

  Cresstale Ltd.

  85,000

  1 April 1987–31 March 1988

  Supreme Knitwear Manufacturing Company Ltd.

  100,000

  Wireless Video Products

  5,000

  Stainton Metal Company Ltd.

  50,000

  Tees Components Ltd.

  48,000

  Silleck Mouldings Ltd.

  170,000

  Sanyo Electric Manufacturing (UK) Ltd.

  721,000

  1 April 1988–31 March 1989

  De Novo Engineering Ltd.

  20,000

  Ready-To-Assemble Furniture Ltd.

  400,000

  Styles Precision Components Ltd.

  20,000

  Dalestone Concrete Products Ltd.

  70,000

  E. H. Education and Training (E. E. Hughes T. A.)

  10,000

  1 April 1989–30 September 1989

  No case details published

  352

  (D) Offers of regional selective assistance in the Middlesbrough local authority district

  Company

  Amount offered £

  1 April 1982–31 March 1983

  Seaway International Cables Company Ltd.

  20,000

  Fabrikat industries Ltd.

  230,000

  Collin Maintenance and Inspection Services

  200,000

  1 April 1983–31 March 1984

  Norlite Windows Ltd.

  14,000

  A. C. Walker and Co.

  10,000

  Solar Pans Ltd.

  50,000

  1 April 1984–31 March 1985

  Henry Newbould Ltd.

  480,000

  1 April 1985–31 March 1986

  Cleveland Cable Company Ltd.

  45,000

  1 April 1986–31 March 1987

  Chemoxy International Ltd.

  200,000

  1 April 1987–31 March 1988

  Marinecrown Ltd. T/A Tees Inshore Engineering

  25,000

  Bulkhaul Ltd.

  100,000

  Stanley Vickers Ltd.

  45,000

  Northern Systems Ltd.

  30,000

  Amberley Foods Ltd.

  550,000

  Recovery Ltd.

  15,000

  Maval Engineering Company Ltd.

  25,000

  1 April 1988–31 March 1989

  Gordian Print Ltd.

  22,000

  River Tees Engineering and Welding Ltd.

  50,000

  Wearparts Ltd.

  60,000

  Cherry Marine Ltd.

  15,000

  1 April 1989–30 September 1989

  No case details published

  Notes:

  1 In accordance with normal practice, information has been restricted to that published in the quarterly tables in "British Business".

  2 The figures relate to the Parliamentary Constituency areas of

  (a) Darlington

  (b) Stockton North

  (c) Stockton South and to the local authority area of

  (d)Middlesbrough, excluding that part of the Stockton South Parliamentary Constituency within the borough boundary.

  Mr. Devlin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many jobs have been created or safeguarded by regional aid in the Northern region since 1984.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The number of jobs expected to be created or safeguarded in the Northern region1 through offers of regional develpment grant (RDG) and regional selective assistance (RSA) since 1984 is:

  Regional Development Grants

  Financial Year

  Jobs

  1984–85

  2846

  1985–86

  11,340

  1986–87

  18,389

  1987–88

  21,156

  1988–89

  25,013

  Total

  76,744

  353

  Regional Selective Assistance

  Financial Year

  Jobs

  1983–84

  14,133

  1984–85

  13,579

  1985–86

  5,984

  1986–87

  9,600

  1987–88

  6,123

  1988–89

  4,487

  1989–903

  3,708

  Total

  57,614

  1 The northern region is the north east region plus Cumbria.

  2 Offers were made under the revised RGD scheme from 29 November 1984. Following the closure of the scheme on 31 March 1988, all outstanding offers were made in the period ending 31 March 1989. Prior to November 1984, RDG's were not linked to the creation or preservation of jobs, so no estimate is available of the effect on employment of payments under that scheme.

  3 Period to 30 October 1989.

  Notes:

  1.Some RSA and RGD offers will relate to the same jobs but it is not practicable accurately to identify these.

  2.The figures for both schemes are based on offers made.

  3.Regional enterprise grants have also been available for firms employing less than 25 people in development areas since April 1988. Job creation or safeguarding is not, however, a condition of the scheme.

  4.Other Government Departments have no job-linked regional aid schemes.

  Parliamentary Questions
  Mr. Haselhurst
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will list the subjects on which he is not prepared to answer parliamentary questions.

  Mr. Ridley
  It is not possible to provide a definite and exhaustive list of questions which I might exceptionally decline to answer on grounds other than cost and commercial confidence. Each question will continue to be considered on its merits.

  Ticket Touts
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will make it his policy to introduce a system of licensing for ticket touts.

  Mr. Forth
  No.

  Crown Immunity
  Mr. Patchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he has any plans to remove Crown immunity from those establishments run by his Department subject to consumer protection and environmental health laws; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply my hon. Friend gave to the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner) on 20 October 1989 at column 279.

  Export Seminar
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what is the cost to small firms wishing to attend the seminar organised by his Department on exporting to Belgium and Germany on 21 November.

  Mr. Redwood
  The exporting to Belgium seminar on 21 November costs £35 per delegate, including lunch.

  European Trade Committee
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what trade union representation exists on the European trade committee.

  Mr. Redwood
  There is no trade union representation on the European trade committee. Members are selected on the basis of their wide experience of exporting and their knowledge of western Europe.

EMPLOYMENT

  Earnings
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will provide information covering each of the last five years showing the number of employees whose earnings fell below(a) the national insurance contributions lower earnings limit; and (b) the PAYE threshold; and if he will estimate what proportion of these employees are (i) women, (ii) female part-timers and (iii) part-timers.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The available information from the new earnings survey is not sufficiently precise to make reliable estimates separately distinguishing the numbers with earnings below these two thresholds. However, the numbers are broadly estimated to be in the following ranges:

  April

  Millions

  1984

  2½–3

  1985

  2¾–3¼

  1986

  2¾–3¼

  1987

  3–3½

  1988

  3–3½

  It is estimated that women account for 75 per cent, of these employees, that female part-timers account for 70 per cent, and that all part-timers account for 90 per cent.

  Restart
  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment when results from the Restart cohort survey will be available; if a copy of any preliminary findings and subsequently the full results will be published or placed in the Library; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  The final results from the Restart cohort study are likely to be available in the middle of 1991. A decision on publication will be taken in due course.

  Employment Training
  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what information is collected on the ET2 form which is completed for each employment training trainee by training managers; and if he will give as much information as he has for each region and for Great Britain as a whole showing how many employment training trainees have achieved vocational qualifications; how many have received any form of training bonus: and how much.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The information which is collected from the ET2 trainee record form is detailed in the following
  355
  table. Information from the forms on qualifications obtained and numbers receiving training bonuses is still being analysed and its reliability assessed. No information is available about the amount of training bonus paid to trainees.

  EMPLOYMENT TRAINING

  INFORMATION COLLECTED FROM ET2, TRAINEE RECORD FORM

  Name and address

  National Insurance number

  Date of birth

  Sex

  Marital Status

  Age band

  Duration of unemployment

  Whether disabled/health problem

  Ethnic origin

  Referral source

  Eligibility code

  Literacy and numeracy need

  Whether trainee referred to Training Manager

  Date of assessment

  Training Agent/Training Manager Reference number

  Date training started

  Date training expected to end

  Placed on project in first 4 weeks

  Date of Training Manager action

  Training Manager reference number

  Date training ended

  Main training occupation classification code

  Type of training received

  Whether studied for vocational qualification or credit

  Whether gained vocational qualification or credit

  Whether fulfilled agreed action plan

  Whether received training bonus

  Leaving code

  Training Manager reference number

  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment why there has been a delay in assessing employment training training managers for ATO status; what effect this has had on the original timetable; how many employment training training managers passed stage one; how many have been told to make improvements; how many have failed; and if he will make a statement about the future timetable for carrying out the full assessment of ATO status in employment training.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Area office staff began the assessment of employment training training managers for ATO status immediately the programme began and they have continued that process.

  It was originally hoped the process would be completed within 18 months of the beginning of the programme. It was recognised that training of managers, many of whom were new to training of this type, needed sufficient time to provide the evidence of the high standards of training required to satisfy the stringent criteria leading to the award of approved status. For this reason, the timetable allowed for the approval process is now set at two years from the date of commencement of operation.

  At 31 October 1989, 338 training managers had passed stage 1. The monitoring activities for approved status provide for Training Agency staff to work in partnership with all training managers to offer advice about the developments necessary to achieve full status.

  No training managers have failed.

  The timetable for approved status is set as described.

  Women Managers
  Dr. Woodcock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will outline the steps being taken by Her Majesty's Government to encourage the employment of women in management jobs.

  Mr. Nicholls
  Employers are bound by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 to afford equal opportunities at all occupational levels to women and men. The careers service, the employment service and the Training Agency take every opportunity to bring openings in management and other senior appointments to the attention of appropriate women and to advise them of the necessary qualifications and available training.

  I and colleagues frequently remind employers of the need to use women's talents to the full, particularly at managerial level, and to emphasise that women must be treated equally with men. We are also supporting initiatives which help to promote women's enterprise. It is encouraging that the number of women managers is rising and that the Institute of Employment Research predicts that by 1995 two fifths of managers and entrepreneurs will be women.

  NATO Exercises
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is the extent of involvement by his Department in NATO exercise Wintex-Cimex 1987 and exercise Wintex-Cimex 1989; what is the number of staff engaged in the exercise planning process and in the exercises themselves; and what are the posts, ranks and responsibilities of the staff involved.

  Mr. Eggar
  My Department plays its part in testing those procedures in which we have an interest. Staff participate as required; it would not be appropriate for me to supply the detail requested.

  Computers (Public Safety)
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what steps he is taking to ensure all aspects of decision-making at all levels involving public safety will not be compromised by the commercial secrecy of any computer codes which may be involved in such decision-making.

  Mr. Nicholls
  The Health and Safety Executive is working with Government Departments to develop guidelines and standards for the use of computer software in safety-related applications. Under section 20 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, inspectors have powers to make any necessary examination or investigation.

  Industrial Accident Regulations
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will extend the scope of the Control of Industrial Major Accident Hazard (CIMAH) Regulations to cover nuclear installations.

  Mr. Nicholls
  No. Such an extension is neither appropriate nor necessary. The operation of nuclear installations is already closely controlled by the conditions attached to nuclear site licences granted by the Health and Safety Executive's nuclear installations inspectorate under the Nuclear Installations Act 1965.
  357
  The HSE is currently developing regulations which will apply to nuclear installations requirements similar to those of the CIMAH regulations on the preparation of off-site emergency plans by local authorities and the provision of information to the public.

  New Businesses
  Mr. Oppenheim
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many new businesses registered for value added tax in Derbyshire in the latest year for which figures are available.

  Mr. Eggar
  In 1988, the estimated number of new registrations for value added tax in Derbyshire was 3,110. The net increase in the number of VAT-registered businesses in Derbyshire in 1988 was 740, or 3·3 per cent, bringing the total number of VAT-registered businesses in Derbyshire to 22,770.

  Injury incidence rates1 for injuries to employees and the self employed in the construction industry2 in Great Britain

  Year

  Employees

  Self employed

  Fatal and major Rate per thousand3

  All reported Rate per thousand4

  Fatal and major Rate per thousand3

  All reported Rate per thousand4

  1979

  7

  31·5

  7

  7

  1980

  7

  30·0

  7

  7

  1981

  1·7

  41·9

  0·1

  7

  1982

  2·0

  40·7

  7

  7

  1983

  2·2

  7

  0·2

  7

  1984

  2·4

  7

  0·2

  7

  1985

  2·4

  7

  0·3

  7

  1986–875

  2·7

  19·4

  0·9

  2·3

  1987–885

  2·8

  19·3

  1·0

  2·4

  1988–895 6

  2·8

  18·4

  1·3

  2·9

  1 Rates based on injuries reported to Health and Safety Executive's Factory and Agricultural Inspectorates and all other relevant enforcing authorities, under the Notification of Accidents and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations, 1980 (NADOR) for 1981 to 1985 and the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations, 1985 (RIDDOR) for later years. Rates for the years 1979–80 are based on reports made under various legislation to the Health and Safety Executive's Inspectorate only.

  2 The construction industry is defined as Standard Industrial Classification 1980 Division 5.

  3 The major injury category was first introduced by NADOR. The definition of a major injury was widened with the introduction of RIDDOR on 1 April 1986.

  4 Includes injuries causing incapacity for work for more than three days. For the years 1979–80 and from 1986–87 over three day injury data is based on employers' reports to enforcing authorities. For 1981–82 the over three day injury data is based on industrial injury benefit claims.

  5 Year beginning 1 April.

  6 Provisional.

  7 Not available.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Trade Deficit
  Mr. Orme
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the balance of trade deficit.

  Mr. Major
  The deficit on visible trade in the third quarter of 1989 was £6·8 billion. In that quarter exports, in both value and volume terms, were at an all-time high. Excluding oil and erratics, export volumes were 8½ per cent. higher than in the third quarter of 1988. Imports in the third quarter of 1989 were also at an all-time high, but import growth has slowed down significantly since last year. As domestic demand slows further, import growth should also continue to decline.

  Enterprise Allowance Scheme
  Mr. Oppenheim
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many people in Derbyshire were benefiting from the enterprise allowance scheme in the latest year for which figures are available.

  Mr. Eggar
  In the financial year April 1988 to March 1989 a total of 1,555 people joined the enterprise allowance scheme in Derbyshire.

  Construction Industry (Injuries)
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many occupational injuries per 1,000 workers were reported in the construction industry(a) in total, (b) for employees, (c) for the self-employed and (d) others for each year from 1979 to 1988·89.

  Mr. Nicholls
  [holding answer 2 November 1989]: The available information is given in the table. Figures for the periods 1979–80, 1981 to 1985 and 1986 onwards are not comparable owing to changes in reporting arrangements. Figures for 1988–89 are provisional.

  Crown Estates (Revenue)
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the revenue raised by the Crown Estate for the last five years by sea area for(a) dredging licences and (b) mooring rights.

  Mr. Major
  Statistics on dredging activity are collated by main dredging area. The revenues raised by the Crown Estate from licences to dredge aggregate for the last five calendar years were:

  £ million

  1984

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  East Coast

  0·9

  1·1

  1·3

  1·5

  1·9

  Thames Estuary

  0·4

  0·4

  0·4

  0·4

  0·5

  South Coast

  0·5

  0·6

  0·6

  0·7

  0·9

  Solent and Spithead

  0·1

  0·1

  0·1

  0·1

  0·1

  Bristol channel

  0·3

  0·3

  0·4

  0·5

  0·5

  Liverpool Bay and River Mersey

  0·05

  0·05

  0·06

  0·07

  0·07

  359
  Statistics for the revenue from mooring rights for the last five years are not readily available on the same basis. However, revenue for the 1988–89 financial year by main area of activity was:

  £ (thousands)

  East Coast of England

  10·2

  South Coast of England

  96·8

  West Coast of England (with Wales and Northern Ireland)

  8·3

  Scottish Waters

  46·8

  Child Care
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what rules he applies to parents receiving vouchers or allowances in lieu of child care facilities not provided by employers; and what concessions he makes to those employers who do.

  Mr. Lilley
  Under the normal business tax rules, employers qualify for tax relief on day-to-day expenditure on all forms of child care provision for their employees' children, including cash allowances and vouchers. Tax relief is also available for certain capital expenditure on child care facilities. Cash allowances or vouchers given by employers to employees in lieu of child care facilities are taxable under the normal income tax rules.

  Workplace Nurseries
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider a change in the law in relation to the taxation of workplace nurseries and child care subsidies.

  Mr. Lilley
  Proposals to change the tax law in relation to workplace nurseries and child care subsidies were considered and rejected by the House during the passage of this year's Finance Bill. My right hon. Friend has no plans to reopen this matter.

  Emergency Communications
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the liaison arrangements between the Central Office of Information and United States civilian or military authorities on the proposed content of emergency radio and television broadcasts in the United Kingdom during a pre-war crisis.

  Mr. Ryder
  No liaison arrangements have been made between the Central Office of Information and United States civilian or military authorities on the proposed content of emergency radio and television broadcasts in the United Kingdom during a pre-war crisis.

  Benjamin Report
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will arrange for a copy of the report by Professor Bernard Benjamin, "Accessibility and other problems relating to statistics used by social scientists", to be placed in the Library.

  Mr. Lilley
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) on 31 October at cols.153–54. I understand that the report is available on request from the Economic and Social Research Council.

  Pensions
  Mr. Neil Thorne
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider removing the attributable forces family pension from taxation.

  Mr. Lilley
  [holding answer 27 October 1989]: I have no plans to do so.

  War Widows
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his Department's definition of a war widow for the purpose of taxation.

  Mr. Lilley
  [holding answer 27 October 1989]: There is no definition of war widow in tax legislation. Section 318 of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 defines the pensions and allowances, generally regarded as war widows' pensions, which are not treated as income for tax purposes.

  Rugby Players (Tax)
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his reply of 25 October to the hon. Member for Wakefield, if he will specify the information that is available about income tax paid by rugby union players in respect of relevant earnings.

  Mr. Lilley
  [holding answer 30 October 1989]: For the reason given in my reply of 25 October to the hon. Member at column 451, no such information is available.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  County Courts
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Attorney-General what plans he has to make county courts more accessible for disabled people, especially in terms of physical accessibility, provision for the hard of hearing, clarity of signposting.

  The Attorney-General
  New and adapted or reconditioned court buildings provide, to the maximum possible extent, all the facilities required for the disabled, including lifts and ramps as necessary. Other buildings have had improvements incorporated where this has been feasible. New court rooms are designed to high acoustic standards which benefit the hard of hearing. Internal signs are made as clear as possible. Court staff are always available to assist disabled court users.

  Court Fees
  Mr. Archer
  To ask the Attorney-General how much money was raised by county court fees, respectively, in the years 1986–87, 1987–88 and 1988–89; how much money was spent on county court services, other than on judicial salaries in each of these years; how much money was raised in High Court fees in each of these years; and how much money was spent on High Court services other than on judicial salaries in each of these years.

  The Attorney-General
  The income raised by fees in the county court and the Supreme Court (High Court and Court of Appeal) respectively for the last three years, and the total cost of the civil courts, exclusive of judicial costs,
  361
  are shown in the table. It is not possible to give a precise breakdown of costs between the Supreme Court and county courts. Civil business is treated as a single entity and many of the components of the overall figure, for example administrative overheads, are not broken down in this way. However, an estimate based on 1988–89 figures suggests that 75 per cent, of the cost is attributable to county court and district registry services, and 25 per cent. to other Supreme Court services.

  £ millions

  1986–87

  1987–88

  1988–89

  County Court fees

  91·5

  96·4

  97·4

  Supreme Court fees

  43·2

  47·0

  52·5

  Total fees

  134·7

  143·4

  149·9

  Non judicial cost of civil courts

  121·1

  133·5

  143·9

  Excess of fees over cost

  13·6

  9·9

  6·0

  County Courts (Civil Justice Review)
  Mr. Archer
  To ask the Attorney-General what additional staff accommodation, judges and registrars will be made available to the county court in order to implement the recommendations of the civil justice review.

  The Attorney-General
  Implementation of the civil justice review recommendations are to be phased over a period of five years. Resources for the first stages of the programme are currently the subject of public expenditure survey negotiations.

  Legal Aid
  Mr. Archer
  To ask the Attorney-General what was the percentage increase(a) in legal aid fees and (b) in total costs per legal aid certificate in each year since 1979.

  The Attorney-General
  (a) No rates are prescribed for non-matrimonial civil cases. From 1 October 1988 a system of prescribed rates and fees was introduced for legally aided matrimonial work, which were increased by 6 per cent, with effect from 1 April 1989. Rates for non-matrimonial legal aid work remain in the discretion of individual court taxing officers.

  For criminal cases prior to 1982 there were no prescribed rates for remuneration. With effect from 1 October 1982 rates were prescribed by regulations. Those rates have been increased by the following percentages:

  Solicitors per cent.

  Counsel per cent.

  1983–84

  5

  5

  1984–85

  4·5

  4·5

  1985–86

  4

  4

  1986–87

  15

  5

  26·5

  5

  1987–88

  6

  5

  1988–89

  5·4

  5·2

  1 with effect from 1 April 1986

  2 with effect from 1 October 1986

  (b) For civil cases the percentage increase in total costs per legal aid certificate in each year since 1979 was:

  per cent.

  1979–80

  18·44

  1980–81

  14·91

  1981–82

  26·25

  1982–83

  17·89

  362

  per cent.

  1983–84

  14·18

  1984–85

  10·36

  1985–86

  10·16

  1986–87

  10·22

  1987–88

  8·99

  1988–89

  16·22

  For criminal proceedings in magistrates courts the percentage increase in total costs per legal certificate in each year since 1979 was:

  Per cent.

  1979–80

  19·08

  1980–81

  23·50

  1981–82

  5·98

  1982–83

  6·93

  1983–84

  7·73

  1984–85

  8·85

  1985–86

  7·46

  1986–87

  11·54

  1987–88

  14·95

  1988–89

  10·06

  For criminal proceedings in the higher courts information is available only from 1985. The percentage increase in total costs per legal aid order for solicitors from that year was:

  Per cent.

  1985–86

  9·79

  1986–87

  13·53

  1987–88

  11·32

  1988–89

  4·40

  No information is available on counsel's fees by reference to legal aid orders for the higher courts.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Naturalisation
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for naturalisation were made to the immigration and nationality department in(a) 1987, (b) 1988 and (c) the current year to date.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The number of applications for naturalisation received in caseworking groups was as follows:

  Number

  1987

  22,696

  1988

  24,632

  1989

  46,515

  Because of delays in the initial processing of applications, the figures for the years in question may include applications received in a previous year.

  Citizenship
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the number of applications received for registration for citizenship by 31 December 1987.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The number of applications for registration for citizenship received in caseworking groups
  363
  during 1987 was 57,322. In addition, there were a substantial number of applications for registration received in the Home Office which were received in groups after 1987. A figure for this is not currently available.

  Animal Experiments
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make it his policy not to grant any licence under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 to Perrycroft Lodge kennels in Malvern.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Applications for licences and certificates under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 are considered individually on their merits but it is not our practice to comment on particular applications.

  Game Licences
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has any plans to review the system of game licences in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  We have no plans to review the system of game licences.

  Deportations
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many persons have been deported from the United Kingdom in each of the past 10 years(a) for being illegal immigrants and (b) for other reasons.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Information on persons removed from the United Kingdom between 1987 and 1988 under the enforcement powers in the Immigration Act 1971, either as illegal entrants or under the deportation process, is published in tables 23 and 24 of "Control of Immigration: Statistics, United Kingdom 1988" (Cm. 726), a copy of which is in the Library.

  Drug Addicts
  Mr. Conway
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will advise chief constables to make available police pathology lab photographs of the bodies of dead drug addicts to schools and parents in order to show the effects more realistically.

  Mr. Waddington
  We have no plans to give such advice. Many schools have already introduced a programme of drugs education and all schools will be required to do so under the national curriculum.

  HM Prison, Shrewsbury
  Mr. Conway
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the causes for delay in selling houses owned by his Department in Shrewsbury to prison officers based at Her Majesty's prison, Shrewsbury; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waddington
  Since the introduction of the discount sale scheme of quarters to prison officers in June 1987, over 4,500 applications have been received in England and Wales. Approximately 3,400–75 per cent.—sales have so far been completed, with a further 500 accepted offers currently with solicitors.
  364
  Inevitably there have been some delays in dealing with difficult cases and at Shrewsbury there have been particular problems with four properties in The Dana opposite the prison. A detailed survey was needed to determine the areas of land to be sold with each property and the question of rights of way and inclusion of associated lock-up garages had also to be considered. The deeds, dating back to 1598, were rather obscure and had to be investigated by the Treasury Solicitor to establish proper title.

  The delay in these cases is regretted but the Treasury Solicitor is in possession of all necessary deeds and documents, together with detailed plans for conveyance purposes, and is reaching completions as quickly as possible.

  Criminal Injuries Compensation Board
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the average time taken by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board between the receiving of a claim and bringing the matter to settlement; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. John Patten
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Shersby) on 17 October 1989 at column 16.

  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is satisfied with the efficiency and staffing of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.

  Mr. John Patten
  To deal with the steep rise in the number of applications the board's complement has been increased from 220 in 1987 to 320 now and a new office has been opened in Glasgow. We are in close touch with the chairman of the board about ways of improving efficiency at the board and tackling the problems of delay and backlog caused by the increased workload.

  Child Abuse
  Mrs. Dun woody
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will instigate a report to discover the sociological and psychological backgrounds on child abusers;

  (2) if he will instigate a research project to discover how widespread the problem of child abuse is within the community; and what are the effects upon the individual child, the family unit concerned, and the sentencing and removal of the abuser.

  Mr. John Patten
  A table listing recent, current and planned research into child abuse funded by all Government Departments was placed in the Library in May this year. This covers the period 1989–90 and includes projects on the perpetrators, prevalence and effects of child abuse to be undertaken mainly by health departments. The Home Office is undertaking research into prevention and evidential matters. We are also preparing for publication a statistical study of criminal proceedings for offences against children, taking in sentencing. It is too early to say what projects Departments will be including in 1990–91 research programmes.

  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will set up a national prevention programme against child abuse.
  365
  Mr. John Patten
  The Government are supporting a number of preventive measures. An important factor in preventing child abuse is to ensure that children are taught how to keep themselves safe, and to this end a set of guidelines for parents, drawn up by the organisation KIDSCAPE, has been incorporated in the Home Office crime prevention handbook "Practical Ways to Crack Crime". Three million copies of the handbook have been distributed.

  The Department of Health provides a financial contribution towards the administrative expenses of a number of national voluntary organisations which campaign for the prevention of child abuse, for example the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and Childline. The Department of Health also funded the production of a training package by the Open university which was launched earlier this year and which aims to provide people who have had little or no knowledge of the subject of child abuse, as well as professionals and voluntary workers, with greater awareness and recognition skills.

  Broadwater Farm (Police Raid)
  Mr. Bernie Grant
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis as to how many police officers and other personnel were used in the raid on Broadwater Farm by the police on Friday 29 September; if any armed police officers were used; how many press, radio and television journalists accompanied the police, and representing which newspapers, radio and television stations; how many observers accompanied the police and from where; what briefing was given to the observers and the press by the police; and where and for how long the observers and the press were kept incommunicado.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  I understand from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis that 229 police officers were involved in the operation but none of them was armed. Eight media organisations accompanied the police. There were four personnel (one reporter, three crew) from Independent Television News, three (one reporter, two crew) from BBC News, two (one reporter, one photographer) from the Press Association, and one journalist from each of The Mail on Sunday, BBC Radio News, the News of the World, the Tottenham and Hornsey Journal and Independent Radio News. Four observers accompanied the police, of which three were members of the Haringey police liaison committee and the fourth was the director of criminal justice studies at Reading university. All the observers and the media representatives were present throughout the entire main briefing given to the police officers at the police training centre at Hendon. They were incommunicado from the time they joined police early on the morning of 29 September until about 5 pm that afternoon when the operation commenced.

  Attempted Suicides
  Mr. Bermingham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many attempted suicides have been recorded in prison establishments in England and Wales during 1989; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waddington
  We have received reports of 463 apparent suicide attempts made by inmates in prison service custody so far during 1989.

  Suicides
  Mr. Bermingham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many suicides in England and Wales have occurred during 1989(a) at prison establishments and (b) in remand establishments; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waddington
  At the end of October 1989 verdicts of suicide had been returned on 20 inmates who died in prison establishments in England and Wales during 1989. Of these inmates eight were on remand. Inquests have yet to be held on 13 other inmates, of whom 10 were on remand, who have died in prison department custody during this period and whose deaths are thought to have been suicides.

  Prisoners
  Mr. Bermingham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the sentence and remand prison population for England and Wales for the latest date available, and for each year since 1979; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waddington
  The latest available information is that in September 1989, 10,536 remand, 222 non-criminal and 37,851 sentenced prisoners were held in prison service establishments. A further 30, most of whom were on remand, were held in police cells. Average populations in each of the last 11 years were published in table 1.5 of "Prison Statistics England and Wales 1988" (Cm 825), a copy of which is in the Library.

  Acid House Parties
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many arrests for drug-related offences have been made to date at events described as acid house parties;

  (2) what information he has on which drugs and in what quantities have been seized by police at events described as acid house parties.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  This information is not collected centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Drugs
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people in each of the last 10 years have been fined for drug-related offences.

  Mr. John Patten
  The information is published in table 1.1 of Home Office statistical bulletin issue 30/89, "Statistics of the Misuse of Drugs: Seizures and Offenders Dealt With, United Kingdom, 1988", a copy of which is in the Library.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were convicted for unlawful possession of(a) cannabis, (b) cocaine, (c) LSD, (d) heroin, and (e) crack for each year from 1979.

  Mr. John Patten
  Information on the number of persons found guilty, cautioned or dealt with by compounding for unlawful possession of cannabis, cocaine, LSD and heroin for each year since 1979 is
  367
  published in tables S2.29, S2.17, S2.23 and S2.21 respectively of "Statistics of the Misuse of Drugs: Seizures and Offenders Dealt With, United Kingdom, 1988— Supplementary tables", a copy of which is in the Library. Corresponding tables S2.28, S2.16, S2.22 and S2.20 give the number of persons found guilty in 1988. Crack offences are included in those for cocaine.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the numbers of registered addicts in the United Kingdom for each year from 1979.

  Mr. Waddington
  There is no system of registration of addicts. Information on the numbers of addicts notified to the chief medical officer at the Home Office in the years 1979 to 1988 was published in Statistical Bulletin issue 13/89 "Statistics of drug addicts notified to the Home Office, United Kingdom, 1988", a copy of which is in the Library.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has on the current street price of crack.

  Mr. Waddington
  Information from the national drugs intelligence unit suggests that the street price of crack is in the region of £20 to £25 for a piece of about 0·2gs.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has on the levels of addiction of hard drugs in(a) West Germany, (b) France, (c) Netherlands, (d) Switzerland, (e) Spain, (f Italy, (g) Belgium, and (h) the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Waddington
  Information about the numbers of drug addicts notified to the Home Office in 1988 was published in Home Office statistical bulletin issue 13/89, "Statistics of Drug Addicts Notified to the Home Office, United Kingdom, 1988," a copy of which is in the Library. In addition, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, in its report "Aids and Drug Misuse part 1," estimated that there might have been between 75,000 and 150,000 misusers of notified drugs in the United Kingdom during 1986, together with as many again (excluding cannabis users) who are using a variety of non-notifiable drugs (such as amphetamines) on an experimental or occasional basis. Comparable information about addiction levels in other European countries is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has on the numbers of young people aged 16 or under, arrested or cautioned for possession of drugs.

  Mr. Waddington
  The number of persons aged 16 or under dealt with in the United Kingdom in 1988 for unlawful possession of drugs was 831. This includes persons dealt with at court and cautioned, and cases where other action (such as informal warnings and no further action) was taken. There is likely to be under-recording of persons in the last group.

  Mr. Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has on the use of the drug ectasy in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Waddington
  MDMA, known as "ecstasy", has been a controlled drug since 1977. Seizures of MDMA 368
  have increased in recent years but still remain small compared to those of drugs such as heroin, cocaine, amphetamines and cannabis. Informaton from the forensic science service indicates that some 90 MDMA seizures were analysed in 1988.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the average sentence given for(a) unlawful possession and (b) possession with intent to supply drugs.

  Mr. Waddington
  The information is published in table S2.6 of "Statistics of the Misuse of Drugs: Seizures and Offenders Dealt With, United Kingdom, 1988— Supplementary tables", a copy of which is in the Library.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the weight of the seizures of(a) cannabis, (b) cocaine, (c) LSD, (d) heroin and (e) crack for each year from 1979.

  Mr. Waddington
  The information is published in tables 2.4 and 2.5 of Home Office statistical bulletin issue 30/89, "Statistics of the Misuse of Drugs: Seizures and Offenders Dealt With, United Kingdom, 1988", a copy of which is in the Library. Crack seizures are included in cocaine seizures.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of prison suicides, is among those inmates serving sentences for drug-related offences.

  Mr. Waddington
  The table gives the figures for inmates held in prison establishments in England and Wales in each of the last five years.

  Total suicides1

  Suicides by sentenced inmates1

  Suicides by inmates serving sentences for drug related offences1

  1984

  23

  11

  1

  1985

  23

  9

  —

  1986

  17

  5

  —

  1987

  42

  14

  2

  1988

  30

  11

  2

  1989

  220

  212

  21

  1 The table gives the number of deaths for which suicide verdicts were returned at the inquest.

  2 Inquests have yet to be held on 13 other inmates who have died in 1989 and whose deaths are thought to have been suicides. Of these two were serving sentences for drug related offences.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of the gaol population of the United Kingdom is in detention for(a) drug and (b) cannabis-related offences.

  Mr. Waddington
  The latest readily available information was published in table 1(b) of "Prison statistics England and Wales 1988" (Cm 825), a copy of which is in the Library.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has any plans to seek powers for the police to be able to apply for a court order to allow them access to information about a suspected drug dealer's tax affairs.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  No. Courts already have powers under sections 27 and 30 of the Drug Trafficking Offences
  369
  Act 1986 to make an order authorising the police to gain access to information about the tax affairs of any person who is suspected of involvement in drug trafficking.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is able to estimate per year(a) the approximate levels of consumption in the United Kingdom of cannabis, cocaine, LSD, heroin and crack and (b) the total value of each of these drugs.

  Mr. Waddington
  No. But information on seizures of these drugs is published annually by the Home Office.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is able to estimate the number of police officers in the United Kingdom who are solely engaged in combating crime from drug-related offences.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  We estimate that by the end of 1988 a total of 1,323 police officers were solely engaged in the investigation of drug-related offences at force and regional level in England and Wales. Twenty posts from the 1989–90 manpower programme have been allocated to regional crime squad drugs wings.

  In addition, very many police officers at force and crime squad level will contribute to the prevention and investigation of drug-related offences in the course of their duties.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is able to give an estimation of the cost per year of prosecuting and convicting individuals accused of drug-related offences.

  Mr. Waddington
  No. But information on persons dealt with for drug offences is published annually by the Home Office.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is considering the greater use of confiscation orders for drug trafficking convictions.

  Mr. John Patten
  The Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 already provides that, when a person is convicted of a drug trafficking offence, the court must determine whether he has ever benefited from drug trafficking and, if he has, impose a confiscation order to deprive him of his proceeds.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will undertake a review of the penalties for drug-related offences.

  Mr. John Patten
  No. The courts have adequate powers to deal with drug-related offences. For the production, supply or possession with intent to supply a class A drug the maximum penalty is life imprisonment; for class B drugs, it is 14 years and five years for class C drugs. Sentencing is a matter for the courts and the Court of Appeal has given guidance on sentencing drug offences.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his Department collects regular information on the street prices of drugs; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waddington
  No. But the national drugs intelligence unit collates information on the approximate street prices provided by police forces for intelligence purposes.

  Crack
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the first seizure of crack was made in the United Kingdom; and how much has been seized to date.

  Mr. Waddington
  The first seizure of crack recorded by the national drugs intelligence unit was in 1986, although it is possible that earlier seizures were made but reported as of cocaine. The total numbers of seizures of crack recorded so far are as follows:

  Number

  1986

  5

  1987

  12

  1988

  27

  19891

  75

  1 January to September.

  Kurdish People
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Kurdish asylum seekers have been detained, and for what period, since 1 January.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  [holding answer 27 October 1989]: The information is not available in the form requested. Of approximately 3,900 Turkish nationals who have claimed asylum on arrival in the United Kingdom since 1 January some 300 have been detained at some time, for periods ranging from one day to five months. On 26 October, four Turkish asylum seekers, one of whom arrived in May and three in June, remained in detention, their applications for asylum having been considered and refused. On the same date two other Turkish nationals who were being treated as illegal entrants and were detained had applied for asylum. One had been in prison—following a criminal conviction, the other was detained in September 1989.

  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Kurdish people from Turkey have arrived at Heathrow airport and then returned to Turkey without seeking entry to Britain since 1 January.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  [holding answer 27 October 1989]: Information on passengers subject to control who seek leave to enter is maintained by nationality not ethnic or religious origin. There are no records of passengers who do not seek leave to enter, for example because they are in direct transit. Up to 26 October a total of 232 Turkish asylum seekers had departed voluntarily without awaiting the outcome of their applications.

  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what date Siho Iyiguven arrived in Britain; for what periods he was detained; how many representations were received on his behalf; who took the decision to remove him; whether his Department will pay for the return of his body to Turkey; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  [holding answer 27 October 1989]: Mr. Siho Iyiguven arrived in Britain on 2 May 1989. He was detained on 22 August for one night and on 4 October until the fire on 5 October which led to his death. Representations were received on his behalf on five occasions. The decision that he did not qualify for asylum

  371
  in this country was taken in the refugee section of the immigration and nationality department and removal directions were issued by the immigration service. The inquest into Mr. Iyiguven's death has been adjourned and I understand that his next of kin have yet to decide what arrangements to make for his remains.

  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the total number of Kurdish asylum seekers from Turkey who have arrived in Britain since 1 January; and how many have(a) made voluntary departures, (b) been given exceptional leave to remain, (c) been granted asylum and (d) been removed to Turkey.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  [holding answer 27 October 1989]: Immigration statistics do not record ethnic origins of asylum seekers. From 1 January until 25 October some 3,900 Turkish nationals had applied for asylum on arrival (a) 232 had made voluntary departures, (b) 270 had been given exceptional leave to enter, (c) 75 had been granted asylum and (d) 38 had been removed to Turkey.

  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations from human rights and church organisations he has received concerning the treatment of Kurdish asylum seekers since 1 January; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  [holding answer 27 October 1989]: Representations have been received from various individuals and organisations about general and specific issues concerned with Turkish asylum seekers.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Polish Economic Delegations
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if visits by Polish economic delegations which include seminars at the Adam Smith Institute are being subsidised by his Department.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  No. But we have funded a seminar on privatisation in Warsaw organised by the Adam Smith Institute. Polish economists, whose visits here are financed by us, sometimes have talks with the institute.

  Cambodia
  Sir Michael McNair-Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the Government's policy towards the continuing membership at the United Nations of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maude
  I refer my hon. Friend to the reply my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs gave to the hon. Member for Stockton, South (Mr. Devlin) on 25 October at column 491.

  Political Groups (EC)
  Mr. Meale
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will tabulate in the Official Report the amounts paid, in 1988 pound sterling equivalents, to each of the political groups of the European Parliament together with an indication of any allocated expenditure within the totals and the total expected expenditure in 1990.
  372
  Mr. Maude
  [pursuant to his reply, 24 October 1989, c. 402]: The amounts paid in 1988 to the political groups of the European Parliament were:

  ECU

  £(at1·5057 ecu = £l)

  Contribution to administrative/secretarial operating expenses of the political groups and non-attached members

  6,851,970

  4,550,687

  European Information Campaign (information activities on the role and work of the European Parliament, its political groups and their members)

  27,700,000

  18,396,758

  Purchase of data-processing equipment

  800,000

  531,314

  Hire and maintenance of equipment

  330,000

  219,167

  Other activities

  3,496,100

  2,321,910

  No breakdown of the payments to each political group is available.

ENERGY

  Correspondence
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy (1) what percentage of letters from hon. Members to his Department received a reply(a) in under four weeks, (b) within four to six weeks, (c) within six to eight weeks and (d) over eight weeks, in each of the last three years;

  (2) what information his Department has on the length of time taken to respond to letters from hon. Members.

  Mr. Wakeham
  The Department's general objective: is to answer letters from hon. Members within three weeks of receipt. At present the Department has no letters awaiting a reply which have been outstanding for longer than that period. The specific information requested by the hon. Member can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Risley Programmes
  Mr. Butler
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on the progress of the Chardis, Thor and Supersomite programes at Risley.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  This is an operational matter for the UKAEA and I will ask the chairman to write to the hon. Member.

  Reactors (Privatisation)
  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a further statement on tier Majesty's Government's policy on the privatisation of advanced gas-cooled reactors and the pressurised water reactors under construction.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  I refer the hon. Member to the statement made to the House on 24 July by my right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State for Energy at columns 744–45.

  Electricity Industry
  Mr. David Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what information he has on the competitive structure of the United Kingdom electricity industry and other member nations of the EEC.
  373
  Mr. Michael Spicer
  The electricity industries of EC member states show a variety of structures. Some are dominated by a single state monopoly; in others, dominant generators play a significant role in transmission; regional monopolies in supply are also common. In England and Wales, the Government are putting in place a competitive structure. Use of the distribution and transmission system will be open to all on published and regulated terms. There will be competition between generators from day one. And the market in supply to customers will be progressively opened up to competition. There will be no permanent monopolies in supply or generation.

  Electricity Privatisation
  Mr. Lofthouse
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what studies he has carried out regarding the effect of the privatisation of the electricity supply industry on British Coal; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  Since it has responsibility for the coal industry, my Department naturally monitors closely and continuously the implications for British Coal of electricity privatisation.

  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on European Community investigations into the nuclear provisions in the electricity privatisation.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  The Government have kept the EC Commission fully informed of their proposals relating to the privatisation of the electricity industry. The dialogue is continuing. We are confident that the arrangements for the new industry will be consistent with the United Kingdom's Community obligations.

  Wylfa B Power Station
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will cancel plans for the public inquiry into the proposed Wylfa B pressurised water reactor station.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  My right hon. Friend has received formal objections to the CEGB's application for his consent to construct a PWR nuclear power station at Wylfa from both the Isle of Anglesey borough council and the Gwynedd county council. He is therefore obliged to arrange a public inquiry pursuant to section 34(1) of the Electricity Act 1957.

  Hinkley Point C Power Station
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will cancel plans to build the Hinkley Point C pressurised water reactor station.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  The CEGB's application for my right hon. Friend's consent to construct a PWR nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C is currently the subject of a public inquiry.

  My right hon. Friend will wish to consider the inspector's report before deciding whether or not to grant his consent to the CEGB's application.

  The construction of new nuclear power stations in England and Wales is a matter for the CEGB.

  Coal Productivity (North-East)
  Mr. Devlin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy whether he will give the latest figures for productivity for the north-east coal field; and if he will give those for 1985.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  Productivity in the north-east coalfield rose from 2·23 tonnes per man shift in 1985–86 to 3–82 tonnes in 1988–89.

  Nato Exercises
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what is the extent of involvement by his Department in NATO exercise Wintex/Cimex 1987 and exercise Wintex/Cimex 1989; what is the number of staff engaged in the exercise planning process and in the exercises themselves; and what are the ranks and responsibilities of the staff involved.

  Mr. Wakeham
  My Department plays its part in testing those procedures in which we have an interest. Staff participate as required; it would not be appropriate for me to supply the detail required.

  Nuclear Power
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on the annual load factor achieved by United Kingdom nuclear power plants.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  The average load factor of the Central Electricity Generating Board's nuclear power stations for the first six months of the current financial year was 60·6 per cent. The equivalent load factor for the South of Scotland Electricity Board's nuclear power stations was 62·8 per cent.

  Fast Breeder Reactors
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on the future of the fast breeder reactor programme.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  I refer the hon. Member to the statement made to the House on 21 July last year by my right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State for Energy at column 1288.

  Magnox Plants
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy when he now expects to be able to announce the estimated decommissioning costs for the Magnox nuclear power plants.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Members for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) and for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) on 24 October at column 381.

DEFENCE

  Armed Services (Privatisation)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has any plans to evaluate the benefits to the efficiency of national defence of privatisation of the armed services.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  No.

  B2
  Mr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has received any request from the United States administration to base the B2 stealth nuclear bomber in the United Kingdom, under the updated 1948 Anglo-American military air bases agreement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  No.

  Collisions
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list in the Official Report all instances of Royal Navy surface or submarine vessels in collision, or otherwise in contact, with commercial vessels in the Irish sea since May 1979.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  In the case of surface vessels, this information is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost and effort. Incidents in which Royal Navy submarines have been in collision with surface vessels or their gear since 1 January 1980, in or around the Irish sea, are as follows:

  Date

  17 November 1981

  FV Sapphire

  Clyde Area

  18 April 1982

  FV Sharelga

  Irish Sea

  10 March 1983

  FV Targuen

  Irish Sea

  11 August 1984

  FV Huntress

  Clyde Area

  6 December 1987

  FV Prevail

  North Channel

  2 July 1988

  Yacht Dalriada

  North Channel

  16 July 1988

  Yacht Drum FV Brilliant

  North Channel

  27 October 1988

  Star

  Sound of Bute

  28 June 1989

  FV Huntress

  Clyde Area

  12 September 1989

  FV Contester

  Irish Sea

  Contester (Incident)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the incident in the Irish sea off Skerries, county Dublin, involving the trawler Contester and a Royal Navy vessel; and what communications have been received by Her Majesty's ambassador in Dublin over this incident.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  At 1830 hours on 12 September 1989, some 25 miles north-east of Dublin, a communications buoy being towed by a Royal Navy submarine became caught in the nets of the Irish fishing vessel Contester; the buoy wire parted shortly afterwards. The submarine came to periscope depth, made a very careful visual examination of Contester, which had been monitored on sonar throughout, and listened on radio circuits to ensure that all was well. Once it had been established that neither Contester nor any of the other fishing vessels in sight were in any difficulty, the submarine proceeded on her way.

  The British embassy in Dublin has been in contact with the relevant authorities in the Irish Republic and has also received letters from interested organisations and individuals in connection with this incident.

  Australian Service Men (Compensation)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if the Australian Government have sought any financial compensation from the United Kingdom to offset 376
  payments they agreed to make, on 4 September, to Australian service men contaminated by radioactive fallout from United Kingdom nuclear weapons tested in Australia in the 1950s.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  We have not received any such request from the Australian Federal Government, nor would we expect to do so.

  Hydrographer's Department (Sales)
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will authorise the Hydrographer's department to reproduce old charts, pilots and fleet review anchor plans for sale to the general public.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The hydrographic office already makes photocopies of old charts and documents available to researchers and other individual inquirers for specific purposes. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence informed the House on 18 October at column 155 that the hydrographic office is planned to become a defence support agency from 1 April 1990.I hope that, as such an agency, the office would more easily pursue commercially viable opportunities for wider sales of reproductions of the historic collections in its archives.

  Nuclear Tests (Safety)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will seek advice from the Health and Safety Executive under section 11 (5)(b) of the Health and Safety at Work, Etc. Act 1974 as to the health of the United Kingdom participants in the British nuclear weapons test programme 1952–67.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  With regard to the health of United Kingdom participants in the British nuclear weapons test programme, we are completely satisfied with the independent and expert advice already being provided by the national Radiological Protection Board, which is engaged in an ongoing study and is free to consult whichever experts it sees fit. It is not for the Government to dictate the conduct or methodology of that study. Furthermore, the Health and Safety at Work Act did not come into force until 1974 and therefore the Health and Safety Executive had no direct involvement in the trials. It would, therefore, seem inappropriate to consult them and the NRPB has not advised us to do so.

  Open Skies
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the open skies aerial surveillance and reconnaissance proposals for cooperation between NATO and the Warsaw pact.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  As the May 1989 NATO summit declaration made clear, we consider President Bush's call for an open skies regime to be an important intitiative. It is currently the subject of study and consultations.

  Uniter
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the progress of the Uniter RAF telecom system; what was the original cost and target completion date; what are his current estimates; and if he will make a statement.
  377
  Mr. Alan Clark
  Uniter will provide the RAF with a new secure voice and data communications system to support the effective operation of a number of new equipments and systems coming into service in the next few years. Uniter stage 1, involving 12 improved United Kindom air defence ground environment stations, was commissioned and handed over to the RAF in December 1988. Stage 2, involving a further 48 sites, will come into service in the early 1990s.

  The equipment delivery programme for stage 2 is proceeding according to schedule. Some equipment costs have, however, increased; and greater than foreseen difficulties with the substantial works programme, combined with high cost escalation in recent years in the civil construction industry, have led to cost and timescale overruns for the programme as a whole. I am considering proposals to strengthen the management arrangements for the remainder of the programme in order to minimise the likelihood of further delays or cost increases.

  Red Arrows
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what factors are taken into consideration when deciding the annual programme of appearances at air displays for the Red Arrows; and if he will make a statement regarding next year's programme;

  (2) what representations he has received regarding the annual programme for the Red Arrows display team; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  To date, the Ministry of Defence has received nearly 200 requests for public appearances by the Red Arrows in 1990.

  At the end of each year, a Ministry of Defence committee considers all the requests received for appearances by the Red Arrows, and other RAF display teams and aircraft, at public events the following year. The main aims of RAF participation in such events are to create good public relations and to attract recruits into the service. With these aims in mind, the committee considers factors such as likely crowd size, expected media coverage, geographical location, whether repeat performances are being sought, and financial and practical considerations.

  The committee plans to meet in December 1989 to decide the programme for the Red Arrows, and the other RAF display teams and aircraft, for 1990.

  Weapons (Dismantlement)
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what investment in terms of finance and personnel his Department has made in arms control and disarmament verification in the sectors of(a) nuclear weapons dismantlement, (b) nuclear warhead dismantlement, (c) conventional weapons dismantlement and (d) chemical and biological weapons detection and dismantlement, in each year since 1979; and what has been for each year the proportion of the annual defence budget devoted to verification issues.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  [holding answer 2 November 1989]: Demands on the defence budget connected with arms control verification have been met from existing resources and are not accounted for separately. The information requested could therefore be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Nuclear Weapons
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has had any discussions or plans any future discussions with the defence Minister of any country not party to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty on the joint developments with the United Kingdom of stand-off air-launched nuclear weapons systems.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  As I have made clear on several occasions, discussions are taking place with both the United States and French Governments on procurement options for the possible replacement of WE 177 free-fall bomb.

  Army Presentation Team
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the Army presentation team started to give presentations on the British Army to invited audiences throughout the United Kingdom; and if he will state the dates and occasions of presentations by the Army presentation team on the British Army to invited audiences in the last 12 months.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The Army presentation team was established to explain the vital role of the Army, both regular and reserve, in the defence of the United Kingdom. The first presentation was given in Tunbridge Wells on 4 September 1989, since when further presentations have been given as follows:

  Date

  Canterbury

  5 September

  Guildford

  6 September

  Portsmouth

  11 September

  Bletchley

  13 September

  Shrivenham

  14 September

  Stirling

  26 September

  Glasgow

  27 September

  Galashiels

  28 September

  Harrow

  9 October

  Walthamstow

  11 October

  Marble Arch

  17 October

  Twickenham

  18 October

  Lewisham

  19 October

  Stoke-on-Trent

  31 October

  Shrewsbury

  1 November

  Wolverhampton

  2 November

  Presentations are open to all, and are publicised via the local media.

  Ambulances
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of his Department's ambulances are(a) in the United Kingdom and (b) overseas; and if he will estimate the normal requirements of the service in peacetime.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The armed forces have approximately 1,000 ambulances of various types in service in the United Kingdom and approximately 700 overseas. The services also maintain stocks of vehicles for use in the event of war, however details of such holdings are classified.

  The military requirement for ambulances in peacetime centres on the need to provide day-to-day emergency medical cover at service establishments and also the need to ensure that appropriate numbers of vehicles are available for training and exercises. The current size of the military ambulance fleet reflects this.

  Cambodia
  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assistance Her Majesty's Government are giving towards the military training of each of the factions contending for power in Cambodia.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin) on 30 October 1989 at column 43.

SCOTLAND

  Parliamentary Questions
  Mr. Alan Haselhurst
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the subjects on which he is not prepared to answer parliamentary questions.

  Mr. Rifkind
  No. I answer all questions which appear to be proper to my responsibilities.

  Land Renewal
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was(a) the total amount of expenditure on land renewal by the Scottish Development Agency in each of the years 1979–80 to 1988–89 inclusive and (b) the estimated expenditure on land renewal in 1989–90, 1990–91 and 1991–92, at current and constant prices.

  Mr. Lang
  This information is set out in the table and includes the agency's expenditure on urban renewal and environmental improvement generally. The Government's expenditure plans for the years beyond 1989–90 will be expenditure White Paper early in the New Year.

  £ millions

  Year

  Cash

  1988–89 prices

  1979–80

  24·9

  46·8

  1980–81

  31·6

  50·1

  1981–82

  24·0

  34·7

  1982–83

  30·7

  41·4

  1983–84

  30·3

  39·0

  1984–85

  36·4

  44·7

  1985–86

  41·2

  48·0

  1986–87

  44·1

  49·7

  1987–88

  44·9

  48·2

  1988–89

  46·5

  46·5

  11989–90

  47·7

  244·6

  1 Provisional.

  2 Estimated.

  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was(a) the total number of land renewal schemes started by the Scottish Development Agency in each of the years 1979–80 to 1988–89 inclusive and (b) the estimated number of schemes to be started in 1989–90, 1990–91 and 1991–92.

  Mr. Lang
  The information is set out in the following table. Wide variations in the agency's level of support for individual schemes makes it impossible to give realistic forecasts of the number of schemes which will receive assistance this year or in 1990–91. From 1991–92 onwards, this will of course be a matter for Scottish Enterprise.
  380

  Number of schemes started

  1979–80

  210

  1980–81

  70

  1981–82

  116

  1982–83

  448

  1983–84

  264

  1984–85

  173

  1985–86

  242

  1986–87

  287

  1987–88

  336

  1988–89

  364

  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total expenditure from the land renewal budget of the Scottish Development Agency on the Glasgow garden festival in each of the years 1985–86, 1986–87 and 1987–88.

  Mr. Lang
  The information is set out in the table. The table also shows expenditure on the festival in 1988–89.

  £ million

  Year

  Cash

  1988–89

  1985–86

  2·9

  3·4

  1986–87

  5·5

  6·2

  1987–88

  11·9

  12·8

  1988–89

  3·6

  3·6

  Public Rights of Way
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his policy as to whether the Countryside Commission for Scotland will be permitted to fund the erection of a structure which substantially altered the value of a right of way without a variation order being obtained.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 2 November 1989]: The Countryside Commission for Scotland operates in conformity with the powers and duties contained in the Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967. Under the Act, it is the duty of local planning authorities and not of the Commission to assert and protect public rights of way. Questions about the application and interpretation of this duty are matters for the courts to decide.

HEALTH

  Hospital Facilities (Closures)
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what contingency provisions he has made or is contemplating to avoid bed closures and other temporary closures of hospital facilities during Christmas and winter of the current year.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  It is for health authorities to decide how health services should be provided to meet local needs and priorities within the resources allocated by the Government.

  Ms. Gordon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many new district general hospitals have been built or approved in principle in the last 10 years; what was their size in area and in bed provision; and what is the population of the health districts they serve.
  381
  Mr. Freeman
  District general hospitals are normally developed on a phased basis, each phase or scheme being the subject of a separate approval in principle submission and construction contract. Information held centrally is not therefore in the form requested and could not be provided without incurring disproportionate expense. I have, however, placed in the Library of the House a list of 482 schemes costing over £1 million completed or approved in principle since 1 January 1980, giving the number of beds in each case. (There is some undercounting because(a) before 1986 information was only collected on schemes over £2 million and (b) central records for 1980–82 are incomplete). Information on the population of health districts is set out in OPCS Monitor PP1/89/1. However hospitals often treat patients from outside their own district boundaries.

  Elderly Patients
  Ms. Gordon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of acute hospital in-patients are over the age of 70 years.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  In the year ending March 1988, the latest year for which information is available centrally, 24 per cent, of acute patients treated were aged 65 years and over and 12 per cent, were 75 years and over.

  Maternity Units
  Mr. Conway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what are his Department's guidelines as to the number of births per annum in a district hospital maternity unit for it to be recognised as a training establishment.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  This is not a matter for the Department. The design and accreditation of training for these professional staff is the responsibility of the relevant statutory and professional bodies: the English National Board for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

  Shropshire Health Authority
  Mr. Conway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what increase in patient through put he expected to result from the opening of Telford district hospital at the time he decided to approve plans by the Shropshire health authority to close hospitals in the county and reduce the number of beds available within Shrewsbury.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Shropshire district health authority's consultation document "The future of health services in Shropshire" (January 1988) indicated that the number of in-patients treated across the district would increase in 1990 by about 2,000 a year.

  Child Abuse
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the special programmes for social workers that include training in handling specific cases of child abuse.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The Government introduced this year the training support programme (child care), which makes available to local authorities grants of 70 per cent, in support of expenditure of £10 million on training for social services staff working in the child care field.
  382
  Within the programme authorities were asked to give particular emphasis to training for staff handling child abuse and child sexual abuse. The programme will continue in the next financial year.

  Mrs. Dun woody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the definition of child abuse used by his Department.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The Department's guidance "Working Together" (1988), copies of which are available in the Library, describes child abuse as harm to children by parents, relatives, carers, acquaintances or strangers. Paragraph 5.31 of the guidance details definitions of neglect, physical abuse, emotional and sexual abuse. It states that these categories are not necessarily exhaustive nor mutually exclusive; and that all are encompassed within the term "child abuse".

  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what facilities are available for child abusers under the age of 12 years.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Child abusers under the age of 12 years are eligible for the full range of assessment, treatment and support services provided by local authority social services departments and health authorities. These may include for example placement in residential or foster care, including secure accommodation where appropriate, or provision of psychological and psychiatric services.

  Mr. Patchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children in South Yorkshire are currently on the child abuse register.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Child protection registers record those children who are the subject of an inter-agency plan for the protection of the child. The most recent published information about children and young persons on child protection registers is contained in "Survey of Children and Young Persons on Child Protection Registers Year Ended 31 March 1988". Copies are available in the Library.

  NHS Accommodation
  Mr. Rooker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the number of nurses and other hospital staff living in National Health Service accommodation in the west midlands.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The West Midlands regional health authority estimates that 3,852 nurses and 2,762 other staff were living in NHS accommodation on 23 October 1989.

  HIV-positive People
  Mr. Butler
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he intends to issue an update of the Cox estimate of the number of HIV-positive individuals in England and Wales as at the end of 1987; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The estimates of the Cox report are being considered by a group of experts. It is expected that the revised changes will be published early next year.

  Waltham Forest Health Authority
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make it his policy not to merge Waltham Forest district health authority with any other district health authority; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  There are no plans for a merger involving Waltham Forest district health authority.

  Health Authorities (Capital Charges)
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will publish updated estimates of the capital charges for health authorities under his White Paper proposals.

  Mr. Freeman
  Health authorities are making good progress in compiling asset registers in preparation for capital charging. Estimates of capital charges will be available when these have been completed and valued.

  Community Care
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list those district health authorities which are most advanced in the provision of care for the mentally ill in the community.

  Mr. Freeman
  Many district health authorities are responsible for examples of good practice in relation to health care for people with a mental illness being treated in the community and I referred to some in the written answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) on 13 July at columns 620–25. We do not have within the Department the information necessary to compile a definitive list of such districts.

  BMA
  Mr. Yeo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he last met the chairman of the British Medical Association; and what subject was discussed.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I met Dr. John Marks, the chairman of the British Medical Association, with some of his colleagues on 18 October when we discussed details of the implementation of the proposals in the White Paper, "Working For Patients". It was a friendly and useful meeting.

  Mr. Hunter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations he has recently made to, or received from, the British Medical Association.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Ministers met the British Medical Association on 18 October to discuss the implementation of our proposals in the White Paper "Working for Patients". We have also received a number of letters from the BMA about the details of our proposals.

  Treatment (Boundaries)
  Mr. Harry Green way
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to enable patients to cross district health authority boundaries for treatment in authority areas other than their own, where their own authority cannot provide the treatment concerned; and if he will make a statement.
  384
  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  GPs are free to refer patients to the consultant of their choice, and consultants are free to refuse or accept such referrals. Sometimes referrals are not accepted when they involve patients from outside the health authority boundary for whom the authority is not remunerated.

  Proposals in the White Paper "Working for Patients" will make it easier for patients to get treatment outside their home district if they choose to do so. Districts will ignore administrative boundaries in ensuring that a comprehensive range of high quality services is available to their population. Money will follow the patient so that all hospitals will have an incentive to offer their services widely. The most popular hospitals that attract patients by the quality of their care will be rewarded. The effect will be to give patients greater choice and better access to the highest standards of service.

  Hampstead Health Authority
  Sir Geoffrey Finsberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the spending per head of the population served by Hampstead district health authority in the year 1987–88; and what is the figure per head on the most nearly comparable basis for(a) England and (b) the United Kingdom as a whole.

  Mr. Freeman
  Figures for spending per head of resident population for 1987–88 are shown in the table:

  Revenue expenditure per head of resident population

  Hospital and community health services1

  £

  Hampstead District Health Authority

  592

  England—average for all district health authorities

  227

  United Kingdom

  238

  1 Includes hospital, community health, patient transport (ie. ambulance), blood transfusion and other services.

  Sources:

  (a) 1987–88 annual accounts of district health authorities in England and those of the analogous health authorities, boards and agencies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland—as submitted to the central health department in each country.

  (b)Mid-year estimates of populations—1987 (Office of Population Censuses and Surveys).

  Notes to the table

  1.Capital expenditure on hospital and community health services is excluded. Expenditure on family practitioner services (which cannot be strictly attributed to particular districts) and expenditure on personal social services (which in Northern Ireland is accounted for by Health and Social Services Boards) is also excluded.

  2.Significant variations in figures for spending per head of population at district level arise principally because:

  (a) people travel across district boundaries for treatment and resource allocations reflect the pattern of service provision locally;

  (b) the population figures used make no allowance for people resident in one district who receive treatment in another or for differences in morbidity and age/sex structure of particular populations.

  Toxic Waste
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make it his policy to commission a study of possible adverse health effects of abandoned and leaking toxic waste dumps.
  385
  Mr. Freeman
  The Department, with others concerned, would commission a study if there were reasonable grounds to consider that there might be adverse health effects associated with a localised source of pollution.

  The Department, with others, has established a small health statistics unit at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. This independent unit is developing new techniques specifically to undertake studies of this sort.

  Officials will be discussing with officials at the Department of the Environment whether there are any particular sites used for the disposal of toxic chemicals where environmental contamination may be occurring in circumstances which would make a health study appropriate.

  I refer the hon. Member to the reply that the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment gave to him on 26 October at columns 552–53.

  NHS Supplies
  Mr. Ashley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make it his policy to ensure that in no circumstance the National Health Service should pay more for supplies than the private sector, and that it should pay less when there is a large and regular order.

  Mr. Freeman
  Existing policy is to seek maximum value for money and commercial awareness in all NHS tendering and contracting practices and procedures.

  Hearing Aids
  Mr. Ashley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) pursuant to the answer to the right hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South on 26 October whether the main suppliers who have offered to supply commercial hearing aid equipment to the National Health Service at reduced prices are now charging the National Health Service the same prices as those charged to private hearing aid dispensers; what is meant by the term main suppliers; and which suppliers are still charging the National Health Service more than they charge the private sector;

  (2) pursuant to the answer to the right hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South on 26 October, if he will request those suppliers of hearing aids who have overcharged the National Health Service either to pay immediate compensation or to lower their prices for a fixed period to such an extent as to fully compensate the National Health Service.

  Mrs. Virgina Bottomley
  Mersey RHA has completed negotiations on behalf of the NHS with the relatively small group of suppliers who provide commercial hearing aid products to the NHS for special requirement which fall outside that of the established NHS hearing aid range. The NHS accounts for only a small market share of such products in this country.

  We welcome the fact that all the suppliers concerned have agreed to supply the NHS at the same wholesale prices as supplied to private hearing aid dispensers. Contract terms and conditions are being established with each supplier by Mersey RHA and the new prices will be effective nationally from 1 December 1989. Suppliers have previously provided hearing aids on the basis of contracts freely entered into by individual health authorities. In
  386
  these circumstances where there is no evidence of any breach of contract it would not be appropriate to claim compensation.

  Mr. Ashley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the answer to the right hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South on 26 October, if the National Health Service procurement directorate routinely compares prices charged to the National Health Service with those charged to the private sector; when was the last occasion that a major supplier was found to be charging the National Health Service more than the private sector; and what action was taken.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Action is continuously taken by NHS purchasing officers to secure more competitive prices by reference to market or other conditions. It would not be practicable for the procurement directorate to monitor every price charged to the 3,000 points of delivery that exist in the NHS, or to ensure that prices were always lower than those charged to every other purchaser. The NHS is by no means always a main or dominant purchaser, and prices may vary between health authorities according to delivery, service and volume requirements.

  Methadone Substitution
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many addicts are on methadone substitution programmes.

  Mr. Freeman
  The figures published in the Home Office statistical bulletin, issue 13/89, a copy of which is in the Library, record that there were 12,339 drug addicts in the United Kingdom recorded as receiving methadone to treat their addiction as at 31 December 1988.

  Vinegar
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information he has on the health implications of the consumption of vinegar.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  We are not aware of any adverse health implications from the normal usage of vinegar (acetic acid).

  Drug Treatment Centres
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the expenditure by Her Majesty's Government on specialised drug treatment centres, for each year from 1979.

  Mr. Freeman
  Information relating to the expenditure by health authorities on specialised drug treatment centres is not held centrally.

  Illegal Drugs
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether he is able to estimate the cost per year to the National Health Service of patients suffering from the effects of illegal drugs.

  Mr. Freeman
  Because drug misuse has many different effects, which will be treated by a wide range of specific and general medical services, it is not possible to estimate the overall cost to the National Health Service.
  387
  However, since 1984 we have committed nearly £65 million of new money to preventing drug misuse and providing services.

  Hormone Replacement Therapy
  Mrs. Gorman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he has any plans to fund a research centre at King's College hospital, London to investigate the beneficial effects of hormone replacement therapy on menopausally related problems.

  Mr. Freeman
  This matter is still under consideration.

  NHS Reform
  Miss Widdecombe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which of the units that have expressed interest in self-governing status intend to prepare applications to become National Health Service community trusts or National Health Service hospital trusts in April 1991.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I will not be able to receive any formal applications until Parliament has given approval to the necessary legislation. Since it is for the sponsor of the proposal in individual units to decide whether and when to prepare an application, the picture is likely to change over time. Amongst those units interested in self-governing status, some are more advanced than others and are likely to be in a position to apply to become an NHS trust in the first wave in April 1991. Others will follow in due course. The preparation of applications is proceeding in many places and the local sponsors are drawing up plans for service development that concentrate on the benefits that establishing an NHS trust could bring to the unit and its patients. Neither I nor any local sponsors have entered into any final commitment at this stage in respect of any unit. Seventy-nine units currently intend to prepare draft applications for NHS Trust status in 1991. The units are listed in the table.

  Northern RHA

  Darlington Hospital and Community Services

  Freeman Hospital

  Newcastle Mental Health Services

  North Tyneside District

  Northumbria Ambulance Services

  Yorkshire RHA

  Bradford Acute Services

  Leeds General Infirmary and Associated Hospitals

  St. James University Hospital, Leeds

  Trent RHA

  Bassetlaw

  Children's Hospital, Sheffield

  Doncaster Royal Infirmary and the Montagu Hospital

  Lincolnshire Ambulance Service

  Nether Edge Hospital, Sheffield

  Northern General Hospital

  Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield

  South Lincolnshire Mental Handicap Services

  University Hospital, Nottingham

  East Anglian RHA

  East Suffolk Community Services

  Great Yarmouth and Waveney Priority Services

  West Norfolk and Wisbech Community Services

  West Norfolk and Wisbech Acute Services

  North West Thames RHA

  Central Middlesex Hospital

  Harefield Hospital

  Hillingdon Hospital

  Mount Vernon Hospital

  388

  North West Hertfordshire Priority Services Unit

  North Hertfordshire Acute and Community Services

  Northwick Park Hospital

  North East Thames RHA

  City and Hackney (St. Bartholomew's, Homerton, St. Mark's Hospital Trust)

  North Middlesex Hospital

  Southend District Services

  The London Hospital Group

  The Royal Free Hospital

  The Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital

  South East Thames RHA

  Brighton Acute Services

  Bromley Acute Services

  Eastbourne Acute Services

  Guy's and Lewisham Hospitals and associated Mental Illness Services

  King's-Camberwell Acute Services and associated
  Community Services

  St. Thomas's Hospital and associated Community Services

  South West Thames RHA

  Croydon Mental Handicap Unit

  Croydon Community Unit

  Kingston Hospital

  Mid-Downs West Unit

  Mid-Surrey General Unit

  South West Surrey Acute Unit

  St. Helier and Sutton Hospitals

  Wessex RHA

  Lymington Hospitals

  Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases

  West Dorset Community and General Hospital Services

  West Dorset Mental Health Services

  Oxford RHA

  Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford

  South Western RHA

  Bristol

  Cornwall Mental Handicap Services

  Cornwall Community Services

  East Somerset

  East Gloucestershire NHS Trust

  Exeter Community Services

  North Devon

  Plymouth Acute Services

  Royal Cornwall Hospitals

  South Devon Health Care Trust

  West Somerset

  West Cornwall

  Weston

  Wonford Acute Services

  West Midlands RHA

  Alexandra Hospital

  Mid Staffs Mental Health Unit

  Mid Staffs Community Unit

  Rugby District Services

  Walsall Acute Services

  Mersey RHA

  Broadgreen Hospital, exc. Mersey Regional Cardio-Thoracic Unit

  Crewe Acute Services

  Halton Community Services

  Regional Adult Cardio-Thoracic Unit, Liverpool

  Royal Liverpool Children's Hospitals

  Whiston St. Helens Hospital

  North Western RHA

  Central Manchester Hospital and Community Services

  Christie Hospital

  Pregnancy-related Disease
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many women aged 14–16 years, 17–21 years, 22–24 years, 25–30 years, 31–35 years and 36–40 years died from pregnancy-related diseases in each year since 1959.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 28 July 1989]: The information is not available precisely in the form requested. Details have been extracted from the reports of the confidential inquiry into maternal deaths in England and Wales, which are produced triennially rather than annually. The breakdown of information among age groups is comprehensive but not exactly the same as the age groups requested.

  Definitions used in the classification of maternal deaths altered in 1972. Before then they were sub-classified as

  Number of Associated/Indirect Maternal Deaths by Age of Mother 1958–1984

  Under 16

  16–17

  18–19

  20–24

  25–29

  30–34

  35–39

  40–44

  45+

  Total

  Year

  "Associated" Deaths

  58–60

  —

  —1

  8

  40

  62

  67

  51

  224

  —

  252

  61–63

  1

  —

  310

  49

  65

  48

  45

  24

  2

  244

  64–66

  —

  3

  3

  30

  44

  41

  29

  16

  5

  176

  67–69

  —

  4

  7

  60

  66

  50

  29

  26

  1

  243

  70–72

  1

  3

  19

  58

  65

  42

  46

  17

  —

  251

  "Indirect" Deaths

  73–75

  —

  6

  11

  34

  48

  35

  14

  6

  1

  155

  76–78

  1

  4

  5

  11

  27

  20

  6

  4

  —

  78

  79–81

  —

  2

  3

  29

  20

  27

  5

  4

  —

  90

  82–84

  1

  2

  4

  16

  19

  13

  13

  3

  —

  71

  1 under 20 years

  2 40+ years

  3 16–19 years

  Single Mothers
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State of State for Health what is the percentage of single mothers aged 16 to 19 years, by country. in England and Wales.

  Mr. Freeman
  The numbers of families consisting of a single mother with one or more children in each country are not known However, the country percentage of all births outside marriage in 1998 which were as follows:

  Area

  per cent.

  England and Wales

  24·5

  England

  24·2

  Standard regions and counties

  North

  30·2

  Tyne and Wear

  29·2

  Cleveland

  31·0

  Cumbria

  29·9

  Durham

  30·9

  Northumberland

  32·5

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  28·5

  South Yorkshire

  27·5

  West Yorkshire

  29·5

  Humberside

  29·0

  North Yorkshire

  25·6

  East Midlands

  25·8

  Derbyshire

  26·7

  Leicestershire

  24·9

  Lincolnshire

  28·1

  390
  "true" maternal deaths—resulting from complications of pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium; or "associated" maternal deaths—due to other causes when the deceased woman was know to be pregnant, or had been pregnant within one year.

  From 1973 maternal deaths have been sub-classified as "direct"—resulting from obstetric complications of pregnancy, labour and childbirth; "indirect"—resulting from previous existing disease or a disease which developed during pregnancy and which was aggravated by pregnancy; or "fortuitous"—resulting from causes not related to or influenced by pregnancy.

  The request for information about "deaths from pregnancy-related diseases" has been interpreted as a request for information on "associated maternal deaths" up to 1972 and to "indirect deaths" thereafter.

  Area

  per cent.

  Northamptonshire

  23·6

  Nottinghamshire

  25·9

  East Anglia

  24·9

  Cambridgeshire

  24·1

  Norfolk

  24·9

  Suffolk

  25·6

  South East

  19·0

  Greater London

  15·9

  Inner London

  14·1

  Outer London

  17·8

  Bedfordshire

  21·5

  Berkshire

  21·8

  Buckinghamshire

  22·0

  East Sussex

  18·4

  Essex

  21·7

  Hampshire

  24·5

  Hertfordshire

  23·2

  Isle of Wight

  26·7

  Kent

  23·3

  Oxfordshire

  21·4

  Surrey

  19·4

  West Sussex

  22·1

  South West

  24·3

  Avon

  22·9

  Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

  25·7

  Devon

  25·1

  Dorset

  23·4

  Gloucestershire

  23·1

  Somerset

  26·4

  Wiltshire

  25·4

  West Midlands

  26·0

  391

  Area

  per cent.

  West Midlands

  24·6

  Hereford and Worcester

  26·2

  Shropshire

  25·6

  Staffordshire

  30·3

  Warwickshire

  27·7

  North West

  27·1

  Greater Manchester

  27·7

  Merseyside

  24·6

  Cheshire

  28·9

  Lancashire

  28·2

  Wales

  29·5

  Clwyd

  26·2

  Dyfed

  28·1

  Gwent

  31·9

  Gwynedd

  23·9

  Mid Glamorgan

  35·1

  Powys

  24·9

  South Glamorgan

  27·0

  West Glamorgan

  27·8

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Recycled Paper
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Lord President of the Council whether his Department has taken any steps to consider the use of recycled paper for House of Commons publications; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Geoffrey Howe
  Much of the material published for the House is of archival significance and must be printed on paper of suitable archival quality which is not currently obtainable in paper produced from recycled waste.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Set-aside Scheme
  Mr. Andrew Welsh
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will allow fibre-producing or other animals to be added to existing set-aside scheme provision.

  Mr. Curry
  I refer the hon. Member to my written answer to the right hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Steel) on 31 October 1989 at column 129.

  Respiratory Disease
  Mr. Andrew Welsh
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information his Department has on the incidence of respiratory disease among the agricultural work force; and what steps he is taking to promote improvement in this situation.

  Mr. Nicholls
  I have been asked to reply.

  Nineteen cases of occupational respiratory disease occurring in agricultural workers in England and Wales were reported to the Health and Safety Executive under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations, 1985, in the two years 1986–87 and 1987–88, the two years for which information is available. However, data collected under these regulations is regarded as an incomplete measure of the true incidence of occupational disease. The Executive's employment
  392
  medical advisory service is about to begin a publicity campaign, lasting 12 months, on occupational lung disease with the objective of increasing the awareness of employers, employees and the medical community to this group of diseases. Also, the Executive is currently supporting a project on the surveillance of occupational lung disease from reports of consultant chest physicians and occupational physicians.

  Fishing Industry
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he last met representatives of the National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations; and what subjects were discussed.

  Mr. Curry
  I met representatives of the National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations on 25 October when we discussed the 1989 allocations of North sea haddock.

  Farm Animal Welfare Council
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many veterinary surgeons are appointed to the Farm Animal Welfare Council; and how many meetings they have participated in during the last two years.

  Mr. Curry
  The three registered veterinary surgeons referred to in the reply are Professor Webster of Bristol university, Mr. Haxby, ex-president of the BVA and RCVS, and Mr. MacPherson, veterinary consultant and member of the RCVS council.

  Meat and Meat Products
  Mr. Meale
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will state any current restriction placed by any member state of the European Economic Communities, or any Community authority, on the import into any Community member other than the United Kingdom of meat or meat products currently permitted for sale in the United Kingdom together with the related reasons, and showing what categories of slaughterhouses, or food processing plants, are unacceptable to any of the authorities concerned; and what action he is taking to make such exports possible.

  Mr. Currry
  West Germany has recently announced that it requires additional certification for beef from the United Kingdom and that it will not accept bovine slaughter by-products for human consumption. We consider these restrictions unjustified on public health grounds and are pursuing the matter with the authorities of the Federal Republic as a matter of urgency.

  Slaughterhouse and processing plants in any member state which wish to engage in intra-community trade must be approved as meeting the requirements of directives 64/433 (red meat), 71/118 (poultrymeat) and 77/99 (meat products). Plants operating only under the national rules of member states are not permitted to export. We shall be discussing with the EC Commission and other member states the rules which are to apply to all meat plants on completion of the internal market.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what restrictions have been placed by Britain's trading partners on the importation of British meat and bone meal of ruminant derivation.
  393
  Mr. Curry
  France, West Germany and Israel have set conditions for the import of British meat and bone meal. France requires that British meat and bone meal should not be fed to ruminants. West Germany seeks to require certification that the material is not derived from cattle confirmed or suspected of having BSE. Such cattle in the United Kingdom would in any case be compulsorily slaughtered and their carcases destroyed. Exports to Israel are restricted to meat and bone meal derived from poultry.

  Swales Moor Mink Factory
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when his inspectors last visited Swales Moor mink factory; what their findings were; and if he will place a copy of the inspector's report in the Library.

  Mr. Curry
  Officials of the Ministry's wildlife and storage biology discipline and the state veterinary service last visited Swales Moor farm on 26 September and 11 October respectively.

  Reports on specific premises obtained during the course of statutory duties are not made public.

  Fur Farming
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what minimum conditions have to be complied with by applicants for fur farming licences; and how many such licences are currently extant.

  Mr. Curry
  A total of 55 licences were issued for the farming of mink in England and eight in Scotland during 1988–89. There are no licensing controls for other species farmed for fur.

  Mink farm owners must satisfy the security arrangements specified in the Mink (Keeping) Regulations 1975, as amended in 1982.

  Food Irradiation
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what arrangements he has made for the vitamins value of irradiated foodstuffs to be checked; and when he expects to have the results of such tests.

  Mr. Maclean
  Extensive research by a number of expert bodies has established that food irradiation does not result in any greater loss of vitamins than other comparable food preservation processes. Nevertheless the Government intend, if Parliament approves the introduction of food irradiation, to require details of vitamin content before and after irradiation to be provided by those licensed to undertake the process. This information would be made available to the steering group on food surveillance (SGFS) who would keep under review the nutritional implications of the consumption of irradiated food. The SGFS regularly publishes the results of its work.

  Live Animals (Export)
  Mr. Corbett
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now establish an independent and representative inquiry into the economics, welfare and transport implications of the export trade in live animals.

  Mr. Curry
  I have no plans for a specific inquiry but we will take the factors referred to fully into account in negotiating new EC controls on the welfare of animals during transport.
  394
  Mr. Corbett
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on how many occasions in each of the past five years his officials have accompanied shipments of live food animals to destinations in Europe; and with what results.

  Mr. Curry
  Monitoring the welfare of animals transported in other Community countries is essentially a matter for the authorities of those countries. Nevertheless in the last five years nine export journeys of food animals have been accompanied by representatives of our state veterinary service under arrangements agreed with the countries concerned.

  Myopathy
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information his Department has on the incidence of myopathy in deer; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has no information on the incidence of myopathy in deer.

  Common Agricultural Policy
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the total expenditure on structural and support measures in the common agricultural policy in the most recent year for which figures are available; and what is the total British contribution to the common agricultural policy.

  Mr. Curry
  Total expenditure in the European Community on structural and support measures under the common agricultural policy was 28·9 billion ECU (£19·6 billion) in 1988. This was about 65 per cent, of the total EC budget. The United Kingdom's net contribution to the EC budget in 1988 was £1·36 billion.

  Badgers
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his policy on the release of lactating sow badgers trapped as part of his Department's tuberculosis control scheme; and whether he authorises any exceptions to this policy.

  Mr. Curry
  Lactating sow badgers trapped during official badger removal operations are released.

  All possible precautions are taken to avoid taking them by mistake and, as such, where doubt exists, they are released.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on how many occasions during the last 12 months operatives from or on behalf of his Department have used snares for the purpose of catching badgers under the tuberculosis control scheme.

  Mr. Curry
  Since 1 November 1988 snares have been employed in eight badger investigations. Snares are used as a last resort, under careful supervision, when it is either not possible to use traps or when traps have proved ineffective.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has revised his guidelines on the trapping of badgers under tuberculosis control release;
  395
  whether any trapping is authorised other than on farms where tuberculosis has recently been confirmed; and what definition is used for these purposes of the word "recently."

  Mr. Curry
  Revised procedures, allowing a single trapping period of four months rather than a three-month period with follow-up trapping, have been introduced. There have been no other changes in the guidelines for trapping procedures, which are based upon the recommendations of the Dunnet report published in 1986. No trapping is carried out beyond those breakdown farms where badgers have been implicated in the transmission of

  Cereal area and yield 1985–1989

  Area ('000 ha.) Yield (tonnes/ha.)

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  11989

  Area

  Yield

  Area

  Yield

  Area

  Yield

  Area

  Yield

  Area

  Yield

  Wheat

  1,902

  6·33

  1,997

  6·96

  1,994

  5·99

  1,886

  6·23

  2,106

  6·55

  Barley

  1,966

  4·95

  1,917

  5·22

  1,831

  5·04

  1,878

  4·67

  1,662

  4·81

  Oats

  134

  4·59

  97

  5·16

  99

  4·57

  120

  4·50

  121

  4·55

  Rye

  8

  4·64

  7

  4·72

  7

  4·76

  7

  4·57

  7

  4·12

  Mixed Corn

  7

  4·27

  7

  4·31

  6

  4·50

  5

  4·19

  5

  4·14

  1 provisional.

  Eggs
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many laying hens producing eggs for human consumption there were on British farms in(a) September 1988 and (b) September 1989; and how many individual flocks of such poultry there were on the same dates.

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

  Details of the numbers of fowls laying eggs for human consumption, and the number of holdings in Great Britain on which laying fowls are recorded, taken from the agricultural census which is held in June each year, are given in the table.

  Year

  Number of fowls producing eggs for eating (millions)

  Number of holdings (thousands)

  1988

  33·931

  38·2

  19891

  31·216

  36·6

  1 Provisional.

  Very small holdings which make only occasional returns are excluded from these figures.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he anticipates announcing modifications to the Testing of Poulty Flocks Order to assist the smaller egg producer.

  Mr. Curry
  The Poultry Laying Flocks (Testing and Registration etc.) Order 1989 came into operation on 26 October 1989, replacing the provisions in the Testing of Poultry Flocks Order 1989 which related to flocks producing eggs for human consumption. The new order reduces the required frequency of sampling and provides for a simpler sampling method involving the collection of droppings. These changes will, without compromising the protection of public health, lead to a considerable reduction in the cost of testing, particularly for small flocks.
  396
  the disease to cattle. Investigations into the cause of breakdowns are carried out as quickly as is practicable and the word recently is not used.

  Cereals
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give the respective acreages and yields for the last five years of(a) wheat, (b) barley, (c) oats, (d) rye and (e) other cereals produced in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Curry
  The information is as follows:

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will publish in the Official Report a table of average egg prices for each month of the current year.

  Mr. Curry
  The average packer to producer price (in terms of pence per dozen) for each of the last 12 months has been as follows:

  pence

  January

  25·0

  February

  28·5

  March

  29·7

  April

  32·0

  May

  35·7

  June

  36·2

  July

  35·1

  August

  38·9

  September

  45·1

  1October

  45·7

  1 provisional.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the number of laying hens in the United Kingdom at the latest date for which figures are available and on the equivalent date of 1988.

  Mr. Curry
  Details of the size of the laying flock in the United Kingdom, taken from the United Kingdom agricultural census which is held in June each year, are given in the table. These figures are for fowls laying eggs for human consumption and include estimates for very small holdings in England and Wales (but not for Scotland or Northern Ireland).

  Number of fowls Producing egg for eating

  Year

  millions

  1988

  37·389

  11989

  34·152

  1 provisional.

  Farmers Union of Wales
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on how many occasions in 1988 and 1989 either he, or his predecessor, or his officials, have met representatives of the Farmers Union of Wales.

  Mr. Curry
  Meetings with the Farmers Union of Wales are, in the first instance, for the Secretary of State for Wales, my right hon. Friend the Member for Worcester (Mr. Walker), and his Department. However, there are occasional meetings between representatives of the union and Ministers and officials of my Department. The most recent such occasion occurred last week, when I held discussions on sheep scab.

  EC (Fraud)
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent measures his Department has taken to combat European Community fraud.
  398
  Mr. Curry
  The Government have taken the initiative in the Council of Ministers on several occasions to press for further action to deal with fraud in the common agricultural policy and good progress is now being made on strengthening controls. Proposals are currently under discussion which would require member states to carry out annual physical checks on intervention stocks and a minimum level of inspections on consignments attracting export refunds; and to improve the system of audit checks on firms making or receiving CAP payments. My Department is actively involved in these negotiations and is working towards early implementation. In addition, new anti-fraud controls and penalties have recently been introduced into a number of CAP schemes, such as the suckler-cow premium beef special premium and durum wheat production aid.