Sitting of 16 December 1992

Preamble
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]
PRAYERS

  PRIVATE BUSINESS
  BRITISH RAILWAYS (No. 4) BILL (By Order)
  BRITISH WATERWAYS BILL [Lords] (By Order)
  CROSSRAIL BILL (By Order)
  EAST COAST MAIN LINE (SAFETY) BILL (By Order)
  GREATER MANCHESTER (LIGHT RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM) BILL [Lords] (By Order)
  WOODGRANGE PARK CEMETERY BILL [Lords] (By Order)
  RIVER HUMBER (UPPER BURCOM COOLING WORKS) BILL [Lords] (By Order)
  Orders for Second Reading read.
  To be read a Second time on Thursday 14 January 1993.

Oral Answers to Questions
  SCOTLAND

    Rail Services (Edinburgh and the Borders)
    Mr. Beith: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent discussions he has had with the chairman of British Rail about the future of rail services from Edinburgh and the borders to London and the continent.
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton): My right hon. Friend and I meet senior management of British Rail from time to time. Such contacts cover a wide range of topics relating to rail services in Scotland.
    Mr. Beith: If Mr. Richard Branson—or anyone else—is allowed to take over the east coast main line service, what guarantee is there that passengers from the borders will continue to have frequent train services from Berwick and other intermediate stations? With or without Richard Branson, when will there be through services to France, through the channel tunnel, from Edinburgh and the borders?
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The answer is 1995. I understand that British Rail intends to operate a day-time service from Edinburgh down the east coast main line and a night-time service from Glasgow down the west coast main line to Paris and Brussels. Day-time and night-time through services are expected to start in 1995, but, for
    414
    people intending to use the route earlier, there will, of course, be an option of transferring quickly in London to another route. Freight services will be in use as soon as the channel tunnel opens. The reason for the delay to 1995 is that many complex issues need to be resolved.
    Mr. Foulkes: Has the Minister read the remarks of Lords Whitelaw and Ridley in the other place arguing strongly against any privatisation of British Rail? As one of them is one of the greatest advocates of privatisation, will the Government take account of those remarks? Train services in the borders, in Ayrshire and in other rural areas are bound to suffer if privatisation goes ahead. Clearly, private operators will be after only the lucrative routes, and rural areas, as usual, will be the ones to suffer. Will the Government think again on the issue?
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The Government have given a clear commitment to preserving the current national network and continuing to provide subsidy, when it is needed, for loss-making services that are socially necessary. On the privatisation of international routes, the Government's view is that international services will benefit from private sector expertise, and specific options for transferring international services to the private sector are under discussion within British Rail and the Government. I cannot yet say when we shall be in a position to publish specific proposals.

    Independence
    Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent representations he has received for Scottish independence.
    The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Ian Lang): Since the general election I have received 22 representations in favour of independence for Scotland. I have received hundreds in support of the maintenance of the Union.
    Mr. Amess: Is my right hon. Friend aware that many Scottish people live in Basildon? They are proud to be Scottish and pleased to live in Basildon. Is my right hon. Friend further aware that the overwhelming majority of them are totally opposed to the break-up of the United Kingdom, and does he agree with them?
    Mr. Lang: I am glad to be able to reassure my hon. Friend that the overwhelming majority of the people of Scotland are also resistant to the break-up of the United Kingdom. The only political party offering the break-up of the United Kingdom saw its representation in the House reduced by 40 per cent. at the general election, when I was delighted to see my hon. Friend re-elected as the Member for Basildon.
    Mr. McAllion: Is the Secretary of State aware that although the democratic opposition to Tory Government in Scotland may be divided on the issue of indpendence, it is absolutely united behind the principle that Scotland should decide for itself what its views on independence are? Who does the Secretary of State think is more representative of Scottish opinion—the 25,000 Scots from every part of the country who gathered in Edinburgh last Saturday to demand a multi-option referendum, or the ragbag of no-hopers on the Conservative Back Benches?
    Mr. Lang: If the hon. Gentleman wants to see a ragbag, he should look at the range of organisations with different opinions that marched in the demonstration on Saturday. They could not even reach the end of the march without disagreeing and falling out among themselves.
    Sir Nicholas Fairbairn: Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that Scotland's greatest benefit is that it is the only country on earth which does not have the misfortune to have a Government? However, Scotland has the good fortune to have control over its affairs and its heritage—for which my right hon. Friend is so appreciated. Will he ensure that when the English work out whether they can buy tea or shortbread on Sundays, under their stupid Shops Act 1950, section 4 of the 1950 Act is never applied to Scotland and that our law remains as free as it is?
    Mr. Lang: My hon. and learned Friend is right to draw attention to the distinctive features of legislation affecting Scotland, which are safeguarded by arrangements in this Parliament. Not for the first time, Scotland is giving examples from which England can benefit.
    Mr. Wallace: Does the Secretary of State accept that while 78 per cent. of the Scottish people rejected independence on 9 April, 75 per cent. were not satisfied with the status quo and wanted a Scottish Parliament? Given that the Secretary of State, in his speech to the Monday club at the Conservative party conference, accepted the nationhood of Scotland, how does he envisage Scotland being able to implement the democratic wish of the Scottish people if he and his colleagues in Government refuse to accept that wish?
    Mr. Lang: The vast majority of people voting in the last general election supported parties which are nominally committed to the maintenance of the Union of the United Kingdom. Within that United Kingdom and its Parliament, it is possible to cater for the distinctive needs of the different parts of the Union. That is what already happens in Parliament, and that is what we are considering to find out whether further changes can be made to improve arrangements for Scottish business at Westminster.
    Mr. Ian Bruce: What representations has my right hon. Friend received from the dockyard workers at Rosyth about an independent Scotland? If that were to come about, what effect do they think that it would have on their jobs?
    Mr. Lang: I have had no such representations, but, in that matter as in so many others, Scotland's benefits derive to a large extent from our membership of this United Kingdom.
    Mr. Salmond: The Secretary of State must be aware, even if Basildon man is not, that the latest signs are that independence is the leading option and that it is twice as popular as his option—the status quo. In the light of Saturday's march and rally, does the Secretary of State still believe what he has told us for the past six months—that no one is interested in the Scottish question? On Saturday, 25,000 people demonstrated for freedom and democracy in the streets of our capital city. When will he take stock of that? If the governor-general were to announce a rally in March in favour of the discredited Union, would any Scot bother to turn up—or would he have to bus them in from Basildon?
    Mr. Lang: I have already pointed out that the march last Saturday contained elements that conflict directly with each other in their views of the future of Scotland. The hon. Gentleman asks who is interested in the Scottish question. I am interested in it. That is why I and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister are taking stock. That is why we are considering proposals to change the arrangements whereby Scottish business is handled and to find other ways in which Scottish interests can be better represented within this Westminster Parliament.
    Mr. Canavan: When did the Scottish Tory party manage to get 25,000 Scots marching for anything? The Secretary of State is trying to derive some comfort from the fact that there are honest differences of opinion among the people of Scotland on the exact powers that a Scottish Parliament should have. Why is he so afraid to hold a referendum and let the people decide? Is it because he knows that the overwhelming majority would reject the status quo?
    Mr. Lang: The Scottish Conservative party is pursuing its objectives through democratic and parliamentary means, and it was the only party in Scotland to increase both its vote and its share of the seats at the last general election.

    Local Government
    Mr. David Shaw: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the conduct of local government in Scotland.
    Mr. Lang: The conduct of local authority business in Scotland and the rest of Great Britain was comprehensively examined by the Widdecombe committee, and the Government made a number of changes in the law in the light of its report. I believe that Scottish authorities generally observe high standards in the conduct of their business, but there are lapses from time to time.
    Mr. Shaw: Is my right hon. Friend aware that many Scottish people in my constituency have been shocked to learn that 22 relatives of Labour councillors are employed by Monklands district council? [Interruption.] Is my right hon. Friend further aware that, of those 22 relatives, three are employed in the housing department, the wife of the director of housing is employed in the leisure centre—[Interruption.] and the view of the tenants and people of Coatbridge and Airdrie—[Interruption.]
    Madam Speaker: Order. Hon. Members must not shout down other hon. Members. We have freedom of speech here. There will be opportunities for rebuttal. Will the hon. Gentleman move rapidly to his question?
    Mr. Shaw: My question relates to the fact that of 22 wives, sons and daughters of Labour councillors employed by Monklands district council, three are employed in the housing department, the wife of the director of housing is employed in the leisure centre—[Interruption.]
    Madam Speaker: Order. I am now directing the hon. Gentleman to come to his question. I want a question now.
    Mr. Shaw: I hoped that my right hon. Friend would have the opportunity to follow the whole question. Is my right hon. Friend aware that the people of Airdrie and Coatbridge believe that they can obtain houses, council

    417
    house transfers and repairs only if they have the approval of the ruling Labour families on the council? What does my right hon. Friend intend to do about that?
    Mr. Ernie Ross: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
    Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman knows that I cannot take points of order at this stage. [Interruption.] Order. Hon. Members are responsible for the comments that they make in the House and there are opportunities for rebuttal. I shall come to that as soon as the Secretary of State has had an opportunity to respond.
    Mr. Lang: I am aware of those allegations and I share my hon. Friend's concern. My powers to intervene in such matters are limited by statute law. Section 211 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 gives me discretionary power to order a local inquiry if I consider that a local authority has failed to carry out a statutory duty or if I am of the opinion that an investigation should be made to determine whether it has so failed. I am currently considering whether any of the allegations made may amount to a breach of the council's statutory duties.
    Mr. Maxton: Is it not time that the Secretary of State took the opportunity to dissociate himself publicly in the House from the irresponsible and unscrupulous campaign being run by the hon. Member for Dover (Mr. Shaw) and advised the hon. Gentleman that he has much better things to do with his time? Will he also ask the hon. Member to repeat his allegations outside the House where he is not covered by parliamentary privilege?
    Mr. Lang: I have explained my position with regard to the statutory duties of the local authority and my own statutory powers. Others who have complaints in relation to these matters have the option of pursuing them in other ways—through the courts, the local government ombudsman, or the Commission for Local Authority Accounts in Scotland.
    Mr. Bill Walker: My right hon. Friend will be aware that I have tabled a question and received what I judge to be an unsatisfactory answer about the activities of Councillor Brooks, the leader of Monklands district council. My question concerns the amount of public money which has gone into a company that has gone into liquidation and anther company that is still trading. It is only right that the House should be made aware of the public money that has been used and the debt that is outstanding on pay-as-you-earn after four years in relation to the company that has gone into liquidation. Those are matters of genuine interest to the House regardless of the political colour of the individuals concerned.
    Mr. Lang: If the Commission for Local Authority Accounts in Scotland concludes that the council has illegally authorised expenditure, it can submit a special report to me with any recommendations that it may have. That may include the surcharging of those responsible; I am empowered to do that, but I have no evidence that it would be appropriate.
    Mr. Galloway: Is the Secretary of State unaware how repugnant it will seem to people at home watching our proceedings that question 2 at Scottish Question Time should be from the buffoon of Basildon about Scottish independence? Question 3, which the Secretary of State is
    418
    now answering, impugns the integrity of people who are not here to answer for themselves and was asked by a man—
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Allan Stewart): Black shirt.
    Mr. Galloway: Never mind my black shirt. Question 3 was asked by a man who brought a prostitute into this building and caused her to have a parliamentary pass. That he should be the man casting aspersions on the characters of other people, and that the Secretary of State should associate himself with that, is a revolting spectacle.
    Mr. Lang: I do not think that the hon. Gentleman has asked a question for me to answer.
    Mr. Kynoch: Has my right hon. Friend had any approach from the Leader of the Opposition or the shadow spokesman for Scotland about carrying out an inquiry into these dreadful affairs?
    Mr. Lang: No, I have not had an approach from either the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) or from the hon. Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke).

    Scottish Homes Budget
    Mr. Darling: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the proportion of Scottish Homes budget will be spent in Edinburgh and the Lothians in 1992–93.
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Scottish Homes is likely to spend 12 per cent. of its programme in Edinburgh and the Lothians in 1992–93. This will be about £44 million and compares with £36 million in 1991–92.
    Mr. Darling: While I welcome the fact that Scottish Homes has reluctantly increased the amount that it is spending on the east coast of Scotland, is the Minister aware that this Christmas people will be sleeping rough in the doorways and cemeteries of Scotland's capital, that 8,000 people are on Edinburgh housing association waiting lists and that others fear that in 1993 they will lose their homes as a result of increasing rents and mortgages? Will he stop Scottish Homes siphoning off public funds to help private developers and ensure that more money is put into the housing association budget to build desperately needed homes in Edinburgh and throughout Scotland, and, above all, at affordable rents?
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I confirm to the hon. Gentleman that early next week we shall make a statement on the additional £7.5 million for the homelessness competition. Proposals have been received from more than 40 local authorities and are currently being assessed. The hon. Gentleman spoke about mortgage repossessions. Only 4 per cent. of the applications for homelessness relate to that cause. I make it clear to the hon. Gentleman that Scottish Homes will certainly take into account not only the needs of Edinburgh and the Lothians but those of the whole of Scotland. Scottish Homes has been making substantial progress in giving funds to housing associations to alleviate homelessness.
    A considerable amount of activity is taking place in the hon. Gentleman's constituency. Provision for the elderly is being made by Fountainbridge housing association, and Canmore housing association is providing for special

    419
    needs at Morrison street. Fountainbridge housing association is making provision at Gilmour place for a homeless group. There is a further project at Lauriston place by Lister co-operative for those in priority need, and the Old Town housing association is providing for general needs at Guthrie street. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman's representations will be borne in mind when further allocations are made by Scottish Homes and the provisional allocations are made shortly before Christmas.
    Mr. Gallie: Is my hon. Friend aware that the number of houses below tolerable standard in Scotland fell yet again in the past year, this time by about 4 per cent? As it is Conservative policy to improve and not to demolish, is not that good value for public expenditure? Is he further aware that the remaining below tolerable standard houses are on the private ownership side of the housing market? Will he take account of that when allocating public funds for next year's expenditure?
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall most certainly do that. About £2 million was made available for Edinburgh in a supplementary allocation for the pre-1984 backlog of repairs; that will be borne in mind before we make provisional allocations. I also confirm that Edinburgh and the Lothians received an additional £4.1 million from Scottish Homes in respect of a recent supplementary allocation. Those matters have been carefully borne in mind.
    Mr. Wray: Does the Minister agree that neither Scottish Homes nor Scottish local authorities can solve the homeless problem? Have not 35,000 people registered as homeless in 1992? including 11,500 families? Is he aware that that means 84 children a day becoming homeless in 1992? Is it not clear that the Government do not care about the homeless? If they did, they would not have spent £16 million on a European summit.
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The funding for the European summit was money well spent.
    Scottish Homes has provided more than 1,200 housing association units during the past three years, specifically to cater for the homeless. In addition, one third of local authority nominations for Scottish Homes stock have been targeted for homeless applicants.
    In the coming year, more than £1 billion will be spent on housing by Scottish Homes, local authorities and new towns. A substantial proportion of that should be used to combat homelessness as and where necessary. The statutory responsibility lies with local authorities to decide what allocation to make within their mainstream allocations.
    Mrs. Fyfe: Does the Minister know that in West Lothian the number of homeless families and single people applying for housing rose by 65 per cent. this year? Does he know that this Christmas more than 2,500 children will spend the day in local authority temporary accommodation? Does he realise that 120,000 children will spend Christmas in damp and dangerous housing? At 38,000 households, the Government have beaten their previous record for homelessness in Scotland. Do they actually understand the misery for which they are responsible?
    Can the Minister explain the competition to which he referred briefly a moment ago? Are the homeless now to compete with one another to get a decent, dry home?
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The hon. Lady should be aware that last month we requested proposals for a share of the additional £7.5 million made available for homelessness projects in 1992–93. We have received proposals from more than 40 local authorities, which we are currently assessing. I had hoped to make an announcement today, but I cannot. I shall do so as soon as possible. The proposals need to be properly assessed. Of course, the most pressing priorities will be chosen.
    I must make the point that 60 to 70 per cent. of homeless applicants result from family disputes. Neither local authorities nor the Government are responsible for that. However, it is right that local authorities should have the statutory responsibility. Of course, being homeless is quite different from being roofless. No one in Scotland should be roofless. Local authorities should give top priority to ensuring that any such people are looked after properly.

    Maternity Services
    Ms. Rachel Squire: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the Government's policy towards provision of full maternity services.
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Allan Stewart): The Government's policy towards the provision of full maternity services is to enable women to have a choice of how and where they give birth, provided that this can be done safely and cost effectively. The guiding principle is the safety of the mother and child. The way in which that policy is operated is being reviewed in the light of the report by the Health Select Committee on maternity services in England and Wales.
    Ms. Squire: Is the Minister aware that the choice of the vast majority of the people of Dunfermline and West Fife is that there should be full maternity services in Dunfermline? Is he further aware that the most recent survey of the wishes of local people, carried out by the local newspaper the Dunfermline Press and West Fife Advertiser, found that almost 1,000 people—the vast majority—were in favour of that provision? Will the Minister therefore express his support for a full maternity service in Dunfermline? Will he instruct Fife health board to meet the needs and the wishes of the people of Dunfermline and West Fife and to continue to provide a full maternity service in Dunfermline?
    Mr. Stewart: I am aware of the hon. Lady's close interest in and concern about the matter on behalf of her constituents. I shall give her the up-to-date position as I understand it. The Fife health board decided on 15 December to withdraw consultant maternity services from Dunfermline, and instead to introduce a midwife-led service. My right hon. Friend awaits a formal proposal from the board, which will include the results of the public consultation to which the hon. Lady referred. I assure the hon. Lady that my right hon. Friend has made it clear that he will not agree to the establishment of more midwife-led units until the pilot scheme in Aberdeen has been evaluated.

    Alcohol Abuse
    Sir Fergus Montgomery: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met the Scottish Council on Alcohol to discuss funding for centres dealing with alcohol abuse.
    Mr. Stewart: Scottish Office officials regularly meet representatives of the Scottish Council on Alcohol. The last meeting took place on 5 November. The funding of alcohol misuse services was not raised.
    Sir Fergus Montgomery: Is my hon. Friend aware that people in alcohol abuse centres are worried that the money allocated to them is going on the community care budget? They feel that that money should be ring-fenced and used specifically for alcohol abuse. Does he agree that the chance of people suffering from alcohol abuse because of drinking too much Scotch whisky is slim, because it is cheaper to buy a bottle of Scotch whisky on the continent than in the United Kingdom due to the terrifying amount of duty charged?
    Mr. Stewart: On my hon. Friend's first question, I can reassure him that we are continuing to provide substantial support for the work of the Scottish Council on Alcohol and that the two designated places in Scotland continue to receive substantial direct assistance. The care in the community budget is generally ring-fenced, but aggregate external finance in Scotland is not ring-fenced specifically, as it is in England. However, my right hon. and noble Friend the Minister of State has made clear the substantial extra resources that are being allocated to local authorities for the transfer to care in the community.
    My hon. Friend's second question falls within the remit of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Treasury. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor will no doubt have noted the roar of cross-party approval that greeted my hon. Friend's remarks.
    Mr. Michael J. Martin: One of the things that could help reduce alcohol abuse is a reduction in long-term unemployment. In my community, many highly skilled men and women who have been out of work for years are in deep depression, which can sometimes lead to alcohol abuse. Surely it would be better if the Government took steps to give them back their pride and dignity, and got them back to work.
    Mr. Stewart: I agree with the hon. Gentleman that there are many reasons for trying to get unemployment down, not just the factors to which he referred. Moreover, a range of measures can be and are being taken to deal with the problems of alcohol abuse. For example, I had a useful meeting recently with the chief medical officer and employers' representatives in Scotland. Further positive moves will be taken to see how we can inculcate a responsible attitude to deal with alcohol misuse in the workplace.

    Local Government
    Mr. Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list all the organisations and individuals who lobbied him in support for a reorganisation of Scottish local government; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. Lang: The responses to the Government's first consultation paper on the reform of local government,
    422
    published last February, were made available for public inspection. The Government published a summary of responses to that paper in February of this year and this is available in the Library.
    Mr. Hood: The Secretary of State knows that his proposals are anti-democratic and a further attack on local democracy in Scotland. If he denies that, will he assure the House and Scotland that, post reform, the number of councillors in district councils will not be cut? Will he further assure the House that the joint boards that he envisages in his consultation paper will be manned not by quango Tories appointed by himself, but only by elected councillors?
    Mr. Lang: The proposals in the consultation paper are not undemocratic. The purpose of reform to a single-tier structure is to create stronger, more coherent local authorities. The other points raised by the hon. Gentleman will be considered in the consultation process. However, it is worth mentioning that his district council, Clydesdale, while expressing views on a number of other aspects, said:
    "The council would offer no objections to a single tier system of local government."
    Mr. Raymond S. Robertson: When my right hon. Friend eventually brings his proposals on the future of local government to the House, will he consider allowing the people of our four great Scottish cities directly to elect their Lords Provost and to end the practice of the ruling political group choosing the first citizen?
    Mr. Lang: My hon. Friend makes an interesting suggestion. It is one which can be considered in the consultation process, along with all the other suggestions that we shall no doubt be receiving.
    Mr. Ingram: Is the Secretary of State aware that the people of the East Kilbride part of Busby have voted to stay with Labour-controlled East Kilbride rather than to transfer to Tory-controlled Eastwood? Why, then, has he overridden the views of the people? Is this a foretaste of what will come with local government reform, with the wishes of the people being ignored by the Government?
    Mr. Lang: We have overruled no views. We have put out a consultation paper in which we have listed four illustrative options, but have made it clear that other options can be considered. We shall not approach the decisions that have to be made on a party political basis. I find it depressing that the hon. Gentleman can see the matter only as one of advantage or disadvantage to the Labour party.
    Sir Anthony Durant: Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the discussion that is taking place about Monklands is serious? He will be aware that I have taken an active interest in local government—[Interruption.]
    Madam Speaker: Order. I have insisted that other hon. Members do not use a long preamble, but put questions directly. I must apply that rule to the hon. Gentleman.
    Sir Anthony Durant: Will my right hon. Friend go ahead with the inquiry and not wait?
    Mr. Lang: I am in a position to set up an inquiry only where I am satisfied that there has been a statutory breach

    423
    of local government obligations, and I am not satisfied that that is the case with regard to Monklands district council.
    Mr. McLeish: Is not the reform of local government simply a paving measure for the privatisation of Scotland's water and sewerage services? Will the Secretary of State explain why his Ministers squandered £50,000 worth of taxpayers' money in payments to Quayle Monro Ltd essentially to obtain private advice for the Conservative party? When will he publish the report from Quayle Monro? What does he have to hide?
    Mr. Lang: The findings of the Quayle Monro report are reflected in the consultation paper on the future structure of the water and sewerage industries of Scotland, in which we have laid out a range of eight options and on which we welcome views. The hon. Gentleman spoke of costs. I was interested to see in The Scotsman yesterday that Coopers and Lybrand Deloitte has carried out a report on behalf of Lothian region that bears out the findings of the Touche Ross report that the reform of local government to a single-tier structure will result in substantial savings.
    Mr. Gale: In the light of his earlier answers, does not my right hon. Friend find it surprising that he has not received representations from the Leader of the Opposition concerning the reorganisation of local government in his constituency of Monklands, East?
    Mr. Lang: I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition, and all Labour Members of Parliament, will, in due course, address the issue of the reform of local government. I hope that their contributions to the future structure of local government in Scotland will be more constructive and forward looking than their contributions this afternoon.

    Offensive Weapons
    Mr. David Marshall: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, pursuant to his answer of 26 October, Official Report, column 530, what consultations he proposes to make on legislative proposals relating to the carrying and possession of knives and similar offensive weapons; and if he will make a statement.
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: My right hon. Friend will consult publicly in the new year on proposals to change the law in relation to the carrying and possession of knives. In light of the consultations, we shall introduce measures for consideration by the House at the first available opportunity.
    Mr. Marshall: We have heard all this before, time after time. Are not murders at record levels in Scotland this year? Is it not the case that violent criminals are being let out of prison for Christmas, on condition that they do not take drink or drugs? Have not the Tory Government simply gone soft on law and order? For some years, some of us have been trying to get the Government to take action against violence on our streets. How many more people have to be mugged, maimed, slashed, stabbed or murdered before the Government will do something about this ever-growing menace to society?
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Why is it that Strathclyde police are 181 officers under strength? It is because Strathclyde regional council has not employed its
    424
    full complement. The hon. Gentleman should be making strong representations about that. I know that Strathclyde has increased the number of its police officers, but it is still 181 under strength.
    As for the crime clear-up rate, in 1988 it was 160,000 and in 1991 it was 184,000—a considerable police achievement. Of course I am concerned about the rising crime rate—it has been rising for the past 30 years—but police operations, such as Operation Dove in Paisley, have been extremely successful in helping to produce an overall reduction in crime. I strongly recommend similar schemes to police officers in other areas.
    Sir Nicholas Fairbairn: May I remind my hon. Friend that the draconian sentences passed on the razor slashers in Glasgow—the razors in question were not lethal weapons—caused the new fancy for the knife, which is lethal? So we must be cautious on this matter. As one who carries a gun himself, even though it is rather small, I know that there are worse things in the criminal law than simple assault—for instance, fraud perpetrated at public expense in Monklands. If that is not investigated by the Lord Advocate, it should be—
    Madam Speaker: Order. That is wholly irrelevant to the question, as the hon. and learned Gentleman knows.
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I recall my hon. and learned Friend's gun, because he once let it off in the High Court, causing a considerable disturbance, and it was with great relief that it was discovered to have been only my hon. and learned Friend letting off a very small cap gun.
    The maximum penalty for carrying an offensive weapon is two years in prison, but for the use of such weapons the penalty can be an unlimited fine or life imprisonment. Both the Lord Justice-General and the Lord Justice-Clerk have made it extremely clear that such offences will be regarded as very serious and will be severely dealt with.
    Mr. McFall: What a pathetic response from the party which is supposed to be the custodian of law and order! Does not the Minister realise that there was a staggering increase of 40 per cent. in crimes involving offensive weapons in Scotland last year? Is it not amazing that in Scotland, unlike England and Wales, it is not an offence to carry an offensive weapon? The ready availability of these weapons causes immense concern. I illustrate that point by referring the Minister to the Sunday Times of 22 November in which an advertisement for a mail order magazine featured such murderous weapons as the Bowie knife—a 7 in stainless steel blad with a serrated edge. Does not that show that this activity can be described as trading in death? The police and public to whom I speak ask whether the Government have given up on crime, and if they have not, when they will start doing something about it.
    Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I remind the hon. Gentleman that when we first brought in police powers of search the Labour party voted against them in the House. If a police officer has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person is carrying an offensive weapon he may search that person without a warrant under section 4 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980. We have said that we will take forward consultations speedily and legislate at the first available opportunity. Our commitment to law and order remains stronger than ever.

    Whisky Distillers
    Mr. Shersby: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many whisky distillers are currently in operation in Scotland now and 10 years ago.
    Mr. Stewart: There are currently some 25 whisky distillers operating in Scotland. In 1982, there were 32 quoted companies engaged in Scotch whisky distilling.
    Mr. Shersby: Is my hon. Friend aware that distilleries are at the heart of rural communities in Scotland and that any further closures will be quite devastating to the people of those communities? Is he also aware that sales of whisky in the United Kingdom have dropped by 1 million bottles while sales abroad, where it is taxed less and costs less, have held up? Will my hon. Friend consult the Chancellor of the Exchequer and ask him, at the very least, to peg whisky duty so it can compete on level terms with imported wines?
    Mr. Stewart: The reduction in the number of distillers in the past 10 years is mainly attributable to mergers and acquisitions within the Scotch whisky industry rather than to companies going out of business or ceasing to run their distilleries. My hon. Friend is right to point to the importance of distilleries, particularly to rural areas and to the success of the industry in the export market. I had the great pleasure to attend a Queen's award for export ceremony at Burn Stewart distillers in Barrhead in my constituency.
    I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will consider my hon. Friend's views about duty on whisky, as well as the views of others, including the well-presented research by the Scotch Whisky Association, which was recently sent to the Treasury.
    Mr. McKelvey: Nevertheless, I hope that the Secretary of State for Scotland had the opportunity to peruse the Pieda report, which stated clearly the importance of the Scotch whisky industry to the Scottish economy—it is responsible for 15,000 direct jobs and 56,000 indirect ones. Those jobs will be threatened if the Chancellor does not show some partiality between the tax on wine and that on whisky—in whisky's favour. At the moment the tax on whisky is twice as much as that on wine and such an imbalance must be redressed.
    Mr. Stewart: The hon. Gentleman's record as a strong defender of the interests of Scotch whisky is well appreciated throughout the House. He is, after all, chairman of the all-party Scotch whisky industry group. He has made an immense contribution to the debates about the industry. I repeat that I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will have noted what the hon. Gentleman said.
    Mr. Bill Walker: Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the distilleries and the whisky industry are Scotland's premier exporting industry, and that it will continue for ever if it is looked after properly? Would he and his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State have words with the Chancellor and draw his attention to the fact that if whisky and other spirits were subject to the same tax as that on wine there would be a substantial reduction in income to the Treasury, but that if the tax on wine were brought up to the level of that on whisky there would be a substantial
    426
    inflow of funds to the Treasury? We have never understood why the Treasury has not seen that option as an opportunity to get more money.
    Mr. Stewart: My hon. Friend is known for his own Bill that benefited the industry. He is absolutely right; no one can dispute the key importance of the Scotch whisky industry in relation to the Scottish economy and exports, the value of which in 1991 was more than £1,800 million.
    I am sure that my right hon. and hon. Friends at the Treasury will have noted the specific points that my hon. Friend has raised. I can reassure him that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is in close consultation with the Chancellor on all matters relating to Scottish industry which affect the Treasury.

    Rural Mains Extension
    Mr. Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many additional households have been connected to (a) water and (b) mains drainage in Grampian region under the rural mains extension scheme over the last six years.
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Sir Hector Monro): More than 1,500 houses in rural areas have been connected to the public water supply system in Grampian region since 1 April 1986. No similar figures are available for connections to mains drainage, as the rural sewerage grant scheme ended in that year.
    Mr. Bruce: I am sure that the Minister will recognise the importance of the programme of extending rural mains and mains drainage in areas such as Grampian, which accounts for about a third of all the households in Scotland that still have private water supplies. Is he aware that, since 1975, 700 km has been laid at a cost of £12 million? Can he assure the House that—whatever reorganisation of water is introduced—the rural mains grant will continue, and the 50 schemes that are still outstanding in Grampian will be not only completed but, if possible, accelerated?
    Sir Hector Monro: It is certainly important to continue the schemes in Grampian. This year's capital allocation of £25 million is 35 per cent. higher than that for 1991–92, which shows that we appreciate the importance of the schemes. I shall consider whether to write to the hon. Gentleman about the exact details of the schemes in the future, but I think that he should feel fairly confident that, whichever of our eight options is chosen, rural water supplies will be given high priority.
    Mr. John Marshall: Does my hon. Friend agree that privatisation is the best recipe for those who are concerned about the level of investment in the water industry? Has not the industry in England increased its investment by 50 per cent. since its privatisation?
    Sir Hector Monro: I note what my hon. Friend has said. As I have already made clear, I do not intend to make any pronouncement on the matter before the end of the consultation period. We have presented eight options, and I hope that all hon. Members will make constructive suggestions to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State about them. We shall reach a decision early in the spring.
    Mr. McAllion: Is the Minister aware that in Grampian region, as elsewhere in Scotland, it is illegal to disconnect

    427
    the water and mains drainage supplies of domestic consumers? Can he assure the House that, if it is decided to privatise the water industry, the law in Scotland will not be changed to allow disconnections in the future?
    Sir Hector Monro: The hon. Gentleman is rushing ahead. As I have just explained, we are a long way from introducing legislation. When the Bill is presented to the House, hon. Members will have ample opportunities to go through it line by line and decide—in the light of which option is chosen, and in the light of how it is introduced to the unitary system of local government—what disconnection procedures there should be, if such procedures are considered necessary. As the hon. Gentleman has pointed out, it is not now possible to disconnect domestic supplies, and that will be taken very much into account.

    Local Enterprise Companies
    Mr. Ernie Ross: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met representatives of Scottish Enterprise to discuss the business plans of local enterprise companies.
    Mr. Stewart: My right hon. Friend and I meet Scottish Enterprise regularly to discuss a wide range of issues, including the activities and achievements of the local enterprise companies. However, consideration of the business plans of local enterprise companies is a matter between Scottish Enterprise and the individual companies concerned.
    Mr. Ross: Apparently, the Government do not intend to listen to Sir Brian Wolfson, the man selected by the Tory Cabinet to establish the training and enterprise councils and the local enterprise companies. Sir Brian has criticised the attitude of voluntarism being taken to both TECs and LECs, and also the failure to establish a training levy of companies. But will the Minister at least listen to Scottish Enterprise Tayside? That body told me last month that it was experiencing increasing tension in its efforts to provide high-quality training for a special needs group, and that, if its budget were cut, it might reluctantly have to sacrifice both quality and quantity.
    Mr. Stewart: This year, Scottish Enterprise Tayside received a budget of £23 million. Its budget increased by 5 per cent.—a larger increase than was received by any other LEC except one. As the hon. Gentleman will know, Scottish Enterprise's planned budget for next year is £9 million up on this year's plans, and an additional £20 million is expected from the European regional development fund. There will be no reduction in the overall resources available to the Scottish Enterprise network.
    Mr. Kynoch: Does my hon. Friend agree that the 11 per cent. increase for enterprise and environmental expenditure by Scottish Enterprise and the LECs that was announced last week by our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will enable those bodies to continue, at local level and with local expertise, the good work that they have carried out since their very recent inception less than two years ago?
    Mr. Stewart: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The substantial increase in resources for the environmental and enterprise budgets has been warmly welcomed by the local
    428
    enterprise network because it offers it flexibility between its different budget heads. I have no doubt that the excellent work that the local enterprise companies have done in the past two years will continue, and that, as they gain experience, they will be able to lever in increasing resources from the private sector.
    Dr. Godman: The Minister spoke of the achievements of local enterprise companies, but Renfrewshire Enterprise has achieved nothing on the lower Clyde. Many people are deeply concerned about the decision of Auld's the Bakers to move to Inchinnan. Did it receive no help from Renfrewshire Enterprise officials to locate within the Inverclyde enterprise zone? How valuable is the enterprise zone when a local company is forced to move a few miles away? Will he investigate this and other cases that reveal the pathetic performance of officials of Renfrewshire Enterprise on the lower Clyde?
    Mr. Stewart: I do not understand that question because Inchinnan is in Renfrewshire; the company is moving within the territory covered by Renfrewshire Enterprise. That does not seem to be a matter of great criticism of Renfrewshire Enterprise. [Interruption.] I wish that the hon. Member would allow me to answer the question. The hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) and I have had a number of meetings about the Inverclyde enterprise zone. We are aware that there have been some difficulties, but I assure him that Scottish Enterprise and Renfrewshire Enterprise are doing all that they can to ensure that the zone is a success.
    Mr. McLeish: When will this humbug and hypocrisy end? Why is £20 million being cut from Scottish Enterprise's training budget this year, including a 13 per cent. cut in youth training and a 7 per cent. cut in adult training? Does the Minister accept that, with high unemployment, deepening recession and the guarantee for young people not being met, we should be spending more on training rather than less? When will the Government put the real needs of Scotland first instead of Ministers being content to hang on to the coat tails of English employment Ministers?
    Mr. Stewart: If the hon. Gentleman had listened to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State yesterday morning, he would know perfectly well that Scotland's share of Britain's unemployment has fallen. The implication of the hon. Gentleman's statement is that he would have preferred it to rise. When shall we see an end to the humbug and hypocrisy of Labour Members about training, because the Government have increased real resources for training two and a half times in real terms compared with the Labour Government, yet every training initiative that the Government have taken has been opposed by Opposition Members?

    Fisheries Conservation
    Mrs. Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met representatives of the fishing industry in Scotland to discuss conservation policy; and if he will make a statement.
    Sir Hector Monro: Let us get back to quieter waters.

    429
    My right hon. Friend and I are available to meet industry representatives whenever it is appropriate. I last met representatives of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation on 23 November.
    Mrs. Ewing: The Minister may seek quieter waters for questions, but is he aware of the great depth of anger in fishing communities that neither he nor any Conservative Member of Parliament for Scotland was prepared to march with the 4,000 fisherfolk who came to Edinburgh from the length and breadth of Scotland last week? The only support that we received from the Scottish Office was from civil servants who waved and cheered as we walked past. Given the deep anger in those communities, will he assure us that when he next discusses fisheries at the Council of Ministers he will guarantee that there will be no consecutive tie-up and that any tie-up will be flexible, will enable boats to be taken out of harbours for repairs and will take account of bad weather conditions, which often enforced a tie-up? Without that, there is no way in which he will make his policy work.
    Sir Hector Monro: The hon. Lady attended the recent fishing debates and she knows that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and I take the fishing problem extremely seriously, which is why we are so frequently in touch with the fishermen's interests. We shall go to Brussels this Friday, Saturday and Sunday, determined to achieve the best possible result for the United Kingdom's fishermen and I shall, of course, be looking after the interests of the Scottish fishermen in particular. They will and can look forward to a much better quota of haddock, in which I think that they are especially interested, and to other improvements. I gave the hon. Lady a clear understanding that we are wholly opposed to the 10-day tie-up, which we shall oppose in Europe this weekend.
    Mr. Galloway: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
    Madam Speaker: I shall hear points of order after business questions.

Business of the House
3.30 pm
Mr. Nicholas Brown: Will the Leader of the House tell us the forthcoming business?
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton): The business for the first week after the Christmas Adjournment will be as follows:
MONDAY 11 JANUARY—Remaining stages of the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Bill.
TUESDAY 12 JANUARY—Opposition day (8th allotted day). There will be a debate on an Opposition motion, subject to be announced.
Motion on the Insurance Companies (Amendment No. 2) Regulations.
WEDNESDAY 13 JANUARY—European Communities (Amendment) Bill. Progress in Committee—third day.
THURSDAY 14 JANUARY—European Communities (Amendment) Bill. Progress in Committee—fourth day.
FRIDAY 15 JANUARY—Private Members' Bills.
The House will also wish to know that European Standing Committee B will meet on Wednesday 13 January at 10.30 am to consider European Community Document No. 9752/91 relating to investment and management of pension funds.
[Wednesday 13 January:

European Standing Committee B

Relevant European Community Document

9752/91 Freedom of Management and Investment of Pension Funds.

Relevant Reports of the European Legislation Committee HC 24-viii (1991–92) HC 24-xv (1991–92) HC 79-i (1992–93).]

Mr. Brown: In the light of recent events in Bosnia, will the Leader of the House give us an assurance that, if there are any new developments in the immediate future, the Government will make a statement tomorrow morning? In any event, will he assure us that the House will be informed at the earliest possible opportunity whether there is any change in Britain's present commitment?
Will the Leader of the House assure us that there will be an early debate on the investigation into the pit closure programme? As he will be aware, substantial concern has been expressed that one pit face in Nottingham has already closed, and there is some doubt as to whether there will be a complete and fairly judged review.
Will the Leader of the House invite the Secretary of State for Health to make a statement on the workings of the internal market, especially in the context of the Tomlinson report? We understand that certain matters were deleted from the report at her insistence and we should like to question her about that.
Will the Leader of the House give us an assurance that the crimes committed in the Maxwell pension fund affair could not possibly recur, at least during the Christmas recess? What assurance can he give us about that?
Mr. Newton: I shall take the hon. Gentleman's questions in order.
It is always my wish, and, I know, that of my right hon. Friends, to inform the House in an appropriate way at the earliest opportunity of significant changes, should there be any, on a matter as important as Bosnia. However, there
432
is no basis for suggesting that that might lead to a statement tomorrow, which I think is what the hon. Gentleman meant.
I can do no more than note the hon. Gentleman's request for an early debate on pit closures. If he has in mind the period after Christmas, I point out that there is an opportunity available to the Opposition, should they wish to take it, in the business that I have just announced.
The hon. Gentleman referred to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health. I understand that the Tomlinson report reflects the inquiry's terms of reference. It was not doctored at any stage and contains the views that Sir Bernard wished to express. Almost every statement that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health makes relates to the internal market of the NHS and reflects its success in increasing the amount of treatment provided.
Again, I note the hon. Gentleman's ingenious question about the Maxwell pension fund. I recognise the welcome given by the Select Committee on Social Security to the inquiry into the matter that the Government have set up with a view to ensuring that difficulties are prevented in future.
Mr. John Biffen: If, during the Christmas recess, there should be a further commitment of British armed forces into what was Yugoslavia, will my right hon. Friend give an undertaking that that decision would be the subject not merely of a statement but of a debate in the House during the first week back, even if that meant rearranging business?
Mr. Newton: I very much take on board my right hon. Friend's suggestion. He will understand—this echoes what I said to the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, East (Mr. Brown)—that I do not wish to add to the words that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister uttered on the subject generally in the House yesterday afternoon.
Mr. Robert Maclennan: Does the Leader of the House recognise that there is concern among hon. Members of all parties that we should be informed of the latest moves on the enforcement of the no-fly zone? The Prime Minister referred yesterday to the conference today in Geneva and to the conference on security and co-operation in Europe which meets today in Stockholm. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate to have a report tomorrow on the matter before the House rises.
Will the right hon. Gentleman ask whether the Lord Chancellor will make a statement on the contraction of eligibility for legal aid in the light of the announcement today that representatives of the Bar Council, of the Law Society and of many other lawyers' organisations are willing to enter meaningful discussions about reducing the cost of legal aid, including the possibility of a pay freeze?
Mr. Newton: I note the hon. Gentleman's observation on the earlier matter. He will, of course, reflect on the fact that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister also referred to discussions at the North Atlantic Council on Thursday in addition to the two gatherings to which the hon. Gentleman referred.
I shall ensure that my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor and my hon. Friend the Parliamentary

433
Secretary to the Lord Chancellor's Department are made aware of the hon. Gentleman's request on the question of legal aid and reports in today's papers.
Sir Dudley Smith: Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of us have parliamentary duties away from this place at, for example, the Western European Union and the Council of Europe? In view of the fact that the European Communities (Amendment) Bill may go on for the rest of our parliamentary lives, does my right hon. Friend think that it would be helpful for those of us who have other official commitments to have the same two days every week delineated by my right hon. Friend so that we know where we are and can make our plans?
Mr. Newton: Without wishing to seem to endorse what I would term my hon. Friend's overweening pessimism, I note his request, which has come from one or two other quarters of the House on earlier occasions. I recognise the need to take account as far as we can of things that are occurring elsewhere when it is proper to do so, and I note the latter part of his request. I cannot give my hon. Friend an absolute promise at present, but I shall consider whether there are ways in which I could be helpful to the House, which I will describe at some later stage.
Mr. David Jamieson: The Leader of the House will be aware of the importance of the award of the nuclear refit contract to either Devonport Management Ltd. in Devonport, in my constituency, or to Babcock Thorn in Rosyth. There is clear and growing evidence that there has been a leak of vital commercial information from the DML bid to Babcock Thorn. The award of the contract involves the jobs and futures of more than 40,000 workers in both England and Scotland.
In the light of the change in stance on the matter by the Minister of State for Defence Procurement since he answered a debate in the House on 25 November this year, and as the Secretary of State for Defence has not yet found time to answer my letter to him of 7 December, will the Leader of the House allow time immediately after the recess for the Secretary of State for Defence to make a statement or to answer a debate on this matter of great national importance?
Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman made a number of points and I certainly shall not attempt to answer all of them off the cuff, but I shall bring them to the attention of my right hon. Friend. As for the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's comments, he should note that questions to the Ministry of Defence are at the top of the list for the Tuesday of the week that we return after Christmas.
Mr. William Powell: My right hon. Friend will be aware that there is continuing disappointment in the House that he has failed to give his considered view on the recommendations made in the report of the Committee chaired by my right hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling). When does he expect to make a statement to the House on the future of the proposals?
Mr. Newton: I cannot give my hon. Friend a definite date, but my contacts through the usual channels are continuing, and I hope to come forward with my views without too much further delay. As on previous occasions, may I say that a number of important aspects of the
434
Jopling report have clearly been reflected in practice in the way that we have managed to operate the business of the House in recent weeks.
Mr. Andrew Faulds: In view of the appalling impression given to people outside by the televising of debates in the House, and in view of the fact that the succubi in the Press Gallery are the only ones who benefit financially and professionally from televising the proceedings of the House, would it not be advisable to have a debate on the matter so that the House may decide once and for all to remove that technical incunabula from the place?
Mr. Newton: I am aware from experience that one always disagrees with the hon. Gentleman at one's peril, but personally I do not share his view about the overall impression of the place created by television, which I believe has done a great deal to enhance public interest in Parliament and politics.
Mr. Peter Thurnham: Will my right hon. Friend find time for an early debate—preferably over two days—on the consultation paper on the future of the BBC? I have received a lot of correspondence about it, and I am sure that many right hon. and hon. Members would want to participate in such a debate.
Mr. Newton: I shall certainly bear in mind my hon. Friend's request; but I do not want to encourage any hopes of a two-day debate.
Rev. Martin Smyth: Will the Leader of the House arrange for the Home Secretary to come to the House tomorrow before we rise for the recess to give clear guidance to people throughout the country in the light of the European Court's judgment that it is time that the laws of the land on Sunday trading should be observed?
Mr. Newton: I should perhaps mention, as there will be widespread interest in the matter, that my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General will be answering a question this afternoon about the legal consequences of the judgment of the European Court of Justice. The hon. Gentleman will also be aware that, on 26 November at the Dispatch Box, my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary described the way that the Government wanted to progress in relation to the legislation once they had the European Court judgment.
Mr. Bob Dunn: Will my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House arrange for an early debate in the new year to remind Members of Parliament that what they say and publish must be accurate and based on fact? The hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw)—we are all delighted that he is no longer getting stoned in India—recently published a statement to say that there were now fewer teachers in employment when, in fact, more teachers are in employment than ever before. Such disgraceful behaviour by the Opposition has simply got to stop.
Mr. Newton: While I have not seen the paper to which my hon. Friend refers, I have no doubt that the hon. Member for Blackburn will carefully study what he said and will wish to correct any errors that he has put about. Manifestly, all of us would agree that we have a duty to ensure that what we say is straightforward and accurate.
Mr. Derek Enright: I wish to thank the Leader of the House because, as a result of my request to

435
him about miners' payments before Christmas, I received a prompt reply from the Minister concerned the next day, saying that the bonus would be paid as usual. That was subsequently repudiated by British Coal, and this morning that repudiation was confirmed by the President of the Board of Trade. Will the Leader of the House therefore ask the Prime Minister to come to the House to debate early-day motion 1085, standing in my name?
[That this House recalls and approves the statement of the President of the Board of Trade that miners in pits under review would not lose benefits at the most advantageous rate; notes the confirmation by British Coal that they would withhold the vast majority of these payments despite a statement from the Minister of Energy to the contrary; and calls upon the President of the Board of Trade to intervene urgently, ensuring that payments are made before Christmas.]
Will the Leader of the House ask the Prime Minister to persuade British Coal to behave like Scrooge after rather than before his conversion?
Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman asked whether I would bring the Prime Minister to the House to debate his early-day motion. I fear that, as he may have foreseen, I do not expect to be in a position to do that. In view of the hon. Gentleman's kind remarks at the beginning of his question, I shall again make inquiries, once business questions are over.
Mr. Roy Thomason: Will my right hon. Friend arrange for time to be given for an early debate on Britain's contribution to the European Community to give us the opportunity not only to congratulate the Prime Minister on the outcome of the Edinburgh summit but, particularly, to expose the hypocrisy of Opposition Members who appear intent on pouring British taxpayers' money—
Madam Speaker: Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that "hypocrite" and "hypocrisy" are not words that we tend to bandy across the Chamber.
Mr. Thomason: In that case, Madam Speaker, may I withdraw and use instead the word "inconsistency"?
Madam Speaker: That is perfectly acceptable.
Mr. Newton: Clearly, the spirit of Chirstmas is now suffusing the House. I warmly endorse my hon. Friend's remarks about the success of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister at Edinburgh, both on that matter and on a number of others. As I said in my statement, I shall be providing the House with two full days' worth of opportunities to make a wide variety of comments about Europe.
Mr. David Winnick: Is the Leader of the House aware that people will be extremely disappointed that the House will be breaking up for Christmas without any statement being made on the latest developments in British policy towards Bosnia? Is the right hon. Gentleman further aware that those of us who have been reluctant in recent months to condone military action remain of that view but nevertheless believe that the crimes and atrocities that are being committed by the Serbians in
436
their so-called ethnic cleansing programme are totally unacceptable in today's world and cry out for United Nations action?
A statement should be made before the Christmas break so that the people of Britain may know to what extent we should commit ourselves. I am not suggesting that we should commit ourselves all the way by any means, but we need some action so that the criminals who now control Belgrade realise that the international community cannot stay silent or indifferent to what is happening.
Mr. Newton: The whole House will agree with the hon. Gentleman's condemnation of what is going on in the areas to which he referred. I touched on the question of a statement and debate in a number of earlier answers and I have nothing to add. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will agree, however, that the Prime Minister spoke in firm terms yesterday and referred—as I did during the Christmas Adjournment motion debate on Monday—to the vigorous language of the Edinburgh Council conclusions.
Mr. Bill Walker: May we have an opportunity to debate early-day motions 991, 992 and 1040?
[That this House is concerned that for the last 10 years Councillor J. Brooks has been Labour Leader of Monklands District Council, where with the help of the local Labour Party he has achieved a position of near absolute power which has resulted in (1) a £1 million land deal for a company owned by Councillor Brooks and his brother, whereby the company acquired council land for £50,000 and forced through planning permission to make the land worth more than £1 million, the payment of generous fees to Councillor Brooks and his brother and other expenses followed by the company being placed in liquidation with unpaid bills to third party creditors of over £200,000, (2) the employment by the Council of Councillor Brooks' son in Direct Works, another son in the Planning Department and a daughter in a temporary post, (3) the sacking from council employment of Labour Party member Tom McFarlane at 51 years of age, believed to be the only Monklands District Council worker ever made redundant without being offered alternative employment, because he and his wife had dared to question the internal procedures of the local Labour Party and its corrupt rule of the Council and (4) the attempt by Councillor Brooks to cover up the mafia-like behaviour of himself and other Labour councillors by seeking to obtain council funding for legal fees for a private libel action against the local newspaper and by starting a council-owned free newspaper; believes that other allegations about relationships between the expenditure of council money and benefits to Councillor Brooks and his family need to be independently investigated; and is further concerned that the manner in which the Labour Party is governing local councils in Scotland is against the public interest and requires to be independently investigated.]
My right hon. Friend will be aware that, at Scottish questions, the conduct of Monklands district council was raised on a number of occasions. As there is an Opposition day on the Tuesday after we return, will my right hon. Friend persuade the Leader of the Opposition, who happens to have Monklands district in his constituency, that that is an opportunity to have the matter properly aired and all the charges properly examined so that the situation can be resolved?
Mr. Newton: I am happy to say that that is a question for the Opposition rather than for me. I understand that there were some somewhat heated exchanges on the matter earlier, and I regard it as my role now to try to reduce the temperature.
Mr. Ray Powell: The Leader of the House has just been asked a question on the ruling by the European Court on Sunday trading, and he referred to a reply given by the Home Secretary on 26 November which, in essence, was that he would put the Sunday trading laws in abeyance until such time as the court had ruled. The ruling was announced this morning. Surely the Home Secretary or the Attorney-General should be here to make a statement before we go into recess, and before all the large stores are allowed to trade illegally on the Sunday before Christmas. Also, one of them should be here to explain in detail the Government's interpretation of whether the Shops Act 1950 should apply or whether they will leave the law in abeyance despite the ruling of the European Court.
I want a clear decision this afternoon from the Government, through the Leader of the House, which will give guidance to all our people about whether Sunday trading is legal in the run-up to Christmas and before 22 January, when the House will accept my Bill.
Mr. Newton: It is important that I make it clear that I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's interpretation of the statement—it was not an answer to a question—by my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary on 26 November. On the latter part of his question, I already made it clear in my reply to another hon. Gentleman that the Attorney-General is answering a question this afternoon setting out his view of the position.
Mr. Patrick Cormack: In view of the fact that my right hon. Friend has not been able to announce a debate on foreign affairs before the end of the year, and as he could devote only 10 minutes to the subject in his speech in the debate on Monday because of his generosity to others, will he arrange for a debate on foreign affairs and especially on the situation in Bosnia? Hon. Members on both sides of the House, of all shades of opinion, want a debate, so could we please discuss the matter in the week that we come back and change the business accordingly?
Mr. Newton: I note my hon. Friend's request, but he would not expect me to go further in view of the fact that I have just announced the business. As I said at the time, he made an impressive speech in the debate on the Christmas Adjournment motion. The principal reason that I was unable to devote much time to replying to him was that I made a short speech—as did the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, East (Mr. Brown)—to allow Back Benchers to have as much of the debate as possible. I devoted virtually all my speech to answering my hon. Friend and neglected other hon. Members.
Mr. Jeremy Corbyn: Will the Leader of the House contact the Home Secretary to arrange for an urgent statement to be made to the House on the removal of Lorrain Osman from this country to Hong Kong last night? He has been held in remand in British prisons for seven years, mostly in maximum security. His family saw him at 7.30 pm yesterday, in the company of his solicitor, Mr. Kingston, and they were not told anything. Two hours
438
later, he was bundled on a plane to Hong Kong, where he arrived earlier today, despite the fact that an appeal to the House of Lords was pending against the decision of the Home Secretary grant an extradition order for him.
I and many people outside the House believe that the case needs to be brought out into the open. Undoubtedly, Mr. Osman has a great deal of information about the goings-on in Hong Kong and Malaysia, which also needs to be brought out into the open. There is deep anger about the way in which Mr. Osman has been treated, the length of time that he has spent in prison, and the information needs to come out now, in public.
Mr. Newton: The facts, as I understand them, are that Mr. Osman has been resisting extradition since he was committed into custody to await surrender in June 1987. The Home Secretary signed a warrant for his surrender in June this year. Mr. Osman and those representing him have been made well aware that he would be surrendered to the Hong Kong authorities as soon as outstanding legal proceedings had been completed. Following the refusal of his petition for leave to appeal to the House of Lords last night, which was immediately notified to Mr. Osman's legal representatives, steps were taken to remove him to Hong Kong.
Mr. John Butcher: Does my right hon. Friend agree that we are approaching a period of great danger in the Balkans and that our indignation and anger over what is going on in Sarajevo could lead to a chain of events that could, unhappily, go out of control? Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to remind the House of the strong links between Serbia and its fellow Slays in Russia, which is led by a Government who are looking increasingly beleaguered and nationalist? For those reasons, would it not be wise to involve the Russian Government closely in any initiative in the Balkans and for us not to use NATO as a vehicle for seeking a solution—
Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman is putting political issues to the Leader of the House. We are dealing with the business of the House in the week after the recess. Many hon. Members have a question to ask. I am trying my best to accommodate all of them, but I shall not be able to do so if hon. Members make long statements and in consequence long replies are given. Questions and answers should be brief so that I can call all hon. Members.
Mr. Butcher: Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate in the House before the recess, because it would be a tragedy if we were to sleepwalk into an international crisis before we had a proper discussion?
Mr. Newton: I am grateful for the measured way in which my hon. Friend spoke. He will understand that I have already touched on the matter several times, but I shall ensure that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is aware of what he has said.
Dr. Lynne Jones: In view of Birmingham city council's announcement today that all job vacancies are to be frozen, that new spending commitments are to be halted and that there are to be 3,000 redundancies in the next financial year as a result of the Government's revenue support grant settlement, and the likelihood of similar announcements from other councils as their treasurers get to grips with the figures, will

439
the Leader of the House arrange for an early debate on the Government's local government policy and its impact on services and jobs, and hence on the wider economy?
Mr. Newton: The hon. Lady will be aware that the local government settlement involved a substantial increase. I note her request for a debate.
Mr. Toby Jessel: In view of the presentation today of the National Lottery Etc. Bill, tomorrow's announcement by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for National Heritage, the great deal of good that that Bill will do for the arts, sport, charities and our heritage, and its widespread support in the House and the country, how soon can we expect a Second Reading debate?
Mr. Newton: Not in the first week after the recess.
Mr. Norman Hogg: The Leader of the House will be aware that the Government have published two policy papers in relation to Scotland, one dealing with local government and the other with the future of the water supply industry. As water privatisation was not mentioned in the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party's manifesto, on which it fought and lost the election in Scotland, may we have an early debate on the Floor of the House on those major policy matters?
Mr. Newton: To give a direct answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I am aware of the publication of those documents. The widespread consultation will be completed at the end of January, and I would not want to promise a debate within that time scale.
Mr. John Bowis: My right hon. Friend may recall my invitation to him to join me in a walk over London's bridges. In the light of a written answer that I have received which shows that just about every bridge from Hampton Court to the sea will be closed or partly closed to traffic in the next six months, will my right hon. Friend arrange for a statement to be made either tomorrow or early in January? If not, all he can do is make a Christmas present to each of my constituents of a course on walking on water, as that will be the only way that they will be able to get here.
Mr. Newton: That is an ingenious question, but I shall still not take up my hon. Friend's offer to join him on a walk over Christmas. I note his request, and I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport and my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London will also note his point. A debate on London transport on the Consolidated Fund was initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall) at some unearthly hour of the night, but I am not sure whether my hon. Friend managed to speak in it.
Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours: Members' interests.
Mr. Newton: I think that the hon. Gentleman knows that I have been in touch with my hon. Friend the Member for Wealden (Sir G. Johnston Smith), the Chairman of the Select Committee on Members' Interests, who I understand has made firm arrangements for the
440
publication of the new Register. He has also put to me proposals for debating other recommendations in the Select Committee report. I have discussed those with him in the past few days, and I shall consider them through the usual channels.
Mr. Phil Gallie: Bearing in mind today's tragic bombings in Oxford street, would my right hon. Friend consider announcing a debate to address the shameful situation in which people residing within our island seem to have no regard at all for the welfare, life or limb of others?
Mr. Newton: I do not think that I can promise an early debate, but all hon. Members will echo my hon. Friend's comments.
Mr. Denzil Davies: In his report to the House on Monday about the Edinburgh summit, the Prime Minister said that the agreement on the Danish opt-out was between Heads of State and Governments and indicated that it was outwith the Maastricht arrangements. If that is the case, and if as a result it may not be possible to discuss those arrangements during debate on the European Communities (Amendment) Bill, may we have an assurance that that agreement between Governments can be debated in the House?
Mr. Newton: I certainly cannot give the hon. Gentleman that assurance off the cuff. What is in order during debate on the Bill is a matter for the Chairman of Ways and Means and not for me.
Dr. Liam Fox: Will my right hon. Friend consider an early debate on the European fighter aircraft, because the Government's success in keeping that project afloat, if I may use that term in the context of an aircraft, has important implications, not only for this country's defences, but for the maintenance of jobs in the United Kingdom, not least in the Bristol area?
Mr. Newton: My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence will be answering questions in the first week after the recess. I am sure that all hon. Members will welcome yet another achievement by the Government, who have brought the project to its present state with their current prospects.
Mr. Dennis Skinner: Will the Leader of the House arrange for a statement to be made as soon as possible on the issue of dioxin in Bolsover and the fact that Coalite, a friend of the Tory Government, is planning to build a new incinerator? I have a petition containing the names of thousands of people who are protesting against the incinerator. At a time when Coalite shares have dropped to about 6p on the stock exchange, will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that a planted question on the subject by a Tory Member will be answered this afternoon so that Coalite can be given a lifeline and farmers can be allowed to operate again, just because the National Farmers Union has taken out a case against Coalite in the court? It sounds to me as if this Tory Government are aiding and abetting their friends at Coalite, and it is time that it was stopped.
Mr. Newton: I am a little uncertain about precisely what the hon. Gentleman is asking me to do. I note his

441
points, and I shall, of course, ensure that my right hon. Friend is made aware of the vigour with which he has put them.
Mr. Max Madden: Will the Leader of the House do everything possible to persuade the Prime Minister to make a statement tomorrow on Bosnia? A statement would coincide with the arrival here of the first 100 detainees from Bosnia. If the official Opposition made Bosnia the subject of their Supply day debate on the first Tuesday back, would the Leader of the House consider switching business on the Wednesday, thereby providing for a two-day debate which would enable hon. Members to address what is clearly the most serious and dangerous political crisis facing Europe at this time?
Mr. Newton: I respect the hon. Gentleman's view and the reasons for his request, but I do not think that I can add to what I said at the start of these exchanges. The hon. Gentleman asked about the Opposition Supply day. That is entirely a matter for the usual channels and Opposition Members, who I see are nodding in agreement. However, I should not encourage hopes that the Government would wish to add a second day.
Mr. David Trimble: May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to what the Secretary of State for Scotland said earlier this afternoon? In referring to his consideration of the governance of Scotland, he said that he was giving particular consideration to improving the way in which Scottish affairs are handled in the House and to increasing the effectiveness of Scottish representatives. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is a uniquely suitable subject for an early debate next year, especially as representatives of what the Chancellor of the Exchequer inelegantly calls "the other territories" within the country have a particular interest in ensuring that they are treated at least as well as Scotland?
Mr. Newton: We are always seeking to improve the way in which all parts of the United Kingdom are governed and also to improve British government as a whole. However, I do not think that I can promise an early debate on those matters in the new year.
Mr. Bryan Davies: On the matter of the National Lottery Etc. Bill, which is to be presented today, will the right hon. Gentleman dispel the unfortunate rumour that it might first be introduced in the Upper House? Does he recognise that, given the range of opinions on the Bill, it is important that it should be introduced in the Lower House?
Mr. Newton: It is my expectation that the Bill will be introduced in this House.
Madam Speaker: Indeed, presentation of the Bill is to be the next item of business.
Mr. Bob Cryer: On the question of the European Court's decision on Sunday trading, will the right hon. Gentleman assure us that a statement will be made by the Secretary of State for the Environment? Is not the task of catching the lawbreakers, who treat the law with indifference and effrontery by opening Sunday after Sunday, in the hands of local authorities—which are short of the money that they need to prosecute those companies?
442
Will the right hon. Gentleman also tell us how much money he intends to give local authorities? Should he not encourage them to prosecute the big corporations that treat the law with such contempt, or are the Government being slow on that because organisations such as B and Q are considerable contributors to the Conservative party and expect something in return? If that is the truth, as I and others believe, it is a deplorable case of political corruption.
Mr. Newton: It is clear that the spirit of Christmas has now left the Chamber. I sometimes find that I am a little weary of the extent to which the hon. Gentleman sees conspiracy in absolutely everything. I have already made a brief comment on local authority financing. He is right to say that the primary role in enforcing the law on Sunday trading rests with local authorities—the precise point made by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General in the answer to which I have already referred.
Mr. Calum Macdonald: If there cannot be a statement tomorrow or during our first week back, may we have a debate on Bosnia during the first fortnight after the House returns? The subject has dominated business questions today, and that should be reflected in our business after the recess.
Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman is right to say that there has been much reference to Bosnia in our exchanges. Indeed, it has been quite striking, as it was in the Christmas Adjournment motion debate earlier this week.
I cannot add to what I said earlier, but the hon. Gentleman will have noted the suggestion of his hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Madden) that it is a subject for debate that the Opposition, apart from anyone else, might wish to consider.
Dr. John Marek: In view of the flagrant breaking of the law by companies such as B and Q, other do-it-yourself stores and various supermarkets, and also the apparent abetting of those actions by the Home Secretary when he said that the law was in abeyance, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the matter is too serious to be left to a written answer? Surely the Home Secretary should come to the House and make a statement, on which he can be questioned by hon. Members, about the current position following the judgment of the European Court?
Mr. Newton: My right hon. and learned Friend made a specific statement on 26 November about his intentions in the wake of the judgment, whose timing we did not then know. He set out clearly and, in my view, sensibly how the Government hoped to proceed. The interpretation of the law is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General—the very point on which he has answered a question this afternoon.
Mr. Mike O'Brien: Will the Leader of the House arrange for an urgent ministerial response to the statement by the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis in the Home Affairs Select Committee this morning? He said that the police may have inadequate powers to deal with IRA terrorism. In particular, he voiced his concern about the need for an urgent clarification of

443
the law on the ability of the police to carry out random road checks to prevent IRA terrorists from bringing lorries and equipment into central London and other towns.
Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman will hardly expect me to comment on his account—not that I have reason to doubt it—of something that took place in a Select Committee hearing this morning. He will have seen, as I have, reports of action that the police have taken in recent weeks, which appears to be effective and precisely of the kind to which he referred.
Mr. John Hutton: Will the Leader of the House reconsider his earlier response to the request by my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, East (Mr. Brown) and arrange for a statement to be made by the Secretary of State for Health in the first week after the recess about the current problems facing the national health service? Many hospitals and health authorities, not least in my constituency, face an acute cash crisis, which might lead to the closure of operating theatres and surgical wards. If ever there were a need for a statement by the Secretary of State for Health, it is in the first week after the recess.
Mr. Newton: The current position in the health service, put briefly, is that we have increased spending by 58 per cent. in real terms since we first came to office, and the extra £1 billion for next year will allow nearly 200,000 more acute in-patients and day patients to be treated in England alone.
Mr. Bill Olner: Is the Leader of the House aware of the decision reached today by the Secretary of State for Defence on youth training within the armed forces for junior leaders and apprentice training? Does he realise the effect that it will have on my constituency, with the closure of Bramcote barracks, with the loss of civilian jobs and thousands of pounds from the local economy? Will he arrange for an early statement to be made to the House next year?
Mr. Newton: My right hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces is answering a written question this afternoon about the restructuring of Army training bases and has written to all hon. Members whose constituencies are affected. The hon. Gentleman may be aware that one of the Adjournment debates tomorrow—admittedly it will be brief—is on redundancies in the defence industry. Perhaps he could make a brief intervention in that debate. To do so, it would be up to him to come to an understanding with one of his hon. Friends.
Mr. Nigel Griffiths: I would like to think, Madam Speaker, that you are saving the best until last.
Will the Leader of the House allow time for an early debate on the 17 deaths and 9,000 injuries in the home through electrical accidents each year caused in part by the Government's failure, over the past five years, to insist that every electrical household appliance should be sold with a pre-fitted plug? We are now one of the few countries in the world that does not insist on that vital safety measure.
Mr. Newton: I shall bring that point to the attention of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

Points of Order
4.12 pm
Mr. Hugh Dykes: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. On 8 December, a bizarre meeting was organised at a west end club by my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Cash), to whom I have given notice of this point of order. He was evoking the presence of a French political leader at a meeting that he was also to address, sending the letter out by way of a circular on House of Commons notepaper to other Members' constituents. A constituent in Harrow let me have the letter yesterday afternoon.
I am disturbed not only by the fact that a Member has addressed other Members' constituents without referral but by the fact that many hundreds of circular letters on official House of Commons notepaper have presumably been sent out in official House of Commons envelopes using official stamps. I should be grateful for your guidance, Madam Speaker, in this serious matter.
Mr. Dennis Skinner: Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. It is clear that vicious warfare has broken out on the Tory Benches just before Christmas. Before you answer the hon. Gentleman's point of order, and as you have control over the matter, I suggest that you separate them, with the anti-marketeers on one side and the marketeers on the other—[Interruption.] We have already done it on this side. We made that decision a long time ago. You will have to do it for them, Madam Speaker, now that the Maastricht Bill is on the agenda for the week when we return.
Mr. Phil Gallie: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Does it relate to this matter?
Mr. Gallie: Yes, it does.
Madam Speaker: I know that it is the season of good will. I did not think that I would need to take the matter further, because I have a response, but if the hon. Gentleman can throw new light on the matter, I must hear him.
Mr. Gallie: Further to the point of order, on the matter raised by the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner)—
Madam Speaker: Order. I answer points of order; Hon. Members do not.
In response to the point of order by the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) about dividing Members of Parliament, let me make it clear that I like hon. Members to sit exactly where they usually sit, because I know then where I can find them and keep an eye on them.
On the more serious point of the use of stationery and House of Commons envelopes, that is a matter for the Serjeant at Arms, with whom I shall be raising the matter.
Mr. George Galloway: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You must be aware that Scottish Question Time today was the site of, and the vehicle for, a concerted abuse of the Order Paper. Four out of the first 10 Scottish questions had been tabled by English Conservative Members. Several other English Conservative Members had, unusually, come into the

445
Chamber to ask supplementary questions. I know that you are aware, Madam Speaker, of the deep offence that this causes in Scotland. We get only one hour a month in which to question Scottish Office Ministers and to hold them to account for their stewardship of our country. If that hour is taken up by a concerted effort, presumably organised by someone, to dominate Question Time, deep offence and deep damage to Parliament's reputation, and to that of the Union, is caused in Scotland.
To add insult to injury—this is new material that I ask you to consider, Madam Speaker—the concerted effort was not just to dominate the Order Paper but to spread foul smears against my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the Opposition and against councillors elected by the people in the Monklands district, a district that has almost certainly never been seen, and could not be identified on a map, by the large number of Conservative Members who were throwing their buckets of smears at people who were not in the House to answer for themselves.
Will you consider this matter, Madam Speaker, before the reputation of the House and Scottish Question Time is further diminished to the point of negligibility in the country of Scotland whose Question Time it is supposed to be?
Mr. John Home Robertson: Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Order. Let me answer the first point of order.
I do not believe that Scottish Question Time is diminished in the eyes of the House or of the public in the United Kingdom. The hon. Gentleman knows that there can be no manipulation of the Order Paper because questions are drawn by ballot. A place on the Order Paper is achieved through the luck of the draw. I remind the hon. Gentleman that this is a United Kingdom Parliament and hon. Members representing any part of the United Kingdom are entitled to ask questions and supplementaries relating to the regions of England, Northern Ireland or Wales, and to be called to do so.
Furthermore, I attempt to ensure that a proper balance is achieved. Therefore, there can be no concerted manipulation of the Order Paper because it is my responsibility to ensure that no one group, or no handful of hon. Members, on whichever side of the House, can manipulate or in any way use the Order Paper to their advantage. That remains my responsibility. I am particularly concerned at Scottish Question Time to ensure that there is fair play and that, when any antagonistic or abrasive questions are raised, there is always ample opportunity for proper rebuttal, from whichever side.
Mr. Home Robertson: Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. This House and the government of the United Kingdom are being brought into disrepute in the eyes of many people in Scotland, and if Conservative Members carry on conducting themselves as they have in recent months and years, the Union will be endangered.
I appeal to you, Madam Speaker, to reflect on certain aspects of recent Scottish Question Times. I recognise your important duty to protect the interests of minorities in the House, including the apparently growing minority of English Tories who want to put questions to the Secretary of State for Scotland. I agree that they are entitled to do that; but is it absolutely necessary to call such a high proportion of that minority at Scottish Question Time? Today we heard from Hendon, Reading, Thanet, Basildon, Dover, Uxbridge and Altrincham and Sale—most of these Members expressing a new-found interest in the affairs of Monklands district council, an interest likely to have been inspired by Tory Whips.
Will you reflect on the limited rights of the Scottish majority? Sixty-one of the 72 seats in Scotland are represented by members of Opposition parties, and the odds against our being able to raise issues on behalf of our constituents seem to be growing ever longer, to the point where our constituents wonder whether we are here.
Madam Speaker: If I am asked in a reasonable manner, I will always reflect on the way Question Time is conducted, but I do not think that Scottish Members do badly at Scottish Question Time or at any other Question Time.

BILL PRESENTED
  NATIONAL LOTTERY ETC.
  Mr. Secretary Brooke, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Clarke, Mr. Secretary Heseltine, Mr. Secretary Hunt, Mr. Secretary Lang, Secretary Sir Patrick Mayhew, Mr. Secretary Patten, Mrs. Secretary Bottomley, Mrs. Secretary Shephard, and Mr. Robert Key, presented a Bill to authorise lotteries to be promoted as part of a National Lottery; to make provision with respect to the running and regulation of that National Lottery and with respect to the distribution of its net proceeds; to increase the membership and extend the powers of the Trustees of the National Heritage Memorial Fund; to amend to law relating to lotteries promoted on behalf of societies or by local authorities and the law relating to pool betting; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time and ordered to be read a Second time tomorrow; and to be printed. [Bill 108.]

Slaughterhouses
4.22 pm
Dr. Liam Fox: I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the law relating to the regulation and supervision of slaughterhouses.
Earlier this Session, I raised the issue in an Adjournment debate. I should like to begin by expressing my thanks to my Conservative colleagues who have given me such amazing support.
We are interested in maintaining high-quality food which is safe to eat. At no point have we tried to back away from the Government's commitment to safe food hygiene, but we are faced with massive over-regulation. The fresh meat hygiene and inspection regulations implementing EC directive 91/497 are over-regulatory—and it is not just this country that is discovering the associated problems. The German Health Minister has said in the German Parliament:
"EC experts will be overseeing our small butchery businesses and butchers' slaughterhouses. I do not believe such supervision to be rational, given that these businesses only trade on the domestic market. Such monitoring—abiding by the subsidiarity principle—should remain the responsibility of the national monitoring authorities alone".
That was said not by a member of the agricultural lobby but by the German Health Minister, who is concerned above all else with public health.
Deregulation, like charity, ought to begin at home. It is not good enough for the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to blame the European Community for all the problems facing our agriculture. The current regulations, emanating from the European Community via the common agricultural policy and augmented by MAFF, make George Orwell's vision seem like that of Adam Smith. We seem to be facing ever greater regulation.
We are told that choice is important, but what about the choice that people should enjoy to visit different types of butcher, besides Tesco or Sainsbury? The Minister replying to my Adjournment debate said that consumers increasingly favour one-stop shopping. That is all very well for those who happen to live close to such shopping, but those who live in isolated rural communities that depend on the local butcher or the local farmer do not have this choice. We want realistic choices for real people in real communities.
Particular ways of life in this country need defending. We do not all, thank God, live in sprawling suburbs, and woe betide us if we try to apply one pattern to the whole population. That is the way to lose the stability that traditional ways of life have brought us.
As on previous occasions, I note that the Opposition Benches empty as soon as we debate rural issues—Opposition Members have no interest in them. Creeping urbanisation, represented by most Opposition Members, threatens our way of life in the countryside.
How will the regulations affect farmers with a small number of stock? Where will they go if their small abattoirs are closed? What will happen to casualty stock? What will all those who are worried about animal welfare have to say if the Government bring in regulations that mean that animals must be transported longer and longer distances to slaughterhouses? That will lead to more and more stressed animals at the point of slaughter and that will not help to guarantee the hygiene and quality of the food that consumers receive.
448
We must also remember the "minor problem" of employment. The south-west will be hard hit by the regulations, and if the costs are applied across the region, we will lose up to 1,000 jobs. The Opposition are always great when it comes to fighting for jobs in urban areas, but they do not seem too concerned about those in rural areas; it is left to Conservative Members to defend them.
It is important to consider the implications of the proposals relating to ante and post-mortem inspections. There is a fundamental difference between our practices and those of Europe. Since the 19th century, United Kingdom controls have developed through local government, under medical guidance. The principal players are the medica officers of health, environmental health officers and meat inspectors. In other countries, such inspections are not carried out by veterinary surgeons. In Holland, for example, the public health veterinarians are part of a different tradition and a different system from our own. The regulations are trying to apply a model on to the United Kingdom that does not fit our heritage and our tradition. Many of the problems with the regulations stem from that.
Our system works well in general, and it does not need profound change or to be subject to the profound centralisation envisaged by the regulations. It is important to consider the competence of those who will be asked to carry out the inspections. A written answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough (Mr. Sykes) revealed the Government's belief that
"The degree qualification obtained by every veterinary surgeon fully equips him or her to perform both ante and post-mortem inspections."—[Official Report, 9 December 1992; Vol. 215, c.718.]
The House might be interested to know that that experience may often be equivalent to one week's training before graduation. That does not match the 30 years of experience of some of our meat inspectors. I do not believe that those inspectors will take kindly to being told by someone who has had one week's experience or even a subsequent course on inspection, which may last just a couple of weeks, that he now takes precedence in terms of carrying out those ante and post-mortem inspections.
The supervision of slaughterhouses must continue to give out with minimum regulation. It should pay full regard to the maintenance of competition, consumer choice, employment prospects and economic viability of abattoirs. That supervision should be conducted in a way that is consistent with nationally established practices, traditions and heritage. In the United Kingdom, that will mean restricting veterinary inspection and continuing to use environmental health officers and meat inspectors to carry out the necessary supervision.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Dr. Liam Fox, Mr. Tom King, Dame Jill Knight, Mr. Mark Robinson, Mr. John Sykes, Mr. Sebastian Coe, Mr. David Harris, Mr. Andrew Robathan and Mr. Bernard Jenkin.

Slaughterhouses
  SLAUGHTERHOUSES
  Dr. Liam Fox accordingly presented a Bill to amend the law relating to the regulation and supervision of slaughterhouses: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 15 January 1993 and to be printed.[Bill 107.]
Orders of the Day
  Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Bill [Lords]
  As amended (in the Standing Committee), considered.
  Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Bill [Lords]
    New Clause 4

      APPEAL BY LORD ADVOCATE AGAINST SENTENCE IN SOLEMN PROCEEDINGS ETC
      ?(1) After section 228 of the 1975 Act (which provides for appeal by a person convicted on indictment) there shall be inserted the following section—
      228A. Where a person has been convicted on indictment, the Lord Advocate may appeal against the sentence passed on conviction—

      (a) if it appears to the Lord Advocate that the sentence is unduly lenient; or

      (b) on a point of law.".

      (2) In section 442 of that Act (Which provides for appeal in summary proceedings)—

      (a) in subsection (1), after paragraph (b) there shall be inserted the following paragraph.

      "(c) the prosecutor in such proceedings may, in any class of case specified by order by the Secretary of State under this paragraph, so appeal against the sentence passed on such conviction if it appears to the prosecutor that the sentence is unduly lenient."; and

      (b) after subsection (2) there shall be added the following subsection—

      "(3) The power of the Secretary of State to make an order under paragraph (c) of subsection (1) above shall be exercisable by statutory instrument; and any order so made shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.".?.—[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]
      Brought up, and read the First time.
      4.28 pm
      The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton): I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): With this it will be convenient to take Government amendments Nos. 17, 18, 19 and 24.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I pay tribute to the particular interest taken in this matter by my hon. Friend the Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) and the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall), both of whom tabled amendments or new clauses on it. Their concerns have been refined in the new clause and, with the amendments, it seeks to meet the undertaking that I gave in Committee. I also believe that it meets the views expressed by those hon. Gentlemen.
      I am aware that my hon. Friend the Member for Ayr has submitted a petition on this matter and I trust that the outcome of today's debate will meet in full his concerns and those of other hon. Members.
      The amendments are numerous, and in most cases make technical changes to the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975 to ensure that an appellant may not only be a convicted person, but may also include the Lord Advocate. The main provision of interest is the proposal to insert into section 228 of the 1975 Act a new power to enable the Lord Advocate to initiate an appeal in solemn
      450
      proceedings against a sentence which he considers to be unduly lenient, or to appeal on a point of law. The new clause provides that the Lord Advocate has four weeks from the date of sentence to initiate such an appeal. The four-week period will ensure that appropriate cases are not lost for lack of time, and that there is no pressure to lodge appeals about which there has been less than full consideration simply to ensure that the time limit is observed.
      As announced in Committee, the new Crown right of appeal will operate for solemn procedure on commencement of the relevant provisions. An order-making power is proposed to bring in the Crown right of appeal for selected categories of summary proceedings. The necessary consequential amendments to part II of the 1975 Act are also made.
      I should draw to the House's attention the proposed replacement of section 452A(2). This provision is intended to clarify the powers of the High Court in determining stated case sentence appeals under summary procedure. I believe that the power of a Crown right of appeal against unduly lenient sentences is to be welcomed. It redresses the balance. At present, a convicted person may appeal against any sentence, but the Crown has no opportunity to do so where that sentence appears manifestly lenient. I must stress that my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate envisages that the power will be used very sparingly. It is not a power to involve the Crown in the sentencing practice of the court; that will remain the preserve of the judges. What it does is provide an opportunity to enable the court, through the appeal mechanism, to revisit that sentence where it appears to have been inappropriately light.
      I commend new clause 4 and the related amendments to the House.
      Mrs. Maria Fyfe: I thank the Minister for his opening remarks, and in particular for his appreciation of the work of my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall).
      I wonder whether the Minister has had an opportunity to read the Scottish Office central research unit paper entitled "Sexual History and Sexual Character Evidence in Scottish Sexual Offence Trials". It makes extremely interesting reading, and is highly relevant to what we are discussing. There is clear evidence that in too many cases judges are not enforcing the 1986 legislation on unfair questioning of complainants in rape and sexual offence trials. If that is so, it is not surprising that some judges also fail to treat such cases with the severity that they deserve.
      Like my party, I have never been a hanger, beater or flogger, but that does not mean that my hon. Friends and I agree with sentences for serious crimes so light as to amount to no more than a tap on the wrist. A Scottish judge gaoled for two years a man who had pushed a girl to the ground, stripped her and raped her. The judge said that it had not been a violent rape. The same judge admonished and freed a sex attacker who had admitted a reduced charge of indecent assault. He regarded the assault as "minor". A man who had killed his wife and month-old son was admonished and freed.
      Does the Minister agree that aging male judges often seem to take sexual assaults against women less seriously than the rest of us? In the English courts, it is possible for such light sentences to be reversed; we want a similar arrangement in Scotland. Scandalously light sentences

      451
      have also been passed in the English courts for equally serious crimes. Only recently, a judge in an English court told a rapist that he had shown concern and consideration because he had worn a contraceptive. Another fined a business man £2,000 after he picked up a hitch-hiker, drove her to a deserted road and raped her. A man who abused his 12-year-old stepdaughter was give two years' probation, with the sympathetic comment that his wife's pregnancy had caused problems for a healthy young husband. I could go on, but I think that I have probably made my point.
      Many of us think that such sentences betray an attitude —which is not shared by the rest of society—that such crimes are not too serious. The judge who sentenced the Ealing vicarage rapists to three years and five years shortly afterwards sentenced a pickpocket to three years. Most of us question the common sense of anyone who can equate rape with pickpocketing. I recently had my purse stolen on the London underground. I was annoyed, of course, but not seriously upset. Women who have suffered sexual assaults such as I have described have had their lives adversely affected for many years. Does the Minister agree that there is a case for giving judges who need it some awareness of the values of the society that they so abysmally fail to represent?
      I hope that my points will be taken up and that the new clause will be agreed. If some judges are out of touch with society, it is important that society should take the opportunity to reverse such ridiculously light sentences.
      Mr. Phil Gallie: I warmly welcome new clause 4 and thank the Minister for his kind words in opening.
      New clause 4 is based on the public perception that the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) described. Sometimes the courts display inconsistency, lack of logic and a failure to match the seriousness of the crime with the sentence. That is what new clause 4 addresses.
      In Committee, I referred to the Samuel Merry case in Ayr, about which I introduced a petition. A young man died, yet one defendant was given a nine-month sentence and another a four-month sentence. My constituents could not see the sense of that. In Committee, I said that the new clause offers advantages for the relatives of the victim and for those who have been sentenced, because in reviewing such sentences the facts of the case may become more known to the public, which may increase their understanding. Although there are two sides, my concern is for the victims and the public, who look to the law for protection.
      I am advised that in Scotland it takes an average of 14 convictions before someone ends up in gaol. In the Scottish Grand Committee yesterday, the hon. Member for Fife, Central (Mr. McLeish) spoke of an epidemic of crime.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: I am surprised by the statistic that the hon. Gentleman has just quoted. It would help me and perhaps other hon. Members if he could give the source of that statistical information.
      Mr. Gallie: I am happy to do so: the governor of Shotts prison.
      452
      In the Scottish Grand Committee yesterday, the hon. Member for Fife, Central referred to an epidemic of crime in Scotland, and called for increased police resources. My argument is that a senseless circle is operating. If the courts do not back up the police when they get convictions, there is something wrong with the system. New clause 4 will deal with that issue and, once again, I thank the Minister.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: The governor of Shotts prison possesses many qualities and doubtless holds his position because he understands the prison service and how to deal with prisoners but, as far as I am aware, he has not previously been prayed in aid as a source of statistical information on which one can rely better to inform the debate. The information offered to the House should not stand between us and proper consideration of the new clause.
      The new clause is a substantial departure in principle from what has been the law of Scotland since time immemorial. It is noticeable that the English Members who found Scottish Question Time such an attractive opportunity to make points about the government of Scotland are conspicuous by their absence when we come to discuss an issue which goes to the very heart of the Scottish legal system and which represents a substantial departure in principle from what has previously been our law.
      Mr. Gallie: I draw the hon. and learned Gentleman's attention to the fact that many Scottish Members who attempted to ask questions, and did so, are also absent now. There are now three hon. Members on the Labour Benches, one on the Liberal Bench and none on that of the Scottish National party.
      Mr. Campbell: We can accept those statistics as rather more reliable than those emanating from the governor of Shotts prison. It is worth noting the apparent lack of application to a matter of such substantial principle in this unitary Parliament, about which we are so often told.
      In support of the new clause, it has been said that sentences have sometimes been passed which are apparently inappropriate to the gravity of the crime. That is unquestionably true. It will always be true under a system of sentencing in which there is no fixed tariff and where there is a substantial degree of judicial discretion. On the basis of more than 20 years practice in the criminal courts, where I prosecuted and defended, I happen to believe that the maintenance of that judicial discretion is a very important part of our legal system. The new clause will trench on that.
      I shall not oppose the new clause, but it is right that the House should pass it into law only with some account being taken of the fact that it is a substantial departure from what we have known.
      Mr. Bill Walker: I bow to the hon. and learned Gentleman as we all respect his experience in the courts and of the legal system. I am delighted that he will not vote against the new clause, but I should have thought that, as a lawyer, he would always be happy for the opportunity to have a second look at anything because errors occur in human activities. That is as true on the Bench as anywhere else. As I understand it, the new clause will provide an opportunity—nothing more—to appeal. Surely that is a good thing.
      Mr. Campbell: It would introduce rather more than that. If the hon. Gentleman read the terms, he would learn that the Lord Advocate has to be satisfied that the sentence which has been passed is "'unduly lenient". Therefore, it is not a question of a second look but of the Lord Advocate saying to the High Court of Justiciary that in his judgment, as the principal Law Officer of the Crown in Scotland, a sentence previously passed is unduly lenient. That is not a second look but—in essence or practice—a recommendation from the Lord Advocate that one sentence should be replaced by another.
      4.45 pm
      That argument is offered in the context that in Scotland we are somehow guilty of imposing lenient sentences. The truth is that the sentences imposed in the United Kingdom are generally much more severe than in any of the neighbouring European countries, and in Scotland, sentences are generally more severe than those in England and Wales. One need only have regard to the view which the High Court of Judiciary has consistently taken on the possession of drugs and, in particular, on possession with intent to supply, to be satisfied that in Scotland the notion that sentences are regularly inadequate or unduly lenient is unfounded.
      The Minister said that the new clause was not an effort on the part of the Crown to influence the judiciary, but one must bear in mind the fact that, if the Lord Advocate were, in the exercise of his judgment, frequently to try to take advantage of the terms of the new clause, there would be a risk that that would be seen as undue influence on the judiciary.
      It is important to remember that, although the Lord Advocate is a Law Officer, he is also a member of the Government and, as such, it is not impossible for him to find himself under considerable political pressure. I have no doubt whatsoever of the integrity or robust independence of the present Lord Advocate, whom I know well, but the ancient office of Lord Advocate has not always been as well served as it is by its present incumbent. The House should recognise the risk, under the new clause, of a Lord Advocate finding himself under pressure from political sources within the Government of which he is a member to refer particular cases over a period of time in such a way that the judiciary might feel that they were being influenced as had not previously happened in Scotland.
      I accept that the broad swathe of opinion is in favour of the new clause, and I shall certainly not oppose its passing into law. However, it should not be passed into law as a reflection of a desirable opportunity for a form of revenge for those who feel that sentences imposed for crimes against them should be increased.
      On a more practical point, the Minister said that the Lord Advocate must exercise his right, which the clause confers on him, within four weeks of the passing of a sentence. That is a curious provision. As I understand section 231(1) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975, the person who is the subject of the sentence has only 14 days in which to mark an appeal if he regards the sentence as excessive. It is curious that the Lord Advocate needs 28 days, whereas the person on whom a sentence is passed is given only 14 days.
      One must also remember that the person on whom the sentence is passed will almost invariably be engaged in a transaction with the legal aid authorities as to whether he
      454
      may be admitted to the legal aid scheme. I hope that the Minister will explain why it is necessary for the Lord Advocate to be given such an extended period, for the fundamental reason that when a sentence is passed on a person, that person is entitled to know as soon as is reasonably practicable—even if the new clause were passed—that that is the sentence which he or she will be required to serve. I submit that any extended period which gives rise to uncertainty is wholly unfair and unreasonable. Therefore, I hope that the Minister will be able to tell us why the Lord Advocate will require 28 days.
      From my own experience as an advocate-depute in the High Court, I believe that it will be instantly clear to those representing the Crown whether a particular case falls into the category embraced by new clause 4. There is no reason for an extended period.
      The new clause gives a substantial power to the Lord Advocate. It is a power which, if exercised with responsibility, will be unlikely to cause injustice but which, if exercised irresponsibly, could cause grave injustice. For that reason, it is right that the House should pause for a moment to consider the implications of what we are being asked to do, and not merely rubber-stamp it as a means of assuaging public opinion.
      Mr. Jimmy Hood: As the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) has said, it is difficult to argue against the sentiments of the new clause. I agree with him when he advises that we should stand back and consider what powers we are giving. Powers are fine when used for the right reasons, but when powers are used for the wrong reasons and when political influences are brought to bear on decision making, the whole process of the administration of the law is brought into disrepute.
      I refer briefly to clause 3 to make my point. I am concerned when pressure is brought to bear on judges, and I am equally concerned about the powers given to the Secretary of State. The Minister may argue that the Secretary of State already has those powers. I refer to one power that has been used to the detriment of the administration of law in Scotland.
      I refer to the case of a killing that happened in Larkhall almost 10 years ago. A family were convicted for art and part. A young man pleaded guilty to using a knife and to causing the death of a policeman. The father and the daughter were subsequently found guilty of that murder. I refer to Hugh Murray junior, who admitted to the murder, to his father, Hugh Murray senior, and to his sister, Mrs. Margaret Smith.
      As a result of a statement made in the House by the then Secretary of State, Lord Younger, anyone convicted of killing a policeman would serve a minimum sentence of 20 years' imprisonment. That has caused some confusion, to say the least, about what is in the process of happening to those three convicted persons. As I said on Second Reading, everyone involved with her in the prison service, everyone who has met her and everyone who has seen her has said that Mrs. Margaret Smith is an ideal prisoner. She was convicted of murder because she was present when her brother committed murder. She has been up for parole and a recommendation from the parole board is lying on the Secretary of State's desk. I raise the matter because I see the Secretary of State in his place. If justice is to be served, that young woman should be released as soon as possible. I hope that that will be the case.

      455
      Surely the House cannot be comfortable about allowing a Minister literally to make law on the hoof by making a policy decision that will be left to those who succeed him. I do not oppose the spirit of the new clause, but I take the opportunity to say that we should consider carefully when we empower people. I am sure that politicians are honourable men and women, but powers given to Ministers may be misused at some future date. For that reason, we should be careful. I do not oppose the new clause, but I advise some further consideration of what it means.
      Mr. David Trimble: The new clause provides an opportunity for an appeal by the Lord Advocate in certain cases in which he thinks it appropriate. The provision is analogous to provisions introduced in the law of other jurisdictions in the United Kingdom in recent years, which have operated on a number of occasions. In that sense, I regard it as relatively uncontroversial.
      When appeals are made, every opportunity should be taken to ensure that there is a fair and just result. In the context of appeals, I ask the Minister to turn his mind to the question of ensuring full disclosure of relevant material for appeals. I do not want to go into the details of the case with which I am concerned at the moment. I have written to the Secretary of State and to others in connection with it, and the Minister may be aware of it.
      It was brought to my attention that there seems to be a serious omission in legislation whereby information that is vital to the prosecution on appeal has not been disclosed and the police in Scotland seem to be reluctant to disclose it. I speak rather hesitantly as an outsider in these matters. However, from this case, it seems as if there is a gap. We want a fair and proper result on appeal. I draw the Minister's attention to that so that he can consider whether it is appropriate in the context of the new clause, of the Bill or of other circumstances, and so that we can ensure that there is full and complete disclosure when appropriate.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall answer a number of points raised in the debate. The hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) mentioned different sentences being given in rape cases. There is more consistency now than there was in past years and judges are more aware of sentencing patterns. They are published and that has been a matter for public comment. Only occasionally are there cases about which there is serious and substantial complaint. I welcome the hon. Lady's support for the new clause.
      My hon. Friend the Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) also welcomed the new clause strongly, believing that the punishment should fit the crime. I repeat that complaints about cases are not frequent.
      The hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) raised the question of the length of the right to appeal. The hon. and learned Gentleman will be aware that in solemn proceedings, the convicted person has to submit an appeal within two weeks of the date of sentence. That period can be extended on application to the High Court. Under the provisions, the time limit for the Crown cannot be so extended. The different time limits are proposed to allow the Crown sufficient time for
      456
      considered reflection on whether to initiate an appeal on the ground of undue leniency, having regard both to the general level of sentence for the type of case and to the individual circumstances of the case.
      The hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East also asked whether the Crown should become involved in sentencing. The function of the Crown is not to contend for a particular sentence, but exceptionally to bring to the attention of the Appeal Court sentences that appear to be unusually lenient. The matter of the appropriate sentence is entirely one for the judiciary and the Crown will continue to have no involvement in it at trial stage.
      The hon. Member for Clydesdale (Mr. Hood) raised the case of the murder of a police sergeant. The present debate is not about particular cases. I understand that the hon. Gentleman has discussed the matter with my noble and learned Friend the Minister of State and that he has promised to let him know the outcome of the review in progress. I cannot, therefore, take the matter further this afternoon.
      The hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) raised another matter. I shall look into it and I draw it to the attention of my noble and learned Friend the Minister of State. I shall ensure that the hon. Gentleman receives a full reply. I cannot give him full details this afternoon as I am not familiar with them, but I shall ensure that he gets a full reply as soon as possible.
      I shall now deal with the issue of political influences on the Lord Advocate in deciding to appeal.
      5 pm
      In the prosecution of crime, the Lord Advocate must act in the public interest. He must also apply the test of undue leniency purely in the public interest. In appealing, he would only be placing the issue once again before the court, the role of which, as at present, will be to determine the appeal by affirming or amending the sentence.
      The Law Officers act independently, which is absolutely right. They do not have to give reasons as to why they do or do not appeal or prosecute. The Lord Advocate has made it clear that he envisages that the power will be used sparingly.
      Dr. Norman A. Godman: I apologise to the Minister and other hon. Members for my late appearance, but assure them that I was attending a meeting of the Select Committee on European Legislation.
      Mr. Bill Walker: That is very important.
      Dr. Godman: It is indeed.
      New clause 4(1) states:
      "228A. Where a person has been convicted on indictment, the Lord Advocate may appeal against the sentence passed on conviction—
      (a) if it appears to the Lord Advocate that the sentence is unduly lenient;"
      How is such a matter brought to the attention of the Lord Advocate? It appears worrying that some over-lenient sentences have been imposed on those who have inflicted violence on women in rape cases. Many such rape case proceedings are disfigured by a judge allowing the defence counsel to trawl through a woman's sexual history. It seems that such trawling may persuade a judge to impose a lenient sentence. How are such matters brought to the attention of the Lord Advocate?
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: A variety of sources, such as the hon. Gentleman, lawyers or the press, could

      457
      draw the matter to the attention of the Lord Advocate, who has said that he would use the power very sparingly. However, it is a significant change in the law of Scotland, which will give the public greater confidence in the judiciary and the legal system.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: Would it not be appropriate for a report to be sent by the prosecutor of the case to the Lord Advocate as a matter of routine? The report, to be drawn up at an early stage, would give the opinion of the prosecutor—an advocate-depute in the High Court or representative of the procurator fiscal service in a lower court. That would be the procedure, and I am not sure that it would require to be put into legislation. There should certainly be some routine procedure—the idea that the matters can somehow be brought to the attention of the Lord Advocate because of the way in which they are dealt with in a newspaper or because of the outrage felt by Members of Parliament, seems wholly inappropriate in relation to a power that is, as the Minister has concluded, of such significance.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I understand that, in the normal course of affairs, the procurator fiscal will draw the matter to the attention of the Lord Advocate in the first instance. The Lord Advocate may make inquiries of a fiscal in some cases, but the normal procedure will quite rightly be, as has been suggested, a matter for the fiscal. The Lord Advocate and the Law Officers should not be unnecessarily influenced by other sources, and I am sure that they will not.
      New clause 4 is highly desirable and I strongly commend it to the House. It redresses the imbalance whereby the convicted person has a right of appeal and the Crown does not. It will ensure that formal procedure exists so that the Appeal Court can re-examine a sentence which, in the view of the Lord Advocate, is unduly lenient. It marks a constructive development in Scottish criminal procedure.
      Mr. John McFall: The Scottish Conservative manifesto for the 1992 general election stated:
      "We will give the Crown a right of appeal against sentences which arc too lenient".
      The Opposition tabled the amendment to that effect. This is the first and last occasion when we shall ensure that the Government stick by their manifesto pledges.
      Mr. Gallie: I tabled a new clause which was worded differently from that tabled by the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall). The changes to it were made for specific reasons, but it was a Conservative clause that was accepted.
      Mr. McFall: I think that the hon. Gentleman is trying to say that he had a hand in the amendment, and I would not argue with that.
      I was talking of the equity between the accused's right of appeal and the Crown's right of appeal so that the accused and the prosecutor receive equal treatment. As has been mentioned, such a system exists in England and Wales. Sections 35 and 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 allows the Attorney-General or the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland to refer a case, so we have an idea how such legislation operates.
      458
      In a written answer to a question that I asked on 20 February 1992, the then Attorney-General, now Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, said:
      "Since February 1989, when this part of the Criminal Justice Act came into force, I have sought the leave of the Court of Appeal to refer 69 cases, including five from Northern Ireland, in which the sentence passed appeared to be unduly lenient. Of these, in 36 cases the sentence was increased, seven cases were withdrawn by me, in a further 10 cases the sentence was not changed, in one case the sentence was lowered".—[Official Report, 20 February 1992; Vol. 204, c. 225.]
      The legislation allows the courts to increase and, if necessary, reduce the sentence. It is to be welcomed in that it corrects erratic sentencing.
      I take the point made by the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell), but the legislation already operates. In my constituency, parents whose children have been killed in road accidents come to me and, as a layman, it seems to me that the sentences passed on those responsible for the deaths are very lenient. If people can see that the case has been referred, it could help some of them to come to terms with their grief. I say that from the experience of talking to a number of constituents about the subject.
      My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) mentioned cases involving women. I still think that the sentencing in such cases is often erratic. I refer the Minister to the research undertaken by Pat Carlen over the years—"Women's Imprisonment: Study in Social Control". She asked a representative sample of the Scottish judiciary for their comments. In 1992, the judiciary still say of women appearing before them, "If she is a good mother, we don't want to take her away; if she is not a good mother, it doesn't matter." Attitudes like that must change, but they still exist.
      It is with the intention of changing such attitudes and ensuring equity of treatment both to the accused and the prosecutor that we have tabled amendment No. 1 and shall support the new clause.
      Dr. Godman: I have some sympathy with the wording of section 228A(a) in new clause 4, which refers to the fact that the Lord Advocate may believe that a sentence is "unduly lenient". Such sentences are occasionally passed, especially when people are convicted of violent criminal acts.
      On the whole, our judges in Scotland are not quite so eccentrically lenient in such cases as many judges south of the boarder. It is not so very long ago that, in a case arising from the appalling rape of a woman, an English judge said that we all know as men that when a woman says no she does not always mean no. If the new clause gives women and others concerned about over-lenient sentencing in rape cases a measure of comfort, it should command the support of all hon. Members.
      I am concerned about the way in which complainers in rape cases are dealt with in our courtrooms. In such cases, women should be given the same kind of protection that we have agreed should be afforded to child witnesses and child complainers in sexual abuse and child abuse cases. A woman who has been subjected to rape and who then has to face the ordeal of recounting her experiences in the courtroom is in many respects as vulnerable psychologically as a young child who has been subjected to abuse.
      Mr. Gallie: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
      Dr. Goodman: Those who seek to protect the interests of such vulnerable persons will to some extent be heartened by the wording of the new clause in respect of unduly lenient sentencing. Now I shall be lenient with the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie).
      Mr. Gallie: I identify with virtually everything that the hon. Gentleman has said, but I put it to him that the difference between my new clause and the new clause tabled by the Opposition was that I proposed to take out the words
      "on a point of law".
      Had those words been left in, the hon. Gentleman's point would not have been met.
      Dr. Goodman: That was a most interesting intervention.
      Mr. Hood: It is Christmas.
      Dr. Goodman: As my hon. Friend says, it is Christmas, but just at this moment I am not feeling very Christmassy as I still have all my cards to sign. Moreover, if the hon. Member for Ayr cares to examine the new clause, he will find that the phrase
      "on a point of law"
      is still there.
      As I said in Committee, those who are proceeded against and found guilty of heinous acts of violence must suffer condign punishment. That must be especially true in relation to rape cases. I agree with the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East that a memorandum should be published giving guidance on how the Lord Advocate's eye can be caught in cases of unduly lenient sentencing. I give the proposal—especially as it affects women complainers, many of whom have to watch the perpetrators of sexual violence receive unduly lenient sentences—a cautious welcome.
      Mr. Hood: The hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) will remember intervening on my Second Reading speech to support my case on over-lenient sentencing and to give an example of his own. I had occasion to write to the Lord Advocate drawing his attention to the decision by a sheriff in a Lanarkshire court to impose a three-month prison sentence on a man found guilty of breaking into a pensioner couple's home with two colleagues wearing ski masks, of robbing the pensioners and hitting them over the head with a hammer. A week or so ago, I received a letter from the Lord Advocate saying that he took my point but could not interfere with the decision and judgment of a sheriff.
      Does my hon. Friend share my concern that, when I complained to the Lord Advocate, he was not prepared to do anything about it even though he shared my view? I would sack a sheriff who behaved in such a way.
      5.15 pm
      Dr. Godman: I believe that it is extremely difficult to bring about the dismissal of a sheriff for his or her eccentric sentencing practices, but I agree with my hon. Friend and recall the case to which he referred.
      I said earlier that our judges are less eccentrically lenient than some south of the border, but some of our sheriffs behave in a weird way when sentencing miscreants who have perpetrated violent crimes. That is especially true in drink-driving cases. Some sheriffs are appallingly over-indulgent to those whom they sentence for such crimes. If someone runs down someone else in his or her
      460
      car when under the influence of alcohol or drugs, that person should, on conviction, receive a hefty punishment. Some of our sheriffs need people like us to bring that home to them.
      Presumably, on the basis of what the Minister said a few moments ago, if we, as members of the public and Members of Parliament, are concerned about an unduly lenient conviction, we shall be able to write to the Lord Advocate and bring the matter to his attention. Presumably, we shall also be able to tell him to do something about it—to review the case. That is why I thought that the suggestion made by the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North East that some form of guidance should be issued on these matters was a good one.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Surely the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that hon. Members should be prevented from writing to the Lord Advocate as a matter of public concern, which they are perfectly entitled to do at present.
      Dr. Godman: The Minister is absolutely right, and I have always received courteous and expeditious responses from the holders of that august office, but the response that my hon. Friend the Member for Clydesdale (Mr. Hood) received, however courteous, was at best extremely unhelpful. If the new clause is accepted, presumably my hon. Friend or anyone else can expect to receive a different kind of response—the Lord Advocate may be inclined to be more positive in such a case. I remember the case to which my hon. Friend referred and I thought that an appallingly lenient sentence was imposed on the mindless thugs responsible. People who perpetrate violent crimes must be told plainly that they will not receive unduly lenient sentences when convicted.
      I shall be pleased to see the provision included in the Bill. Given than I am much more modest that the hon. Member for Ayr, if the hon. Gentleman deserves the credit for the new clause, I shall give him the credit so that he can put his name in whatever the journal is called. It is a useful measure.
      Question put and agreed to.
      Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.

    New Clause 2

      CONCEALMENT BY SCREEN OF ACCUSED FROM PERSON AGED 16 YEARS OR MORE GIVING EVIDENCE
      ?.—()(1) Section 34 of this Act shall apply in relation to a person aged 16 years or more as it applies in relation to a child if application is made to the court in that regard.
      (2) An application under subsection (1) above shall be granted only if the judge taking into account the age of the person and the physical condition and mental capacity of the person is satisfied that the granting of the application—

      (a) is in the interest of justice; and

      (b) in the case of an application by the prosecutor is not unfair to the accused.'.—[Mr. McFall.]

      Brought up, and Read the First time.
      Mr. McFall: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
      The new clause concerns the concealment by a screen of the accused from persons aged 16 years or more giving evidence. We debated the issue in Committee and had a fruitful debate on clauses 32 to 44, with a positive outcome.
      The reason for tabling the new clause is to highlight the inconsistency between statutory provisions for children

      461
      aged 16 and under and non-statutory provisions for adults with a mature chronological, but young mental, age. Adults in that category will not have the same provision as children, and that could result in a lack of cohesion in judicial decisions and perhaps to idiosyncratic decisions, since there will be no legislative standard to judge by.
      The Law Commission recommended screens for other vulnerable witnesses. The new clause seeks to bring clarity and consistency to the approach to vulnerable witnesses, whether or not they are below the age of 16. We welcome the provisions for those under 16, but nothing exists for people over that age. If the Government can accept the Law Commission's report and recommendations for children, why can they not accept them for other vulnerable witnesses, such as people with a mature chronological but a young mental age? They suffer the same problems as young children, so the same statutory arrangements should be available for such vulnerable witnesses. The new clause is therefore moved with that in mind.
      Dr. Godman: I am happy to support the new clause. The use of a screen in a courtroom is, at best, a crude protection device. It separates a child witness from the person charged with an offence. If children can be protected by such measures, other people whom I regard as equally vulnerable should be given similar help. Without wishing to cause any trouble to the Chair, I want the provision to be extended to clause 33 of the Bill where vulnerable persons are concerned, but the new clause refers to clause 34 and the use of screens.
      My hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) mentioned people who may be chronologically mature but mentally incapacitated. These days, the phrase that we are urged to use is "persons with learning difficulties". I tend to use the old-fashioned phrase and refer to them as people who are mentally handicapped. They are vulnerable and should be given every possible protection when they are called upon to give evidence in our courts.
      I am not sure whether the wording of the new clause would allow it, but the same holds true for women complainers in cases involving violent physical or sexual assault. Given that screens have already been used and are in common use—that is what I was told when I visited the sheriff court in Glasgow—has the Minister any evidence of screens being used in rape cases? Do those assisting a complainer in such a case have the right to seek guidance from a judge on the use of screens?
      As I said earlier, a woman involved in a rape case is often in an extremely vulnerable state of mind. Such a complainant deserves every protection. That is why I advocate the use of closed circuit television in such cases.
      Concealment by way of a screen is at best a poor measure. I think that the Minister said in Committee that the accused person must have sight of the witness when screens are used. I believe that a television monitor will be used, although it can be done by a one-way or two-way mirror, or whatever it is called. That is a reasonable measure, but we should go further and extend the provision to all vulnerable persons.
      This is a stage on the way towards offering greater protection to vulnerable witnesses, especially the complainers in rape cases. It is disgraceful that they should
      462
      have to suffer defence counsel trawling their sexual histories; the least that they deserve is the use of a screen to hide the perpetrator of a violent assault from them.
      The new clause is a means of giving greater protection to people aged 16 or more when they give evidence, but much more needs to be done and I shall return to the matter.
      Mr. George Foulkes: As you know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is unusual for me to participate in these debates. I used to do so in the last decade—I was about to say last century, but it is only a decade although it feels like a century.
      Mr. McFall: It looks like it.
      Mr. Foulkes: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I was about to congratulate him on moving the new clause, with which I thoroughly agree.
      The new clause is very good and the purpose behind it exceptionally good, but it could be negated if people come into contact elsewhere in the sheriff court. They may be screened in the court, but if they happen to bump into each other in the waiting rooms, corridors or anywhere else, the effects of the new clause will be negated. The facilities at sheriff courts are absolutely appalling—especially at the court in Ayr—for people waiting to give evidence and for those accompanying them. There are no arrangements for refreshments and the toilet facilities are dreadful. Witnesses can come into contact with each other and with the accused. All of that is contrary to the effective administration of justice. The excellent new clause would be totally negated by people casually bumping into each other in sheriff courts which have such appalling facilities.
      I have had many complaints from witnesses who have been treated appallingly at sheriff courts, particularly Ayr sheriff court, and the same applies elsewhere. Witnesses are often nervous. They may be reluctant to attend and have to be persuaded and encouraged. They need good facilities so as to be assured that they will not bump into people against whom they are about to give evidence.
      5.30 pm
      Dr. Godman: Has my hon. Friend been told by the Scottish Courts Administration whether his local sheriff court is to be renovated in the near future?
      Mr. Foulkes: No, I have not. That is part of the problem. The Minister may be able to tell me. I have a great respect for the Minister. He and I have often crossed swords on other occasions in other places, both at university and on the town council. I am sure that he will give a positive and helpful reply to today's debate, particularly to the point that I have raised. It is important.
      I know that there is a programme for improving, upgrading and updating court houses throughout Scotland, but progress is too slow and many sheriff court houses are completely inadequate for their purpose. If witnesses are not to be intimidated and if they are to come forward willingly, they must have good facilities and know that they are not likely casually to bump into people against whom they may be giving evidence. I may be widening the scope of the amendment, but the point is relevant. I hope that the Minister will deal with it.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: The hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes) showed rare ingenuity in introducing the nature of the facilities at the

      463
      Ayr sheriff court, and you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, showed your customary tolerance in allowing him to expand upon the matter. I hope that I will be allowed to take advantage of that.
      I recently visited the temporary sheriff court in Greenock, within the curtilage of what used to be the Scott Lithgow shipyard. I say without equivocation that the facilities there are a disgrace. I appreciate that the original sheriff court building in Greenock is undergoing a substantial upgrading programme, but to expect justice to be conducted in the circumstances in which it is sought to conduct it in Greenock at the moment is not good enough. I fear, as the hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley made clear, that similar situations are to be found throughout the country.
      I doubt whether the hon. Gentleman has ever been to Lochmaddy, but its sheriff court—I see that at least one other hon. Member knows where that court is situated —is wholly inadequate. As the hon. Gentleman properly says, such facilities negate any advantage that might stem either from the new clause or from the legislation in respect of which the new clause is a supplement. Albeit in a roundabout way, there is considerable relevance in what the hon. Gentleman says.
      I have always had considerable reservations about the notion that—I put it colloquially, for which I hope I shall be forgiven—one should start by moving the furniture around in the court. We come back to the principle that justice should not only be done but should be seen to be done. Our courts are public places which people are entitled to visit.
      Now that we have accepted the principle that those who are vulnerable by way of age should be given special protection, what conceivable reason is there for not extending it to others who are equally vulnerable, either by reason of age, physical condition or mental capacity.
      Therefore, although I do not share the hon. Gentleman's optimism, I hope that we shall have a positive response from the Government, and that even if they are not willing to accept the new clause they will give it serious consideration. Once the principle is ceded, it is difficult to say that others who can be identified as vulnerable should not be entitled to precisely the same protection.
      Dr. Godman: When discussing measures which sought to give added protection to vulnerable witnesses in Committee, my hon. Friends and I stressed at all times that in no way did we wish to harm the interests of the accused person.
      Mr. Campbell: I understand that. To some extent I must accept that I have lost the argument, but I am now concerned to argue for consistency. The Government have accepted that anyone deemed vulnerable by reason of age should be entitled to protection. If it can be demonstrated that a person is vulnerable by reason of other incapacity, such a person should be entitled to precisely the same protection.
      The logic of that is ineluctable and the Minister should accept it, if not within the four corners of the Bill, on some other occasion when the matter is before the House when we may even feel compelled to push the matter to a vote.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) referred to the Scottish Law
      464
      Commission's proposals. The Scottish Law Commission recognised that the use of a screen would not always be appropriate. In the case of an adult witness, the protection afforded by the use of video recorder evidence will be available. It will be open to the prosecution or the defence to apply for the use of screens and the court will always consider such a request with the interests of the witness in mind.
      The hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes) is not slow to take any opportunity to further the interests of his constituents. There has been a substantial programme of upgrading and rebuilding sheriff courts and particular attention has been given to the need to provide comfortable and sympathetic accommodation for witnesses. The hon. Gentleman makes his point well. I shall make inquiries about the particular position of the sheriff courts at Ayr and Greenock, and I shall write to those hon. Members who have expressed an interest.
      Dr. Godman: Will it be possible to use such screens in the temporary sheriff court at Greenock? I am not a lawyer, but that temporary building is a disgrace. I look forward to the day when the original sheriff court will be restored so that cases can be heard there once again.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Yes. As I said, I shall write to the hon. Members about the sheriff courts that they have mentioned.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: I am grateful to the Minister for giving way with his characteristic courtesy. Will he give some consideration to the need to take great care in finding suitable and adequate temporary facilities when a sheriff court is refurbished. I appreciate that there may be geographical constraints. The hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) asked whether screens could be used in the temporary court facilities at Greenock. I do not believe they could, because the space there is inadequate. When a temporary court is being established, careful consideration must be given to ensuring that it is adequate for the purpose.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The hon. Gentleman's point is well made. He made an eloquent plea for consistency in the matter; I certainly agree with the principle and have some sympathy for the new clause. However, the amendment would extend the new evidential provisions to witnesses other than children and, as I said when the matter was discussed in Committee, the Government must be satisfied that the provisions for one category of vulnerable witnesses are working well before we can consider extending them to other categories of witnesses.
      I repeat what I said to the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall)—that a decision to extend any of the provisions that we have introduced for children would be premature until we have been able to evaluate how the provisions are working in practice. I stress the importance of ensuring that any special evidential provisions that are introduced to meet the needs of particular categories of witness are appropriate to their needs. As hon. Members are aware, evidence can currently be taken on commission.
      Hon. Members who were present at the full debate on the matter in Committee will recall that I said that there were other means available for hearing evidence by those who may not be able to attend the courts. In the

      465
      Government's view those arrangements are sufficient to meet the real concerns of such witnesses. When we have sufficient evidence, we shall assess it and make the necessary proposals.
      Mrs. Fyfe: I well recall the Minister's comments on the matter in Committee. We still disagree with him. Surely he does not need to wait for the results of practice with children in courts before he feels able to act for adults over the age of 16 who are perhaps suffering from mental handicap. The two categories are completely separate and because the system works or does not work well with children would prove absolutely nothing about people over the age of 16 who suffer from mental handicap. Will the Minister revise his view on that and accept the advice of those who are accustomed to working with people suffering from such difficulties?
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The difficulty is that at present there is no hard evidence that the extension of screening to witnesses other than children would be the best way to minimise the possible distress caused to such witnesses by having to attend court. It is also important to remember the need to achieve a balance between the needs of witnesses and fairness to the accused. However, I am certain that we shall return to the subject when we have evidence, at which time it will be much easier to see a constructive way forward.
      Mr. McFall: We are still unhappy at the Government's reply. Ministers say that they will have to wait to see how things work out before deciding. I refer the Minister to the proceedings in Committee. I asked about the issue of unit fines, and the Minister said:
      "we must be certain that the system is operating successfully in England and Wales."—[Official Report, First Scottish Standing Committee, 3 November 1992; c. 53.].
      I did a little detective work and looked at the first draft of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Bill which entered the Lords in July 1991. Clause 41 of that Bill states that the system being introduced would enable the Secretary of State to order that specific courts should operate a unit fines system. However, in his reply to me on 3 November this year, the Minister was not aware that his Government were trying to introduce that very system in that 1991 Bill. That is a precedent, and the Minister will understand our caution and suspicion at being told that we shall have to wait to see how things work out.
      Recommendations Nos. 23 and 24 in report No. 125 of the Scottish Law Commission are unequivocal in their description of vulnerable witnesses. That definition is easy to interpret, because it includes
      "the elderly, the infirm, the sick or the mentally ill".
      We do not intend to press the clause to a vote but we urge the Government to bring matters into line so that there is consistency between those under 16 years and those who are over that age.
      Perhaps I can be partisan in the fashion of other hon. Members. The conditions in Dumbartonshire sheriff court are not good and I have been pushing the Minister to make a decision on the matter. Will he write to me before Christmas so that I can give my constituents the good Christmas message that we can look forward to a new court in Dumbarton with new and spacious architectural arrangements which will enable the provision of justice to be exemplary?
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall certainly write to the hon. Gentleman about Dumbarton sheriff court, but at this stage I cannot give a guarantee about the answer. The new clause is premature because the research project began in October 1991 and since that time the live television link has been used in only eight cases. It is too early to reach conclusions about the effectiveness of the procedure and to take final decisions on extending provisions which will be available for child witnesses who are especially vulnerable.
      Question put and negatived.

    New Clause 6
      Intermediate diet
      ?() For section 337A of the 1975 Act there shall be substituted the following section—
      Intermediate diet

        Intermediate diet
        337A.—(1) the court shall, in respect of every case which is adjourned for trial, fix a diet (to be known as an intermediate diet) for the purpose of ascertaining—

        (a) the state of preparation of the prosecutor and of the accused with respect to their cases; and

        (b) whether the accused intends to adhere to the plea of not guilty.

        (2) At an intermediate diet, the court may ask the prosecutor and the accused any question for the purposes mentioned in subsection (1) above.
        (3) The accused shall attend an intermediate diet of which he has received intimation or to which he has been cited.
        (4) A plea of guilty may be tendered at the intermediate diet; and section 336 of this Act shall apply accordingly.".'.—[Mr. McFall.]
        Brought up, and read the First time.
        5.45 pm
        Mr. McFall: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
        New clause 2 was almost accepted by default. Perhaps we shall get another opportunity.
        New clause 6 is about intermediate trial diets in Scotland. Section 15 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 added a section to the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975 which provides for the use of intermediate trial diets in cases heard under summary procedure. That experiment has worked very well and the potential benefits of the experiment have been explored. The findings were that a significant reduction in witness attendance at court could be achieved if intermediate diets were held one week in advance of the trial diet. That resulted in a 50 per cent. reduction in the number of accused waiting until the trial day before pleading guilty.
        At present there are abuses of the system, especially by defence lawyers, who instruct their clients to wait until the day of the trial. That abuse should be eradicated and the experiment in 1982–83 pointed the way forward, resulting in substantial savings in the time of police and civilian witnesses. Trial diets held four weeks in advance of the trial resulted in fewer accused pleading guilty at the intermediate diet.
        My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley, South (Mr. McMaster) turned his attention to the important issue of police and civilian witnesses. He brought the matter to the Government's attention and Lord Fraser of Carmyllie replied dismissively to my hon. Friend some months ago in a pejorative letter. However, my hon. Friend took the matter to the Accounts Commission for Scotland and a report by the Audit Commission on police waiting time

        467
        published in October this year verified my hon. Friend's concern. If intermediate trial diets were pursued, police and civilian waiting time would be cut.
        During the summer recess, I took the opportunity to meet the chief constable of Strathclyde, in my capacity as shadow home affairs Minister. I asked him about the waste of police time and he said, off the top of his head, that more than 50 per cent. of Strathclyde's overtime budget was spent on court attendance by police; yet in only 2 per cent. of cases were police actually called to give evidence. Police officers have been recalled from their holidays and the overtime budget has been used unnecessarily.
        I shall cite as an example Glasgow High Court, which has three courts. Police officers assure me that on a Monday morning more than 100 are at the High Court. An hour later, the number is 40; an hour after that, it is 20. As well as the practice being an abuse, it is a costly exercise. It also has implications for police manning on the streets. Half the number of police who should be on the streets are wasting their time in court. If the Minister talks to police officers, that is what they will tell him. Hamilton town centre had only one policeman on a particular day because all the others were in court. That should not happen.
        The Minister may say that the new clause is not technically correct, but my aim is to draw attention to a scandal. I urge him to consider the issue carefully because something must be done. If the 1982–83 experiment was successful, surely that is sufficient precedent for introducing something similar now. We have waited too long for such a provision and the new clause signals our concern. I hope that the Minister will take them seriously.
        Mr. Menzies Campbell: I wish to add only a sentence or two to what has been most ably said by the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall). There is no doubt that a great deal of police time is wasted in court attendance. However, the police are not always entirely innocent—there are some who quite like the notion of overtime.
        In my experience as a prosecutor, I came across cases where it was made perfectly clear that sending away from court large numbers of policemen because I thought that they were unnecessary would be rather unpopular. The notion of a day spent talking to their friends while being paid overtime was one that some officers, but not all, found attractive. There is always a risk in relying on anecdotal evidence. Much more fundamental is the point made by the hon. Gentleman about the proper and effective use of police resources being absolutely essential.
        Earlier today, during Scottish questions, the Minister said that Strathclyde region was 181 police officers short, and he attributed responsibility for that to the regional council. I must tell him that the consequences of a shortage of 181 officers would be substantially mitigated if far more effective use was made of the time of those officers in position. The need for a proper approach to the problem has never been greater.
        The Government protest their desire to do something, but the apoplectic—sometimes justifiable—response of chief constables is that the effectiveness of the forces under their command is being prejudiced by the time officers spend at court. We must take a radical approach if we are to make inroads into the problem. It may involve the Crown being rather more forthcoming about its evidence,
        468
        endeavouring to put the defence into the same position with knowledge of the weight of the case against an accused person as the Crown is at the time that it decides to take proceedings. The proposals may appear revolutionary to Crown officials, but if as a consequence there is a much more effective use of police time, and provided that there is nothing contrary to the interests of justice, the proposals must be explored.
        My concern about the precise terms of the new clause is that subsection (2) would empower the court to
        "ask the prosecutor and the accused any question for the purposes mentioned in subsection (1) above."
        That relates to
        "(a) the state of preparation of the prosecutor and of the accused with respect to their cases; and
        (b) whether the accused intends to adhere to the plea of not guilty."
        If that power were exercised responsibly, it would not cause difficulty. However, if it were exercised irresponsibly, it could result in the disclosure of information that might be prejudicial to the conduct of a proper defence for the accused.
        I would have some difficulty in supporting the new clause in its precise terms, but I have no difficulty in supporting the general thrust of the argument of the hon. Member for Dumbarton, who put the matter succinctly and persuasively. I hope that he has persuaded the Minister.
        Dr. Godman: I, too, am deeply concerned about the shortage of uniformed police officers in Strathclyde. For some considerable time I have argued that Greenock and Port Glasgow needs another 25 uniformed police officers on the streets to deal with violent crime and other criminal activities. If the number of officers was increased, the crime statistics would show some decline, rather than climbing month after month.
        The hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) said that some police officers liked to sit around spinning yarns with their colleagues in the adjuncts to our courts. That is something that concerns many people. I have a letter from the honorary secretary of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents on precisely that point. It is dated 3 December and is signed by Chief Superintendent Jack Urquhart. I am sure that, if he was here, he would be listening carefully to what hon. Members have to say on the important matter of the waste of police time in court, which the new clause is intended to tackle.
        Mr. Urquhart wrote:
        "At our Executive Meeting held on 2 December members asked me to contact you regarding the report published on 30 November by the Accounts Commission for Scotland. This issue has been of serious concern to the Scottish Police Service for the past ten years due to the enormous amount of police time taken up with court attendance, the vast majority of which is unproductive."
        That point has been made during the debate. Mr. Urquhart continued:
        "Worse than that, the Report shows that the annual cost of police witness duty is now £8 million. Only one in five officers cited actually gives evidence and only 2 per cent. of their time is spent in the witness box."
        That complaint was raised by senior police officers referring to the Accounts Commission for Scotland report. The Minister must heed their warnings and misgivings.
        The honorary secretary's letter goes on to say:

        469
        "As you no doubt appreciate with police resources already being scarce, the situation is serious with a tremendous waste of money which could be better spent on operational policing overtime."
        The executive committee of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents makes a serious point. We need uniformed police officers on our streets. If they are to work overtime, it will be much more productive if it is spent on the streets than wasted sitting around spinning yarns or chewing the fat in our court buildings.
        6 pm
        The letter highlights the loss of officers from our streets, which must be an important consideration, and says:
        "The police service has done as much as it can to organise its own arrangement to minimise abstractions to court by releasing police statements to the defence"—
        as the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East said—
        "arranging for officers to be on standby for court where possible, improving the quality of police reports, reducing the number of police witnesses in cases".
        The new clause deals with some of the problems attendant on officers being called to court. The Accounts Commission for Scotland report says:
        "Each day 700 police officers attend court to give evidence in criminal cases going to trial but only one in five of these officers actually gives evidence."
        That is a disgraceful state of affairs. Whether the Minister accepts the new clause or not, the Government must pay much more serious attention to that wastage of police time, particularly given the growing violence on our streets.
        My constituency has suffered a number of murders this year. I shall not say that those murders could have been averted with more officers on the street, but some street or casual crimes could have been avoided were more police officers on the street rather than sitting in the sheriff court or in courts elsewhere.
        I should be interested to know how many officers from Greenock had to attend the recent High Court case in Glasgow, which ran for 19 days. The Minister knows the case; it involved the murder of a constituent of mine in Dundaff road in Greenock. Were all those officers called as witnesses? I suspect that they were not and that much overtime money was wasted on their attending that court.
        The final paragraph of the report deals with that grievous matter and says:
        "The administration of justice is a complex matter involving delicate issues and for maintenance of appropriate checks and balances. The Commission recognises that others are more appropriately placed to weigh the current operation of those checks and balances to ensure that the public interest is being safeguarded. This report highlights … a deteriorating picture in regard to police time spent at court on witness duty."
        The report says that the position is worsening literally each week. It goes on to say:
        "It is the Government's wish to provide the public reassurance that flows from having police officers visibly 'on the beat'."
        They cannot be on the beat if they are stuck in a court building, knowing in most instances that they will not even be called to give evidence. It has been suggested that that might please some police officers, but I believe that the overwhelming majority of officers of all ranks would rather be doing the job on the street and looking after their local communities.
        The last sentence of the report reads:
        "The findings of this report suggest that this desire"—
        placing more police officers visibly on the beat—
        470
        "is being frustrated by current practices which impact adversely on front line policing resources."
        Despite the reservations expressed by the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East, the new clause makes a valiant attempt to tackle that problem full square, whereas the Government appear to be tackling it only half-heartedly. It is of considerable concern to the Police Federation of Scotland, as was mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) in Committee.
        The letter from the honorary secretary to the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents shows that the police want answers. The chief superintendents and superintendents in day-to-day control of policing operations want their officers on the streets, not wasting time in court. The Minister should react sensibly, realistically and usefully to the new clause.
        Mr. McMaster: I shall be brief, because the case has already been eloquently made by those hon. Members who have spoken. I endorse the amendment. If there are technical difficulties with it, I endorse at least its general thrust.
        The subject has been a bee in my bonnet for some months. Until now, I simply had a feeling that a lot of police time was being wasted in Scottish courts, but in the past couple of weeks my suspicion has been backed up by the Accounts Commission, which has expressed its grave concern about the matter.
        There are many reasons for the situation. For instance, the citizens charter says that hospital appointments must be staggered throughout the day, rather than all for 9 am; yet the same does not apply to courts, where all the police and witnesses are told to turn up at 9.45 am. Another problem is plea bargaining, with which the amendment deals. Plea bargaining has always gone on and will always go on, but it should not happen at the last minute, as it does now. Police and other witnesses are called to court, but then find that they are not needed that day. That can happen several times. The fact that that problem exists is backed up by the Accounts Commissioner.
        I wrote to the Minister of State in another place about that problem some months ago and my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) referred to the reply that I received. To say that the Minister of State's answer was dismissive of the problem and of the need for a solution would be an understatement: it is the most unpleasant letter that I have ever received from a Minister. He said that the very idea that there was a problem was facile and unenlightening, but he has been left with egg on his face because the Accounts Commission now says that the problem is one of grave concern. I wonder how a man who is not only a Minister of State but a former Lord Advocate managed to arrive at such a conclusion.
        At Scottish Question Time today, the Minister referred to the success of Operation Dove in my constituency, but there have been 12 murders in K division of Strathclyde police this year, and both violent and non-violent crime are increasing. Elderly people are afraid to go out at night, and are now becoming afraid to stay in. That happens throughout Scotland—at the same time as 700 police officers are kept in court on any day, of whom only 140 will be called to give evidence while the rest sit about the court needlessly. On average, 30 per cent. of a day shift of police

        471
        officers is not on the streets but in court; yet only 2 per cent. of the time will be spent giving evidence—all at a cost of £8 million.
        The police are keen to keep as many officers on the streets as they can, and they go through all sorts of administrative mechanisms to achieve that. One of the methods is to ask police officers to go on the beat on their day off and to fund that through the overtime budget. If Operation Dove was a success, it was because police officers were on the streets of Paisley when they were needed, late on Friday and Saturday nights. Instead of being spent on such measures, the overtime budget is spent dragging police officers out of Greenock, Dumbarton and Glasgow to police the streets of Paisley.
        Mrs. Irene Adams: Does my hon. Friend agree that, while Operation Dove was a great success in the Paisley area, it was only a temporary measure? He rightly said that this was achieved only by taking acting officers from other areas, thus leaving those areas vulnerable. No new funds were found to finance the operation and no more officers were employed. As we have heard, officers were redeployed in courts when they were desperately needed on the streets. We need a permanent solution to the problem, with more policemen permanently on the streets, more policemen employed and more money for the regional council. The council has been putting civilians into stations to do administrative work, thereby releasing officers to active duty, but we must stop playing about with figures and find that permanent solution.
        Mr. McMaster: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. The trouble with projects such as Operation Dove, as opposed to permanent solutions such as that offered by the new clause, is that if police officers are taken from other divisions to police a problem in Paisley, it will achieve that result, but then police officers from Paisley will be sent elsewhere and the problem will return. The new clause offers a more sensible solution.
        Mr. McFall: Will my hon. Friend accept that those are the comments of the chief constable of Strathclyde? Furthermore, there are different social patterns now, with, for example, late night dancing in discos. I speak from experience, as I have teenage children who knock me up at 5 o'clock on a Sunday morning because they have lost their keys. As more young people are on the streets at that time of the morning, my chief superintendent has to deploy his police officers then, thereby denuding the force operating during the day. Taking such issues into consideration, my hon. Friend is correct, and the experience in Paisley is mirrored in Dumbarton and elsewhere.
        Mr. McMaster: That is correct. The chief constable can only deploy the available resources. Every time we write to the Minister about a police matter, we are told that it is for the chief constable, but if the only solution that the Government can offer is to take police officers from one division and put them into another, we shall never achieve anything. That is simply chasing the problem from one place to another.
        I agree with almost all that the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) said, but I
        472
        do not agree with his remark that sometimes police like being in court because that enhances their overtime payments. I have spoken to police officers who are fed up with the amount of time they spend hanging around courts. I rather suspect that solicitors also like the extra time that they spend in court.
        Mr. Menzies Campbell: I am not a solicitor, so I cannot answer for that profession. I should not like it to be thought either by the hon. Gentleman or by the House that I made a blanket charge in respect of police officers. I hoped that I had made it clear that, on occasion, from time to time, officers were not unamenable to the idea of spending time in court, on overtime, waiting to give evidence, rather than being out doing their other work. I suspect that that is true only of a small proportion of them, and I should not like too much significance to be attached to it.
        6.15 pm
        Mr. McMaster: I accept that. The hon. and learned Gentleman will have noted that I took great care to say "solicitors" and not "QCs", because those of us in the Whips office have to be careful about making accusations against Scottish QCs. I intend to hang on to my job at least until Christmas.
        The new clause offers a partial solution to the problem of crime in Scotland because it would help to get police officers back on the streets, where people want them to be. If we did a survey tomorrow of the issues that people think affect them most in Scotland, crime would be in the top five. More and more, people are recognising that there has been a 600 per cent. increase in crime since the Government came to power and that a crime happens every 30 seconds, and they want something done about it. —[Interruption.] The hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) laughs. Perhaps he suspects that I have managed to stay in order but yet to make a political speech—as if I would. Crime affects all Scotland, and I commend the new clause to the House because it offers a partial solution to that problem.
        Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: A large number of points have been made, but the general view has been that far too much police time is spent in court and that it is extremely desirable that that time should be reduced. Procurators fiscal are under instructions to make every effort to achieve that purpose whenever possible.
        It is a fundamental police duty to attend court to give evidence, but this should be done efficiently with officers spending as little time as possible away from operational duties. We want to make the best use of valuable police resources. The report by the Commission on Local Authority Accounts in Scotland published helpful indicators as to how valuable resources might be put to best use. It is encourgaging to note that measures are already in hand which should contribute significantly to reducing the time that witnesses have to spend at court.
        The report comments on police duty rosters. That matter is being considered within the context of the inquiry into police responsibilities and rewards being conducted by Sir Patrick Sheehy.
        The hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. MacFall) mentioned the 1982–83 experiment, which he said was successful. Although 50 per cent. of the cases went off at intermediate diet, most of those cases were adjourned, or

        473
        a warrant was taken for the arrest of the accused. This meant that the witnesses had to come back on a subsequent occasion. Fiscals are now giving copies of police statements to the defence, and there is an experiment in Paisley in doing exactly the same with civilian witness statements. It is hoped that this and other initiatives, coupled with intermediate diets, might assist the position. What is certain is that the provisions of schedule 3 on business evidence will be a great help to prosecutors in avoiding the citing of witnesses who do not speak to the essentials of a case.
        The hon. Member for Paisley, South (Mr. McMaster) said that plea bargaining should be kept to a minimum. Ideally, the defence solicitor would approach the Crown with an offer for a plea at an early stage. However, they are dependent on their clients' instructions and, regrettably, I have to say from my experience that often instructions are forthcoming only once it is known that prosecution witnesses are present and the case can therefore be proved. I wish that it were different, but that is how it is.
        There is already a permissive power to hold intermediate diets before summary trials. It was introduced by the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980. However, the new procedure fell into disuse in most courts in Scotland because it was found to be ineffective in fulfilling its purpose of identifying adjournments and guilty pleas in advance. I agree with hon. Members that a preliminary procedure such as this has the potential to secure improvements in these areas, but plainly the existing practice has not worked. Accordingly, it would not be sensible to make an ineffective procedure mandatory. That would simply waste more court time and result in a worse service to the public.
        However, I can offer hope of improvement. The Scottish Courts Administration is supporting a review of court programming by groups under the chairmanship of Sheriff Principal Nicholson and Sheriff Cox. Part of the review involves experiments to establish an effective form of intermediate diet within the existing legislation. I am sure that the courts themselves will wish to make use of their existing powers. One court, Airdrie, has already reintroduced intermediate diets as a result of a successful experiment. Moreover, we shall be considering in the light of the conclusions of the review whether improvements can be made in the statutory framework which will result in intermediate diets fulfilling their purpose more successfully, but any proposals arising from that will be for another Bill.
        I invite the hon. Gentleman not to press the new clause and to wait until the review is completed.
        Mr. McFall: I thank the Minister for his reply. He will be aware of the concern of practitioners about this issue. Only a few weeks ago, Ian Hamilton QC expressed great concern about it. There was a photograph of him in the Glasgow Herald in full motorbike gear, saying that the system is crumbling. I am sure that his comments are echoed in many other parts of the Scottish legal system. As a result of his statement, I tabled a number of parliamentary questions asking how many cases involved plea bargaining. The Minister's rather unhelpful reply was that answering the question would involve disproportionate cost.
        The Minister acknowledges that the system is not working. I do not believe that a committee comprising a sheriff principal and a sheriff gets to the heart of the
        474
        problem. The Minister will know that a criminal justice commission in England and Wales has already reported. Why should not Scotland have such a commission to look into all these issues? It could examine all the deficiencies of the legal system. Setting up such a commission would be universally welcomed in legal circles.
        Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: It is much more sensible to go ahead with the review, which will report before long. At that stage we can see what further measures are needed. New clause 6 would make mandatory a procedure which, so far, the courts have found ineffective. We are trying to devise a more effective intermediate diet procedure, so this is not the time to introduce a mandatory requirement.
        Mr. McFall: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.
        Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.

    Clause 3

      POWER TO RELEASE PRISONERS ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS
      Mr. McFall: I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 3, line 27, at end insert—
      '(1A) If the Secretary of State is satisfied that there are no compassionate grounds which would justify the release of a person on licence he shall inform that person of his decision and the reasons for that decision as soon as practicably possible.'.
      The amendment would add a new subsection to clause 3, requiring the Secretary of State to give reasons for a decision not to release a prisoner on compassionate grounds. The clause allows the Secretary of State to release a prisoner if he is satisfied that there are compassionate reasons for so doing. If he refuses to release him, the prisoner has no means of discovering the reasons for the refusal and no means of requiring the decision to be reviewed. The amendment is necessary to make the Secretary of State accountable for his decision.
      I remember a Labour party working group, under the auspices of Lord Macaulay of Bragar, looking into the criminal justice system and asking prisoners about their anxieties. Their main concern was not their physical conditions, although often they were not up to standard: what they were worried about was the lack of communication in the prison between governor, prison officers and prisoners. Prisoners feel vulnerable and isolated, and if the Secretary of State is not obliged to give reasons, that will serve only to heighten prisoners' fears.
      It is surely not asking too much for the Secretary of State to be made accountable for his decisions in the form of a written response. The Minister remarked in Committee that the giving of reasons by the Secretary of State should be a "matter of good practice". We maintain that it should be enshrined in statute.
      The suggested remedy—of a judicial review in the event that the Secretary of State does not provide reasons—is unduly cumbersome. I invite the comments of the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) on this. This remedy would be time-consuming and expensive. It would be much more economical and efficient if the Secretary of State were made to give his reasons in writing.
      Dr. Godman: I support the amendment. If a decision is made to reject an application for release on licence on compassionate grounds, the reason for that decision

      475
      should be conveyed to the applicant as quickly as possible. There is nothing worse for prisoners than being kept waiting for weeks before hearing about such decisions.
      Will the Minister assure me that these decisions will be conveyed to prisoners as quickly as possible? I know that decisions by the parole board used to take an interminable time to reach prisoners. I know that there are difficulties —the massive work load imposed on members of the board, and the work undertaken by the local review committees—but I have known of prisoners waiting for more than two months before parole board decisions reached them. There should be no delays in matters of this kind.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: When one man holds the power of liberty over the life of another, that power must surely be exercised reasonably, responsibly and with sensitivity. If the Secretary of State concludes that an applicant for release on licence cannot be released on compassionate grounds, it is only right and proper that the person, he or she, whose liberty is being denied should be told why. It is a simple proposition needing no elaboration. The Government claim to be in favour of more openness, so I hope that they will find it easy to accept.
      6.30 pm
      Mr. Hood: I agree with the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) that the amendment is not meant as a criticism of the incumbent of the office of Secretary of State; it is designed to make the decisions of the Secretary of State more publicly accountable.
      I am concerned about the way in which the powers relating to licences and their withdrawal have been exercised. I do not wish to repeat all that I said on Second Reading, but the case of one of my constituents is worth considering.
      George Beatty was released after 13 years in prison, but six years later he was pulled back into prison to serve the rest of his life sentence on the basis of a spurious allegation that he had kicked a social worker. When the case went to court, that accusation was withdrawn, but was replaced with a charge of breach of the peace and, lo and behold, George Beatty was pulled back into prison. It would be awful and disgraceful for that to happen to anyone, but that case is even more disgraceful because everyone, except someone high up in the judiciary, believes that that man is innocent.
      On Second Reading, I spoke with some hesitation about this case because I was concerned about the sensitivities of the family of the victim who George Beatty was found guilty of murdering some 13 years ago. However, I have now been informed that the family do not believe that he murdered their daughter. Compelling reasons now suggest that there was no evidence to convict him of that crime.
      I am sure that the reasons for the conviction will come out in the future. I hope that that will happen soon, because, until then, George Beatty will be in prison in Edinburgh. His case should concern not only parliamentarians but everyone in our country, because what happened to him could happen to anyone. That innocent man was convicted of a crime, yet the evidence shows that
      476
      he could not have committed it. The judicial system has closed ranks on him and he is now faced with the full power of the establishment.
      I hope that, in the end, justice will be done, because there is no reason why George Beatty should be kept in prison. I hope that the Secretary of State will allow his appeal to be heard quickly. When the opportunity comes to examine all the evidence, I am absolutely convinced that it will be found that George Beatty was wrongly convicted and imprisoned. For that reason, I support the spirit of the amendment.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I must tell the hon. Member for Clydesdale (Mr. Hood) that I do not propose to discuss in detail individual cases that have been the subject of meetings between him and the Minister of State. The issue of the recall of released life prisoners is not strictly relevant to clause 3, and the issue of any possible miscarriage of justice is even less pertinent to the debate. However, I will draw my right hon. and learned Friend's attention to the hon. Gentleman's remarks.
      I can assure the hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) that decisions on compassionate release will be communicated without delay. Normally the Secretary of State is limited by the parole board's timetable of meetings, but clause 3 allows the Secretary of State to make a decision without consulting the board in cases of urgency. That will happen as necessary.
      As I made clear earlier in our proceedings, I am fully in accord with the spirit underlying the amendment. Our aim, as I indicated then, is that every prisoner should be kept fully informed of any decisions which affect him, and should have the reasons for such decisions explained to him. I suspect that, when a similar amendment was suggested in Committee, I may not have made the Government's policy sufficiently clear.
      If a prisoner puts forward arguments in favour of his or her compassionate release, the Secretary of State will consider them very carefully in the light of medical, social work and prison reports. If the Secretary of State concludes that compassionate release is unjustified, when he informs the prisoner of that decision, he will state his reasons for it. If the prisoner is dissatisfied with those reasons, he or she may make further representations to the Secretary of State. If there is a change in the prisoner's health or circumstances, the Secretary of State will be prepared to review the case again.
      I mentioned the question of judicial review in Committee, but judicial review will of course be a last resort for a prisoner who has exhausted all the administrative avenues of recourse. Our intention is to give reasons administratively when the decision is communicated to the prisoner. This will enable the prisoner to question the reasons if he or she wishes to do so and recourse to the courts would—as I said—be available if the Secretary of State appeared to be acting unlawfully in refusing release. Against this background, the amendment is unnecessary, and I hope that it will not be pressed.
      Mr. McFall: In Committee, the Minister was not agreeable to our amendment, because we asked for the Secretary of State to give reasons for his decision. Given what the Minister has just said, however, is it the case that the Secretary of State will give reasons to the prisoner and that therefore there will be no need for an application for a judicial review? Such an application is made when the

      477
      Secretary of State does not provide the reasons for his refusal to release a prisoner, but it now appears that the Secretary of State will provide those reasons. Am I correct in that assumption? If so, the Minister is accepting the spirit of our amendment.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The reasons will be given. As I said in Committee, in the previous Parliament I had to look at one case extremely carefully. I wanted to release the prisoner in question, but when I looked at all the circumstances—he had killed a young child—I did not feel that the risk to the public justified his release.
      In some cases, the Secretary of State may be considering the release of a prisoner because that prisoner is very ill. However, he may not know how ill he is and the Secretary of State may not necessarily want to inform him, at an early stage, of the extent of that illness.
      I can assure hon. Members that reasons for a decision will be given, so the spirit of the amendment will be met.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: I do not want to interfere with the sense of agreement that is now evident between members of the Government and Opposition Front Benches. However, I am sure that the Minister will agree that one must be careful to point out that if an application for judicial review is successful that does not have the effect of producing reasons for a decision; it has the effect of quashing the Minister's decision. In other words, one is then back in the position that existed the moment before the Minister took that decision. The furnishing of reasons is separate and distinct, but it may be—this is where agreement has broken out—that the furnishing of reasons may, of itself, be enough to dissuade people from embarking upon the more complicated procedure of judicial review.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman.
      Mr. McFall: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
      Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

    Clause 4

      PERSONS DETAINED UNDER MENTAL HEALTH (SCOTLAND) ACT 1984
      Mr. McFall: I beg to move amendment No. 2 in page 5, line 11, leave out
      'a report is furnished in respect of him under subsection (9) below'
      and insert
      'an application for admission under Section 18 of this Act has been approved by the sheriff and made in accordance with Part V of this Act.'.
      Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes): With this it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 3, in page 5, leave out lines 20 to 35.
      No. 4, in page 5, leave out lines 36 to 46.
      Government amendment No. 14.
      Mr. McFall: The amendment would ensure that clause 4 is amended so that the regular procedures under the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 apply to detainees under the Immigration Act 1971.
      We tabled the amendments for a number of reasons, but our principal concern is the provision for continued
      478
      detention following the expiry of sentence. We see no reason why the normal procedures under section 18 should not apply in such circumstances, operating under the same criteria and offering the protection of an application to a sheriff. The proposals contain broader criteria, and only a right of appeal to the sheriff.
      Our anxieties would become crucial in, for instance, the case of a person with language or mental difficulties who had been detained under immigration provisions. Such a person would be unlikely to understand that he or she had a right of appeal, and would surely be dealt with more appropriately under the procedure governing a section 18 application to the sheriff.
      The recent statutory amendments to detention procedures should eliminate concern about transitional difficulties on expiry of sentence, and thus strengthen the argument that the normal procedure should apply following expiry.
      We were not convinced by the arguments advanced by the Minister in Committee.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I am happy to concede that, when a prisoner has been transferred to a mental hospital under both a transfer direction and a restriction direction, and when the date has arrived on which that prisoner would otherwise have been released from prison, the person concerned should from that point on be treated in exactly the same way as a person who has been admitted to hospital under civil rather than criminal procedures. Indeed, my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate and I have made much the same point in relation to clause 4 at earlier stages. I would, however, be reluctant to go as far as is proposed in amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4.
      It should be borne in mind that the provisions that we are considering tend to relate to only a small number of longer-term prisoners who require to be transferred to hospital because of serious mental disorder. Where a prisoner is serving a short sentence, or has only a short period of a longer sentence still to serve on the date on which he is transferred to hospital, it is unlikely that a restriction direction will be made. Where the prisoner's mental disorder is not such as to require long-term treatment, it is unlikely that he will be detained in hospital for very long, or that the responsible medical officer will consider that continued detention in hospital is necessary.
      What is envisaged in amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4 therefore seems somewhat unrealistic. The person concerned may have been detained in hospital for several years, and may in that time have made one or more unsuccessful appeals to the sheriff to be discharged. At the time in question, it will appear evident to all concerned—including the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland—that the person's continued detention in hospital will be necessary for a further period.
      Finally, the patient himself may not wish to contest the grounds for his continued detention. Nevertheless, it is proposed that there should be a formal application to the sheriff to obtain authority for that continued detention, as though the patient were being admitted direct from the community.
      Dr. Godman: When a person is transferred to a mental hospital, will the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland maintain a monitoring role? Will the Minister also assure us that he is entirely confident that no such persons who are detained in mental hospitals anywhere in

      479
      Scotland would have been released long ago if they had stayed in prison for the duration of their sentences? May we have an assurance that no such person has been detained for longer than his original prison sentence?
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall have to check on the second point; it is possible that a person has remained in a mental hospital because he has become very ill. In answer to the hon. Gentleman's first question, I can tell him that the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland will have the monitoring role to which he referred.
      I think that I can reassure the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) about Immigration Act detainees. In their case, subsections (9) and (10) of new section 74 will not apply, and an application under section 18 of the 1984 Act will be necessary to secure their continued detention.
      In my view, there is no need to involve the sheriff unless a patient wishes to contest the grounds of his continued detention. Provision must, of course, be made for the patient to have that opportunity, and such provision is made in lines 42 to 46 on page 5. The effect of those words is that a patient whose detention in hospital is continued under subsections (9) and (10) has the right to appeal to the sheriff at any time during the following six months —that being the period for which the authority for his detention is renewed.
      In the light of that, I do not think that anything would be achieved by amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4 except more and unnecessary work for the sheriff and for solicitors representing patients. There is, however, a reasonable change which could be made, and which I am happy to propose to meet the purpose of the amendments to some extent.
      6.45 pm
      I think that we all agree that, when the day arrives on which a transferred prisoner would have been released from prison, there should thereafter be no distinction between him and other patients who have been detained with the sheriff's approval. It may be said that the existing provisions do not quite achieve that result, because they provide that, on the substitution of fresh authority for his detention, the patient is to be treated as if he had been admitted in pursuance of a hospital order. That would, in effect, mean a continuing distinction between the patient concerned and others who are admitted in pursance of an application to the sheriff. Government amendment No. 14 is intended to remove that distinction.
      I hope that Opposition Members will recognise that I seek to take on board the point of their amendments as far as I can, and that they will support amendment No. 14 rather than pressing amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4.
      Mr. McFall: I thank the Minister for his assurances. None the less, I submit that the notional right of appeal is not the same as the procedure under section 18 of the 1984 Act. I feel that the difference in character between the court's scrutiny under section 18 and an appeal to the sheriff should be recognised. In view of the Minister's positive response to the spirit of our amendment, however, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
      Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
      Amendment made: No. 14, in page 5, line 38, leave out from 'had' to ?; but' in line 41 and insert
      480
      ?,on the date on which the restriction direction ceased to have effect, been admitted to the hospital in pursuance of an application for admission'.—[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]

    Clause 14

      SUPERVISED RELEASE OF SHORT-TERM PRISONERS
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I beg to move amendment No. 15, in page 12, line 15, leave out from 'with' to 'for' in line 16 and insert—

      '(1) such requirements as are specified in the order; and

      (ii) such requirements as that officer may reasonably specify,'.

      Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes): With this we may take amendment No. 5, in page 12, line 38, after 'person', insert
      'and if requested to do so by that person, to his legal representative, if any,'.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: As originally drafted, the provisions in clause 14 would have obliged a person subject to a supervised release order to comply with such requirements as are specified in the order by the court and, subsequently, by the supervising officer.
      I was happy to accept an amendment moved in Committee by the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) which inserted the word "reasonable" as a qualification in respect of such requirements. I still believe that all the requirements specified in or by virtue of a supervised release order should be reasonable; I am now persuaded, however, that a statutory reference to reasonableness is necessary only in relation to requirements specified by the supervising officer.
      I am grateful to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill for drawing attention to the matter. I hope that she and her hon. Friends will be satisfied that what we now propose accords with the spirit of the amendment that she moved in Committee.
      Mr. McFall: I thank the Minister for his letter to me about this point, dated 12 November 1992. He has written to me regularly about the Bill, and I have found all his letters helpful.
      We intend to press amendment No. 5, because we think that a solicitor should be provided with a copy of the supervised released order. In Committee, the Minister argued that the clerk of the court could not send a copy of the order to a prisoner's solicitor as a matter of course, because if a client wanted a solicitor to obtain a copy, he could
      "make that clear to the relevant authorities."—[Official Report, First Scottish Standing Committee; 5 November 1992, c. 78.]
      That is the purpose of the amendment, and I commend it to the House.
      Dr. Godman: I have a brief question about amendment No. 10. Can a person who challenges a reasonable requirement that is laid upon him by a probation officer obtain legal advice? I appreciate that a social worker or probation officer must be sensible and reasonable when imposing requirements on someone who is released under licence, but has the person any right of appeal? I do not recall that question being answered in Committee.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I should first answer the question about amendment No. 5. I listened carefully to

      481
      the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall), and I read with interest the explanation for the amendment that was sent to me by the Law Society of Scotland. I have every sympathy with solicitors whose clients fail to keep in touch with them, but I regret to say that the amendment would not help and I believe it to be unnecessary.
      So far as I am aware, solicitors have no difficulty in obtaining copies of papers that the clerk of court is required to send to their clients; they merely have to ask. That arrangement applies to a vast range of orders and other papers. It would not be wise to insert a statutory provision in relation to one kind of order in isolation.
      The point that the Law Society has in mind is that, by receiving a copy of the supervised release order, the solicitor will find out which local authority or justices have been designated for the purposes of the order. That is not so. The designation of a local authority or justices for the purposes of the order is to be a matter for the Secretary of State shortly before the prisoner is released under clause 14(4). The order will give no hint of where the prisoner intends to reside after he is released.
      Since amendment No. 5 would not assist solicitors, I suggest that it should not be pressed.
      Amendment agreed to.

    Clause 17

      REVOCATION OF LICENCE
      Mr. McFall: I beg to move amendment No. 6, in page 16, line 26, after 'he', insert 'and his legal representative'.
      Madam Speaker: With this, it will be convenient to consider amendment No. 7, in page 16, line 31, at end insert—
      ?(3A) Where the Secretary of State has made a reference to the Parole Board in terms of subsection (3) above he shall inform the person recalled under subsection (1)(a)(i) who makes representations under subsection (2) above or is recalled under subsection (1)(a)(ii) above of the reference to the Parole Board and that he and his legal representatives have the right to make representations to the Parole Board in respect of the recall.'.
      Mr. McFall: Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 would make two changes to clause 17. Amendment No. 6 would ensure that a recalled prisoner may make representations through his solicitor, and amendment No. 7 would ensure that the Secretary of State informs a recalled person about a reference to the parole board and about his or her right to make representations to the board.
      Clause 17 establishes a regime for the revocation of a licence and recall to prison. Revocation and recall can take place in respect of long-term or life prisoners if the parole board has made such a recommendation or if the Secretary of State considers it necessary in the public interest. The prisoner has a right to make representations to the Secretary of State and our amendment provides that the representations may also be made by the recalled prisoner's solicitor. The Secretary of State is obliged to refer certain cases to the parole board under clause 17(3). It is possible that the prisoner will not be aware of such a reference. The amendment obliges the Secretary of State to inform the prisoner about the reference and to ensure that he knows that he can be represented at the board.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I was aware in Committee that I had not fully persuaded the hon.
      482
      Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) that the amendments are unnecessary. I am happy to have this further opportunity to explain why I believe that to be so.
      The amendments appear to reflect some misunderstanding of what happens when a prisoner who is released on licence is recalled to custody, especially as regards the purpose of referral to the parole board and the time scale involved. The purpose of referral is to give the board an opportunity to consider the circumstances that led to the recall and the question of re-release. The board may decide that the prisoner should not be re-released. Alternatively, it may decide that the prisoner should be released immediately. In the latter case, the Secretary of State has no option but to re-release. In the interests of the prisoner, referral to the board is effected as soon as possible. In practice, cases are usually referred to the board between two and four weeks after recall, depending on the date of the board's next meeting and the time that the prisoner requires to make representations.
      The statutory requirements in clause 17(2) is that, on his return to prison, the prisoner be informed of the reasons for his recall and that he has the right to make written representations to the Secretary of State. I accept that some prisoners may need to have it explained to them that the right to make representations does not preclude them from making such representations to a third party such as a solicitor. I assure the House that a prisoner who is recalled will be fully informed of his rights and of the assistance that is available to him. Amendment No.6 is therefore unnecessary.
      Representations made to the Secretary of State by the prisoner or by anyone else on the prisoner's behalf are automatically included in the dossier of papers referred to the board. There is therefore no need for separate representations to be made to the board, and any requirement for such separate representations would only delay the board's consideration of a case.
      I hope that that explanation will persuade the hon. Member for Dumbarton that the intentions behind the amendments are founded on a misunderstanding of the recall procedure and that the rights of a recalled prisoner are adequately protected.
      Mr. McFall: In the light of the Minister's assurances, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
      Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

    Clause 20

      THE PAROLE BOARD FOR SCOTLAND
      Mr. McFall: I beg to move amendment No. 8, in page 18, line 26, at end insert—
      '; and
      (d) requiring the Board to deal with cases within such time limits as the Secretary of State may prescribe.'.
      The Minister knows that we had a worthy debate on this issue in Committee. We are mindful of the fact that the Secretary of State may make rules for the proceedings of the parole board, but the amendment would permit those rules to include provisions regarding the time that the board may take to reach a decision. In the past, the board has sometimes taken too long to reach a decision. Paragraph 10 of the board's 1991 report says:
      "the Board has expressed concern about the time required to complete the review of life sentence cases. The Board is

      483
      therefore very pleased to note that steps have been taken by the Department to reduce the time to around 10 months for the completion of reviews."
      I was grateful for that, but 10 months, which is quite reasonable, could become a year or two years. Therefore, we believe that for the procedure to be efficient it must be effective. There is need for a time limit on the board's decisions and it should be written into the Bill. I know that the Minister agreed with the spirit of the amendment that we moved in Committee and agreed to reconsider the matter. This amendment brings the issue before the House again for further ministerial thought.
      Dr. Godman: Although I support the amendment, I shall ask the Minister a few questions which have been prompted by observations made by my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall), who referred to the time taken to deal with cases.
      7 pm
      Has the Minister reached a decision about the board and its modus operandi since the Committee stage? Has he, for example, any proposals to increase the number of its members? When I can catch his ear, may I ask him whether there have been any fresh retirements from the board or appointments to it since we met in Committee? Have any existing members of the board been reappointed?
      In view of the remarks made tonight by my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton and the similar comments that he made in Committee, is additional assistance to be given to officials who serve the board by way of more advanced means of dealing with the vast amount of paperwork which passes through the board's hands?
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I am sure that the necessary assistance will be given to officials, because I envisage that there will be more work, certainly for social workers, arising out of the Bill. I may be given further information, but I am not aware of any vacancies at the moment. The comments made in Committee by the hon. Member for Dumbarton will be borne in mind.
      I am glad to be able to say that some helpful information has now been passed to me to the effect that my right hon. Friend has recently reappointed Mrs. Megan Casserly but decided not to reappoint Mr. Denis Rice. Sir Hugh Byatt and Mrs. Morris are demitting office this year. That is the up-to-date information, and I am glad that I was able to pass that on within a few moments of admitting that I was not aware of the most recent facts. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept that.
      Dr. Godman: I offer my compliments to the two members of the board who have recently retired, despite some less than helpful observations made about one of them by my hon. Friends. I believe that all the members of the parole board perform a valuable public duty, which should not be overlooked by hon. Members or by members of the public. I am delighted that Mrs. Megan Casserly, a distinguished social work manager, has been reappointed. Mr. Joe Scott is now chairman of the board. I said that he was a member of a large Lanarkshire mining family, but I believe that his family was involved in the steel industry in Lanarkshire.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Having seen the parole board in operation, I am aware that it does an enormous amount of work and that its cases require a great deal of study and reading.
      The amendment was buried under others in Committee, so I am glad that we have been able to give it a second hearing on its own because it gives me the opportunity to explain why it is unnecessary.
      In Committee the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) said that it was difficult to understand whether clause 20(4)(b) and the amendment meant the same thing or had different meanings. It is a question of interpretation, but it is not necessary to require the parole board to complete its consideration of a case within a period specified simply by length. The important factor is not how long the board takes to consider a case but when it completes its consideration in relation to the date on which the prisoner first becomes eligible for parole.
      If a determinant sentence prisoner is eligible for parole on, say, 1 April next year, all the necessary consideration and procedures must be completed so that the prisoner can be told before 1 April whether he is to be released on parole then, later or not at all. The review process begins about five months before what is known as the prisoner's parole eligibility date. The board sets deadlines for the submission of papers to enable it to meet the automatic deadline which is established in each case for the parole eligibility date.
      The board usually requires that the cases of determinant sentence prisoners should be referred to it at least six weeks before the date on which the prisoner becomes eligible for parole. That gives the board sufficient time in which to make a recommendation and for a favourable recommendation to be considered by the Secretary of State and acted on if the prisoner is to be released on or shortly after the date on which he becomes eligible for parole.
      The board is an extremely efficient body and, like the hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman), I pay tribute to the work of its participants. I am not aware of any criticism of its record in meeting the deadlines imposed on it in respect of determinant sentence prisoners.
      Different considerations apply to life sentence prisoners. In such cases, there is no need to impose a specific time limit on the parole board, because that would not help to accelerate what is inevitably a fairly lengthy process. The board itself has previously criticised the time taken in other parts of that process—consultation with the judiciary and consideration by the Secretary of State—but strenuous efforts have been made in recent years to achieve a speedier throughput of cases, and sustained progress has been made. The maximum time for reference of life sentence cases to the parole board has been reduced to 10 months from the date of initiation of the review, and we aim to improve on that wherever possible.
      In response to the hon. Member for Dumbarton, I must point out that the Bill already enables the Secretary of State to make rules requiring cases to be dealt with at prescribed times. Nothing more is required, and the amendment would not achieve any desirable result in that limits specified by length of time would not be helpful in this context. I hope that my explanation has made that clear, and that the amendment will not be pressed.
      Mr. McFall: I thank the Minister for his explanation. As he knows, the spirit of the amendment is to reduce the time taken for the reviews. I hope that the Minister will bear our comments in mind and that, in practice, the time will be reduced. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
      Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

    Clause 22

      PLACE OF CONFINEMENT OF PRISONERS
      Mrs. Fyfe: I beg to move amendment No. 28, in page 19, line 13, at end add—
      '(4) In determining which prison a prisoner should be allocated to, the Secretary of State shall have regard to the prisoner's home circumstances and access to the prison by the prisoner's family.'.
      The Minister will remember our discussion in Committee. I thank him for the detailed response which he sent to my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) in the past few days. He kindly let us all have a copy of that reply.
      In his reply he stated that he had already introduced a scheme for long-term prisoners which became operative last July. It means that
      "prisoners serving sentences of more than 2 years are given the opportunity to choose, subject to the availability of places, among a number of establishments offering appropriate levels of security."
      He also said that there were opportunities for prisoners who are not considered dangerous to be considered for home leave. However, he has so far rejected legislation to enforce what our amendment calls for.
      He set out his reasons in his letter. He said that the current distribution of establishments and
      "the need to hold remands, males, young offenders and females separately means that it is … not a practical proposition to meet a requirement of nearness to family".
      I draw the Minister's attention to the fact that we are asking only that he "shall have regard" to the prisoner's home circumstances and access to his family. We are far from suggesting that that is the only criterion worth considering. We agree with the Minister that a move to medium-security or open conditions may be of great benefit to the prisoner, and that it may be the right time for a prisoner to move to a less secure establishment. That might have the effect of taking the prisoner further away from his family.
      However, we also suggest that in many cases, prisoners might benefit more from a move to a more open prison if in the first place they had the encouragement and support that a family could give through being close to the prison. We recognise that the distribution of prisons is not so convenient that there could be one available in half an hour's bus ride from anywhere in Scotland, but we suggest that, given the current placing of prisons, account should be taken of that difficulty.
      I am sure that the Minister agrees that, if people in prison, whether male or female, have access to those near and dear to them, whoever they may be, that can only help them to get back into society, to give up the crimes for which they have been imprisoned in the first place and to restore them to decent society. Having family back-up maintained throughout long imprisonment must surely be valuable.
      We agree with the Minister that the family are not necessarily those with immediate marital or blood
      486
      relations. The problem of definition can easily be resolved. What is wrong with asking the prisoner himself or herself to name the people with whom he or she feels there is a close relationship? The list must not, of course, be over-extensive.
      Mr. Hood: My hon. Friend makes a valuable point and I am sure that all hon. Members here understand it. This weekend I was concerned with the case of George Beatty. Although innocent, he was convicted, served a prison sentence of 13 years and is now back inside. He obviously does not have a wife. He has only a mother who lives on a state pension. The Department of Social Security is refusing assistance to allow her to visit her son, who is in prison after having been wrongly convicted. Surely that supports what my hon. Friend says.
      Mrs. Fyfe: I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. It is unfortunate that many people are in prison whose home circumstances are very impoverished. Their families have little money and cannot afford long journeys to visit them. Pensioners and people living on income support are especially badly placed in that regard. That is one of the reasons why we are appealing for legislation to ensure that such circumstances are taken into account.
      The actions of the Department of Social Security are not, of course, the Minister's business, but we should take account of the realities in framing legislation. It is not only the length of the journey that is a problem, but the cost of the journey can put it beyond the pockets of so many families. Whether the person involved is the prisoner's mother, wife, partner or simply close friend is irrelevant. The important point is that the person who visits is someone to whom the prisoner feels close and someone from whose close contact he or she would benefit.
      We called earlier for severer sentences in some circumstances, but we should never forget that a long term in prison is a drastic thing to happen to anybody. We want to try to get people to join the community again and to give up whatever crimes have put them in prison in the first place. Keeping in contact with those whom they hold near and dear will surely only help.
      Mr. Gallie: I want to rectify a great wrong. In Committee, I was the only hon. Member to speak out against the inclusion of the amendment in the Bill. At that time, the Minister appeared sympathetic to it and I was critical of him for being so. I was critical because I felt that it was unnecessary to add a factor that was already considered by the authorities when a person was convicted. It is part of the process, and a sympathetic approach is taken.
      I felt at that time that to legislate would mean that there was a mandatory requirement which could cause problems, because prisoners could see such a requirement as a right and would look to it as a principal justification for going to a particular location. The real reason why individuals are in prison is the protection of the public. That must be the overriding factor.
      The question of the prison to which a convicted person goes could be considered, but it should not be legislated for and it should not be a mandatory requirement. I am pleased that my hon. Friend the Minister has gone back on his original comments in Committee, and I hope that he sticks to his present view.
      7.15 pm
      Dr. Godman: I part company with the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) to some extent. When people are in prison, an immense burden is often placed on the shoulders of their families in terms of travel to and from prison for visits.
      Mr. Gallie indicated dissent.
      Dr. Godman: The hon. Gentleman shakes his head. Anyone visiting Shotts prison has considerable difficulty getting to it from the centre of Shotts. If the Minister is unwilling to accept the amendment, he should at least offer some solace to the families of prisoners in those circumstances. I fully accept that there are often practical difficulties that prevent the transfer of a prisoner to a prison close to his or her home.
      Some time ago, I wrote to the Minister asking for a constituent, who is serving 12 years in Perth, to be transferred to Greenock. His mother, an elderly, disabled person who is living on social security, told me that she simply could not travel to and from Perth. I do not want to identify more closely where she lives in my constituency. I asked the Minister whether he would consider such a transfer on compassionate grounds, although not for the man in question, who deserves every day of the sentence imposed on him for the crime that he committed.
      However, it seems that there are establishments closer to my constituency than the one in Perth. I accept that there are difficulties about Greenock because it is a prison designated for short-term prisoners, although there are two or three prisoners there who are serving immensely long sentences.
      The Minister could take measures that would make life easier for the families of prisoners rather than for the prisoners themselves. I am also glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) stressed the need to take account of the prisoners' concerns.
      Not so long ago, a constituent of mine came to see me with a request that her son be transferred closer to the lower Clyde. Unwittingly, I simply accepted that that was also her son's wish. I then received an indignant letter from the laddie concerned saying that he did not want to move to Greenock, not because of its Member of Parliament, but because he wanted to keep away from his family. I had a rather difficult interview with his mother afterwards. The interests of the prisoner must have primacy. The Minister can improve matters. I have asked a number of times for the creation of a visitors' committee at Greenock. I know that I am straying out of line, and I shall not expand the point further. However, in terms of controlling the inevitable tensions and turbulences in our prisons, the Government must show some concern for the issues arising directly from the amendment.
      Mr. Gallie: The hon. Gentleman has made the point that I was trying to make. The system already allows people such as him to write or make representations to the Minister on behalf of a prisoner. The system tends to treat applicants sympathetically and, where possible, meet their demands. I am sugesting that that is already happening and should not be a mandatory requirement.
      Dr. Godman: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his characteristically courteous intervention. I have,
      488
      perhaps, more experience of such matters than some hon. Members, as it appears that a depressingly large number of my constituents are at present incarcerated in prison.
      Mr. Gallie: It might affect the hon. Gentleman's majority.
      Dr. Godman: There are not enough of them to affect my majority at the next election. If they were all released tomorrow and there was an election a month later—for which I devoutly pray—it would not affect my not insubstantial majority.
      It is a serious matter, particularly for elderly women who exist on social security, and who find it enormously difficult to travel to, for example, that appallingly grim place at Peterhead—all prisons are grim, but that must be the grimmest of the lot in Scotland—or to Saughton in Edinburgh. They have to suffer the indignity of appealing for funds from the local benefits agency, as we are now supposed to call it. I believe that, in many cases, the families of prisoners would benefit enormously if the prisoners were not held so far from home.
      I think that Greenock prison is for short-term prisoners —those serving up to and including 18 months. There are a handful of long-term prisoners in the establishment whom I have met—as a visitor I hasten to add. I spent an afternoon there, although I know that the hon. Member for Ayr would like me to have stayed longer.
      It is an important amendment, and even if the Minister cannot see fit to accept it because of the reasons put forward by the hon. Member for Ayr, I hope that when requests are made for transfers, they are treated sympathetically and expeditiously. That is not always the case now.
      Not everyone will visit their Member of Parliament asking for a request to be passed on to the relevant Minister for a daughter or son be placed in an establishment closer to home. Some people will be much too diffident to come to our surgeries with such requests. For a start, they will feel it shameful to have a son or daughter in prison.
      I want the Minister to treat the subject with great sympathy, and not merely in relation to transfers within Scotland. Those of us with constituents in prisons south of the border—in my case just a handful—would like sympathetic consideration to be given to bringing those prisoners home. By "home" I mean prisons in Scotland that are not as far away from their homes.
      There is much to be done to improve visitor facilities in prisons. The state of affairs at Greenock prison is nothing short of a scandal, but I am not certain that it is much better at Shotts, Edinburgh, Perth or elsewhere. Much needs to be done for the families of prisoners.
      Mr. McFall: I have been provoked into speaking by the comments of the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie), although he does not normally provoke me to do so. If I thought for a minute that the Minister was agreeing with the sentiments originally expressed by the hon. Member for Ayr, I would force a Division. However, I was gratified to read in his letter to me of 14 December 1992 that he took our concerns seriously. I am delighted to note that he has had discussions with the chief executive of the prison service on the matter.
      The issue of prisoners and their families is extremely important. If we wish to promote the rehabilitation of prisoners and reintroduce them into society, we must

      489
      consider their family context. In many cases, women will be left on their own to bring up children, and support and encourage their husbands in prison. If we wish to reduce the prison population it is extremely important that we consider the position of the families. Therefore, I am glad that the Minister has recognised our considerations and stated that the spirit of his letter will be maintained. That being the case, I see no reason for us to press the amendment to a Division.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall reply only briefly as I have already written to hon. Members. We had full discussions on the matter and wanted, if we could, to provide the House with a suitable amendment. We concluded that it would be impractical for several reasons. Cornton Vale is the only women's prison and could not meet the requirement were it to be written into statute. There is a protection unit at Peterhead for prisoners who are liable to be attacked by other prisoners so they could not take advantage of the terms proposed. Similarly, those who are to be held in open conditions can go to Penninghame or Noranside, and we would not want to deprive them of that opportunity.
      Prisoners serving more than two years are now entitled to choose from among a range of long-term establishment subject only to the availability of place. The Scottish prison service is working to improve visiting facilities where possible and is also reviewing arrangements for home leave to see whether more prisoners can benefit from home leave without compromising public safety. Those actions are being taken, and will continue to be taken. The proximity of prisoners' families will be taken into account. Where there is overcrowding in prisons, we felt that it would be undesirable to present prisoners with what might have been a right of judicial review, when it would be impractical always to give effect to it. However, as a matter of good practice, the prison service will certainly try to implement the facilities where possible.
      Mrs. Fyfe: I thank the Minister for his reassurances and beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
      Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

    Clause 28

      PRINTS, SAMPLES ETC. IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS
      Mr. McFall: I beg to move amendment No. 9, in page 22, leave out lines 17 to 19 and insert—
      '(4A) A police surgeon may, with the authority of an officer of a rank no lower than Inspector, take from the person from an external part of the body by means of swabbing or rubbing a sample of blood or other body fluid or of body tissue or of other material.'.
      Madam Deputy Speaker: With this, it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 10, in page 22, line 21, leave out 'or (4)' and insert
      '(4) or (4A)'.
      No. 13, in page 22, line 27, at end add—
      '(7) In this section "an external part of the body" means any part of the outside skin of the body or any hair growing on it except insofar as these are covered by clothing.'.
      Mr. McFall: This group of amendments relates to clause 28, which was debated intensely and in a lively fashion in Committee. The Opposition have tried to be helpful to the Minister by giving a definition of what constitutes an external part of the body. I think that the
      490
      Minister defined an external part of the body—to put it succinctly—as one that was not an internal part of the body. There is a searing logic to that definition, which I am sure will make much money for many solicitors and QCs.
      Today, I have spoken to the Law Society, to which the Minister sent a helpful letter. The Law Commission's committee has studied the Minister's letter carefully and Michael Clancy told me today that the commission is reassured on many aspects of the matter. I am happy to go along with that: if the Law Society is happy, that is fine.
      I know that the Scottish Police Federation and serving police officers are still nervous about the position and have not been reassured by the Minister. That is why I referred just now to the House of Lords judgment of 26 November 1992 in the case of Pepper v. Hart. The Minister will know that that historic judgment stated that, as an aid to construing legislation that was ambiguous or obscure—and which of us knows of legislation that is not unambiguous or obscure—or the literal meaning of which led to absurdity, the courts could refer to reports of debates or proceedings in Parliament.
      7.30 pm
      With that judgment in mind, I ask the Minister to respond, so that at some stage—perhaps in the next century, in 50 years' time when the Minister and I will not be around—the Minister's name can be invoked regularly in the Scottish courts. It is important that the Minister should make the point here to reassure both the Law Society and serving police officers on that aspect of clause 28.
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The amendments raise issues that were debated in some detail in Committee. It may help the House if I explain briefly the main purpose of clause 28.
      The provisions in that clause are intended to clarify the powers of the police to take samples and fingerprints of both detained and arrested persons without the need for a warrant. Where a warrant is required or considered necessary, the police will continue as at present to apply through the fiscal to a sheriff for a warrant.
      The Bill does not seek to determine the use to which any sample is put, whether it is obtained under warrant or not. If the police or a prosecutor considers that, for the purposes of their investigations, any sample should be subject to the DNA test, then that will be done.
      It should be noted, however, that a DNA test will in most cases be of assistance only in determining the suspect's DNA profile in order to compare that profile with any determined from blood, bodily tissue or fluid found on the victim or at the scene of the crime. In such cases, a DNA test will have to be run on a sample clearly taken from an internal part of the body of that suspect—from a hair root plucked from the victim, or from a proper full sample of blood. In both such instances, the sample involved will be invasive. It could not, therefore, be taken by a constable under the provisions of the clause. If the suspect is willing to have such samples taken, it would be possible to proceed without a warrant, but it is normal in such circumstances for a warrant to be obtained in any event.
      The types of sample covered by clause 28(4) are all non-invasive. The opinion of the Scottish Law Commission, which I share, is that they are of a kind for which neither a warrant nor the assistance of a doctor

      491
      should be required. Some form of authorisation should, however, be involved—hence the reference to an officer of a rank no lower than inspector.
      The amendments require a police surgeon, rather than a police officer, to take swabs or rubbings. I fail to see the grounds for such a change. Clearly, there is no medical reason for requiring a police surgeon to take the samples because, as I have stressed, they are non-invasive. There is no evidential reason. The police, unlike doctors, are trained in how to take samples from a variety of locations, and procedures exist to ensure the correct packaging and labelling of such samples to maintain their evidential worth. The services of a police surgeon would not, therefore, add to the evidential value.
      Dr. Godman: I am grateful to the Minister for showing his characteristic courtesy.
      Am I right in thinking that a DNA testing unit is to be created in Glasgow? If so, when will it be operational? And was any consideration given to siting it in Greenock—perhaps in the enterprise zone, where it might have created some employment?
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: There is, indeed, to be a DNA unit. I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman whether Greenock was considered as a prime site, but I can tell him that Strathclyde and Tayside forensic science laboratories are the only laboratories providing DNA facilities in Scotland at present. Forces which do not have DNA facilities available submit items for DNA examination to Cellmark Diagnostics. Such facilities exist, and I am sure that Greenock will be borne in mind for the future.
      I come now to the definition of "external". In Committe we had an interesting debate on what constituted external or internal. I fear that amendment No. 13 does not take us much further, as essentially it merely seeks to substitute "external" with
      "the outside skin of the body".
      In any event, as I made clear previously, if the police have any doubt about the area from which a sample is to be taken, they can apply for a warrant.
      Amendment No. 13 goes on to require that, where any outside skin of the body is covered by clothing, the police cannot exercise their powers unless under the authority of a warrant.
      I recognise hon. Members' intentions in tabling the amendment, but I do not consider that the proposed changes would improve the clause. It could result in warrants being required not to take samples but to remove a piece of clothing—for example, a glove—to enable the sample to be taken. Nor do the amendments help to clarify what would happen, for example, if the clothing were torn, or if there were a sample of material at the back of a suspect's neck and he was wearing an open-necked shirt. I believe that the amendment would give considerable scope for confusion.
      In the light of my comments, I ask the Opposition not to press the amendment.
      Mr. McFall: I am happy to accept the Minister's comments on the matter.
      Dr. Godman: Will my hon. Friend confirm that considerable reservations were expressed by representatives of our police forces about the powers to be given to them under this part of the Bill, and that those reservations have largely been ignored by Ministers?
      Mr. McFall: I feel that that is so. In my discussions with them, the police told me that they felt that the power were being foisted on them with no consultation whatever. They had a suspicion—shared, I believe, by Opposition Members—that the clause represented a cost-cutting exercise on the part of the Government and that the police were being asked to do what police surgeons had done previously. As my hon. Friend says, the fears of the police force have certainly not been allayed, and I urge the Government to enter into discussions with the police so that they may be reassured on these matters.
      Given that the Law Society is reassured, and that the Pepper v. Hart case will mean that comments made here can be referred to at a later date, as well as the Minister's reassurance, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
      Amendment, by leave withdrawn.

    Clause 32

      EVIDENCE FROM ABROAD THROUGH TELEVISION LINKS IN SOLEMN PROCEEDINGS
      The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Ian Lang): I beg to move amendment No. 11, in page 24, line 5, leave out subsection (5).
      When I introduced the Bill on Second Reading, I gave the House an undertaking that I would bring forward on Report an amendment that would remove subsection (5) from the new section which is to be inserted by clause 32 into the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980. I recognise the importance that many hon. Members attach to the matter, and the need to ensure that there is an opportunity for all who wish to do so to take part in the debate. I am glad to be able to discharge that undertaking this evening, and I am grateful to those hon. Members who served on the First Scottish Standing Committee for their self-restraint in allowing the matter to stand over until this stage.
      As the House knows, the provisions of clause 32 will enable the evidence of witnesses outside the United Kingdom to be given to a Scottish court by way of a live television link. The new provisions will bring the law of Scotland in that respect into line with the law of England and Wales, where such a facility has been available to both the prosecution and the defence for over two years—that is, since the coming into force of section 32 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 in November 1990 in respect of certain prescribed crimes.
      Were subsection (5) to remain in the Bill, its effect would be to disallow the use of modern technology in respect of one class of serious crime only, and purely on the basis that such crimes would be prosecuted under the War Crimes Act 1991. As my noble and learned Friend the Lord-Advocate pointed out when this matter was debated in another place, it would be wrong in principle to set up a special and different system for trying persons accused of war crimes. The procedures which this clause will introduce will be available to protect the rights of an

      493
      accused person, just as they will enable the prosecution to bring evidence which might not otherwise come before the court.
      Concerns were expressed in another place that the television link would be used to enable witnesses to identify accused persons in circumstances that would be unfair to the accused. I stress that the provisions are framed in such a way that the principle of fairness to the accused is paramount. The court must be satisfied, before granting an application by the prosecution to have evidence given by television link, not only that the interests of justice will be served but also that the granting of such an application would not be unfair to the accused.
      I have every confidence that the Scottish courts, in applying the principle of fairness to the accused which is so important to our system of criminal justice in Scotland, will ensure that, in every case in which an application for the giving of evidence by television link is granted, the right of the accused to a fair trial will not be imperilled. Given the safeguards built into the provisions, we consider it to be unnecessary and inappropriate that there should be any exclusions.
      Mr. Menzies Campbell: I believe that I am the only Member present to have voted consistently against the War Crimes Act 1991. I voted against the initial motion, when the temperature of the House was taken, and at every stage of the Bill. Notwithstanding that, I believe that the amendment, which the Secretary of State introduced so reasonably, ought to be supported. It seems to fly in the face of principle to exclude the use of modern technology for evidential purposes for one crime or set of crimes.
      I have taken the opportunity to read the debate in another place which was the progenitor of subsection (5), to which the amendment is directed. I mean no disrespect to their Lordships, but after reading the debate carefully, it is clear to me that in large measure their interest in the matter was influenced by their antagonism to the notion of war crimes legislation—an antagonism that is widespread in the House. That is understandable, but one must accept that the Bill has become law. The Houses of Parliament have passed a measure that I would have preferred not to be passed and to which I am still opposed. However, to seek to exclude the application of modern technology to one part of the criminal system because people feel that it is repugnant for it to be a part of the system cannot be justified on principle.
      While I wish that the War Crimes Act had never been passed, I am certain that we should be embarking upon a most dangerous precedent if we were to say that the nature of evidence will depend on the nature of the crime. That seems to open up a range of opportunities. In due course a system would emerge in which principle had disappeared and all crimes would be determined on a virtually ad hoc basis. For that reason, I am more than content that the amendment should be passed. It is right in principle.
      7.45 pm
      Mr. David Winnick: I hope that my colleagues who represent Scottish constituencies will forgive me for intervening briefly in the debate.
      The subsection passed in another place is very unfortunate. The hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) fairly spoke of his opposition to the War Crimes Act and gave his reasons for supporting —as I do—the Government amendment to overturn what
      494
      was done in another place. Unlike the hon. and learned Gentleman, who speaks from the Liberal Democrat Benches, I supported the War Crimes Act. I gave my reasons at the time and it would be inappropriate, and no doubt out of order, for me to attempt to so again today.
      Although I supported the Act, I always did so on the basis that justice must be done. I was not concerned with revenge, as some critics argued. If I had been of the view that so many years have elapsed since the crimes took place during the last war that it would be impossible to get justice, I would not have supported the legislation. I am concerned with justice. Nevertheless, just because they happened half a century ago, it does not mean that the people who are alleged to have been responsible for some of the most monstrous crimes that have ever been committed should not be brought to justice, if that is possible. I believe that people living in the United Kingdom and in Scotland may well have to face justice for such crimes. Should those people be brought to court, under our system the courts will decide whether they are guilty.
      Earlier today, I read the debate in another place. As several of their Lordships made clear, when the subsection was debated on 4 June it was almost a replay of the War Crimes Act. Perhaps the word "almost" is not necessary —it was as if their Lordships had decided that, as they had lost the first time round, they would use the Bill to put forward their arguments against the Act. The measure was being used by people who were totally opposed to the Act, which seems unfortunate.
      I am pleased that the Government have decided to invite the House to overturn what their Lordships have done, and I am sure that the House will gladly take up the invitation.
      Mr. Bill Walker: I shall be brief. I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on the way in which he moved the amendment.
      The stand taken by the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) deserves comment. He is a credit to the House and to his profession, because at least he is consistent on matters of principle. That is important, especially in legislation and law. As he said, it would be wrong for the use of modern technology to be excluded for one crime.
      As everyone knows, war crimes will not be restricted to what happened during the ghastly period between 1939 and 1945. One could argue that many war crimes are being perpetrated at this moment. Who knows whether, at some future date, a resident of Scotland will be charged with a war crime? It is proper and right that the amendment should be supported by the House.
      Mr. Lang: I am grateful to hon. Members who have taken part in the debate. I could not help noticing how different the tone of the debate has been compared with the tone and content of the debate in the other place. Their Lordships were wrong to use the measure to reopen the war crimes issue. By so doing, they have injected anomalies into the relationship between the laws of Scotland and England and between war crimes and other serious crimes.
      I am grateful to the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) for his comments. I too voted against the original motion. I was persuaded otherwise as

      495
      matters proceeded, but I feel the same way as he does about the amendment, for precisely the reasons that he eloquently and effectively put before the House.
      I also note and am grateful for the comments made by the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) and by my hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker). I hope that the unanimity of those taking part in this short but important debate will not be lost on their Lordships in another place and that they will recognise the view of this House on an important matter.
      Amendment agreed to.

    Clause 47

      SHORT TITLE, COMMENCEMENT AND EXTENT
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I beg to move amendment No. 16, in page 29, line 41, leave out 'Paragraph 5 of Schedule 5 to' and insert
      'This section and, is so far as relating to paragraph 5 of Schedule 5 of this Act, section 46(1) of?.
      Madam Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to take Government amendment No. 27.
      Lord Douglas-Hamilton: It was agreed in Committee that the provisions in paragraph 5 of schedule 5 should come into effect as soon as the Bill was passed. It is necessary for that purpose that the paving provision in clause 46(1), in so far as it relates to paragraph 5 of schedule 5, should come into effect simultaneously.
      Amendment agreed to.

    Schedule 3

      DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
      Amendments made: No. 29, in page 32, line 38, at beginning insert
      'Except where it is a statement such as is mentioned in paragraph 2A(b) and (c) below,'.
      No. 12, in page 33, line 6, leave out
      'but', if it was supplied indirectly, only if each person through whom it was supplied received'
      and insert
      'unless, in the case of information supplied indirectly, it appears to the court that any person through whom it was so supplied did not both receive and supply'.
      No. 30, in page 33, line 29, at end insert—
      '2A. A statement in a document shall be admissible in criminal proceedings as evidence of the fact that the Statement was made if—

      (a) the document satisfies the conditions mentioned in sub-paragraph (1)(a) and (b) of paragraph 2 above;

      (b) the statement is made, whether directly or indirectly, by a person who in those proceedings is an accused; and

      (c) the statement, being exculpatory only, exculpates the accused.'.

      No. 31, in page 35, line 22, after ?but', insert', except in paragraph 6(1)(a),'.—[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]

    Schedule 5

      MINOR AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS
      Amendments made: No. 17, in page 39, line 48, at end insert—
      ?() In section 233(1) (note of appeal), the existing words from "within six weeks" to the end shall be
      496
      paragraph (a) and after that paragraph there shall be added the word "; or" and the following paragraph—
      "(b) as the case may be, within four weeks of the passing of the sentence in open court, the Lord Advocate may lodge such a note with the Clerk of Justiciary, who shall send a copy to the said judge and to the convicted person or that person's solicitor.".
      () In section 234(1)(presentation of appeal in writing), after the word "appellant" there shall be inserted the words "other than the Lord Advocate".
      () In section 236B(2)(extension of certain periods), for the words "233(1)" there shall be substituted the words "233(1)(a)".
      () In section 236C (signing of documents), after the words "to appeal" there shall be inserted the words "or (except where the appellant is the Lord Advocate) any".
      () In section 238 (admission of appellant to bail), for subsections (1) and (2) there shall be substituted the following subsections—
      "(1) The High Court may, if it thinks fit, on the application of a convicted person, admit him to bail pending the determination of—

      (a) his appeal; or

      (b) any appeal by the Lord Advocate against the sentence passed on conviction.

      (2) A person who is admitted to bail under subsection (1) above shall, unless the High Court otherwise directs, appear personally in court on the day or days fixed for the hearing of the appeal or of any application for leave to appeal; and in the event of his failing to do so the court may—

      (a) if he is the appellant—

      (i) decline to consider the appeal of application; and

      (ii) dismiss it summarily; or

      (b) whether or not he is the appellant—

      (i) consider and determine the appeal or application; or

      (ii) without prejudice to section 3 of the Bail etc. (Scotland) Act 1980 (breach of conditions), make such other order as the court thinks fit.".

      () In section 239(1)(notice of date of hearing), for—

      (a) the words "appellant or applicant", in both places where they occur, there shall be substituted the words "convicted person"; and

      (b) the word "latter", there shall be substituted the words "appellant or applicant".

      () In section 240 (presence of appellant at hearing), for the word "An", where it first occurs, there shall be substituted the words "A convicted".
      () After section 242 there shall be inserted the following section—

      MINOR AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS

        Special provision where appellant is Lord Advocate.
        242A. Where the Lord Advocate is the appellant, sections 241 and 242 of this Act shall apply in respect of the convicted person, if in custody, as they apply to an appellant or applicant in custody.".
        () In section 243 (provision as to warders attending court), for the words "the last foregoing section" there shall be substituted the words "section 242 of this Act".
        () In section 252 (powers of High Court), after the words "228(1)" there shall be inserted the words "or 228A"
        () In section 258 (sentence in absence), after the word "appellant" there shall be inserted the words "(or, where the 'Lord Advocate is the appellant, the convicted person)".
        () In section 261 (notice of determination of appeal), after the word "applicant" there shall be inserted the words "(or, where the Lord Advocate is the appellant, to the convicted person)".
        () In section 264 (disqualification, forfeiture, etc), in each of subsections (1) and (2)—

        (a) for the word "two" there shall be substituted the word "four"; and

        (b) after the words "228(1)(b)" there shall be inserted the words "or 228A".

        () In section 265 (fines and caution), after subsection (4) there shall be inserted the following subsection—

        497
        "(4A) A convicted person who has been sentenced to the payment of a fine and has duly paid it shall, if an appeal against sentence by the Lord Advocate results in the sentence being quashed and no fine, or a lesser fine than that paid, being imposed, be entitled, subject to any order of the High Court, to the return of the sum paid or as the case may be to the return of the amount by which that sum exceeds the amount of the lesser fine.".
        () In section 268 (reckoning of time spent in custody pending appeal)—

        (a) in subsection (1)—

        (i) for the words "an appellant" there shall be substituted the words "a convicted person";

        (ii) after the word "appeal" there shall be inserted the words ?, or as the case may be of any appeal by the Lord Advocate against the sentence passed on conviction,"; and

        (iii) for the word "this", where it occurs qualifying the word "sentence", there shall be substituted the word "that";

        (b) for subsection (2) there shall be substituted the following subsection—

        "(2) The time (including any period consequent on the recall of bail) during which a convicted person is in custody pending the determination of his appeal, or as the case may be of any appeal by the Lord Advocate against the sentence passed on conviction, shall subject to any direction which the High Court may give to the contrary be reckoned as part of any term of imprisonment under that sentence."; and
        (c) in subsection (3), after the word "appellant' there shall be inserted the words "(or, where the appellant is the Lord Advocate, of a convicted person)".
        () In section 269 (extract convictions)—

        (a) for the word "two" there shall be substituted the word "four"; and

        (b) after the words "228(1)(b)" there shall be inserted the words "or 228A".

        () In section 270 (custody of trial documents, etc.)—

        (a) in subsection (2)—

        (i) for the words from the beginning to "proceedings" there shall be substituted the words "Until any period allowed under or by virtue of this Part of this Act for lodging intimation of intention to appeal (or any longer period allowed by virtue thereof for lodging a note of appeal) has elapsed, all documents and other productions produced at the trial of a convicted person shall be kept";

        (ii) after the words "228(1)(b)" there shall be inserted the words "or 228A"; and

        (iii) the words "of two weeks or any extension thereof authorised by the High Court" shall cease to have effect;

        (b) in subsection (3)—

        (i) after the words "228(1)(b)" there shall be inserted the words "or 228A"; and

        (ii) for the words "to his" there shall be substituted the words ", as the case may be, to the convicted person's"; and

        (c) in subsection (4)—

        (i) after the words "228(1)(b)" there shall be inserted the words "or 228A"; and

        (ii) for the words "such period of two weeks or extension thereof as aforesaid" there shall be substituted the words "the period mentioned in subsection (2) above".

        () In section 273(1)(register of appeals), after the words "228(1)(b)" there shall be inserted the words "or 228A".'.
        No. 18, in page 41, line 48, at end insert—
        ?() In section 277(2)(list of provisions non-compliance with which may be waived), in the first column, under the entry relating to section 242, there shall be inserted the entry "242A".'.
        No. 19, in page 42, line 14, at end insert—
        ?() In section 442(1)(b)(ii) (prosecutor's appeal against sentence on point of law), for the words "in such proceedings" there shall be substituted the words "on such conviction".
        () In section 442B (method of appeal against sentence alone)—
        498

        (a) after the words "Where a" there shall be inserted the word "convicted";

        (b) after the word "Act", where it first occurs, there shall be inserted the words ", or the prosecutor desires so to appeal by virtue of section 442(1)(c) thereof,"; and

        (c) for the proviso there shall be substituted the words "; but nothing in this section shall prejudice any right to proceed by bill of suspension, or as the case may be advocation, against an alleged fundamental irregularity relating to the imposition of the
        sentence.".

        ()In section 452A (disposal of stated case appeal)—

        (a) in subsection (1), after the word "subject" there shall be inserted the words "to subsection (2) below and"; and

        (b) for subsection (2) there shall be substituted the following subsection—

        "(2) The High Court shall, in an appeal—

        (a) against both conviction and sentence, subject to section 453D(l) of this Act, dispose of the appeal against sentence; or

        (b) by the prosecutor, against sentence, dispose of the appeal,

        by exercise of the power mentioned in section 453C(1) of this Act.".
        In section 453B (appeals against sentence only)—

        (a) in each of subsections (1), (7) and (8), after the words "442(1)(a)(ii)" there shall be inserted the words ", or by virtue of section 442(1)(c),";

        (b) for subsection (2) there shall be substituted the following subsection—

        "(2) The note of appeal shall, where the appeal is—

        (a) under section 442(1)(a)(ii) be lodged, within one week of the passing of the sentence, with the clerk of the court from which the appeal is to be taken; or

        (b) by virtue of section 442(1)(c) be so lodged within four weeks of such passing.";

        (c) in subsection (6), for the word "(2)" there shall be substituted the words "(2)(a)"; and

        (d) in subsection (8), at the end, there shall be added the words "except that, for the purposes of such application to any appeal by virtue of section 442(1)(c), references in subsections (1) to (3) of section 446 to the appellant shall be construed as references to the convicted person and subsection (4) and (5) of section 446 shall be disregarded".

        () In section 453C(3) (powers of High Court at time of disposal of appeal)—

        (a) after the words "442(1)(a)(ii)" there shall be inserted the words ", or by virtue of section 442(1)(c),"; and

        (b) for the word "appellant", in each place where it occurs, there shall be substituted the words "convicted person".'.—[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]

        Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I beg to move amendment No. 20, in page 44, line 5, at end insert—
        ?() In section 14(l) (legalised police cells), after the word "under" there shall be inserted the words "section 39 of".'.
        Madam Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to take Government amendments Nos. 21, 22, 23, 25 and 26.
        Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: During earlier consideration of the Bill, I made it clear that the Government intend a wholesale revision and replacement of the Prison (Scotland) Rules 1952 and of standing orders made under those rules. These amendments may be regarded as evidence that work is in progress to achieve that intention. In the course of that work, it has been noted that some of the provisions in the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989 leave one in doubt about the nature and standing of the rules to which they refer.

        499
        Amendments Nos. 20, 21 and 22 will make it clear that all rules made under the Act are to be made under section 39 of the Act which will ensure that the new rules that are being prepared will be comprehensive and will be made under a single enabling provision.
        Amendment No. 23 will simplify and clarify the terms of section 42 of the Act which, as amended, will require all rules and orders made under the Act to be made by statutory instruments subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House. The other amendments are consequential.
        Amendment agreed to.
        Amendment made: No. 21, in page 44, line 6, leave out sub-paragraph (3) and insert—
        '(3) In section 19 (provisions of 1989 Act applying to remand centres and young offenders institutions)—

        (a) in subsection (3), for the words "the rules" there shall be substituted the words "rules under section 39 of this Act"; and

        (b) in subsection (4), in sub-paragraph (iii) of the proviso—

        (i) for the words "paragraphs (i) and (ii)" there shall be substituted the words "paragraph (i)"; and

        (ii) for the words "of the Secretary of State" there shall be substituted the words "under section 39 of this Act".'.

        No. 22, in page 44, line 13, at end insert—
        ?() In section 39(1) (rules for the management of prisons and other institutions)—

        (a) the word "and", where it occurs for the third time, shall cease to have effect; and

        (b) at the end there shall be added the words "and for any other matter as respects which it is provided in this Act that rules may be made under this section".'.

        No. 23, in page 44, line 27, leave out from beginning to ?rules' in line 32 and insert
        ', for the words from "regulations" to the end there shall be substituted the words "an order made under section 37(1) or".'.—[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]

    Schedule 7

      REPEALS AND REVOCATIONS
      Amendment made: No. 24, in page 47, line 35, at end insert—

      'In section 270(2), the words "of two weeks or any extension thereof authorised by the High Court".'.

      No. 25, in page 48, line 28, leave out 'Section 39(4)' and insert
      'In section 39, in subsection (1) the word "and" where it occurs for the third time; and subsection (4)'.
      No. 26, in page 48, line 31, leave out from 'or";? to 'and' in line 37.
      No. 27, in page 48, line 42, leave out 'committees' and insert 'committee'.—[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]
      Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Bill be now read a Third time.
      7.54 pm
      Mr. McFall: As we said on Second Reading, we should understand the true context of the Bill. First, it emerges from a period of unprecedented upheaval in the Scottish prison service. Secondly, and just as importantly, it
      500
      emerges from the fact that we are top of the league in Europe for gaoling people. We therefore need to do something to try to alleviate the situation.
      The Bill provided a good opportunity to consider a number of issues. The Opposition can take comfort from the fact that we have highlighted a number of areas for future discussion and, I hope, for future progress, not least the issue of fine defaulters. Fine defaulters comprise 40 per cent. of those entering prison. That is a waste of prison resources about which something should be done and we look forward to the Government taking that on.
      We have brought our concerns regarding sections 71 and 72 of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 to the Minister's attention and he has responded. In England and Wales there has been a review of health services for mentally disordered offenders and others requiring similar services. It has reported under the chairmanship of Dr. John Reid. I should like a similar course of action to be taken for individuals in Scotland. I hope that the Minister will take that on board.
      I thank the Minister for his helpful letters to us during the Committee proceedings right up to today's deliberations.
      We were pleased to note that the issue concerning ethnic minorities had been addressed in Barlinnie prison, where prison officers have a formal relationship with Strathclyde community relations council. That is good news, which we welcome. We welcome any progress which can be made on this.
      The issue of young people and their rehabilitation is important, and we should like the Minister and others to bear in mind our concern about that. I have received a number of helpful representations from various bodies. One was from a solicitor who has defended criminal cases for more than 20 years. He said:
      "It is my experience of defending the same people again and again over the years, that the vast majority of my clients give up committing crime not because of any particular sentence which is imposed on them by a Court but rather despite sentences which are imposed on them. Most people give up committing crime because they simply mature or they get a job or they meet a girl who keeps them on the straight and narrow or some other significant life event which causes them to confront the way they have behaved in the past and resolve not to behave that way again".
      That illustrates the role that families and other people outside prison play in rehabilitation. That aspect must be emphasised and kept in mind.
      I do not want to be too partisan, but I have to point out that there has been no input from the Scottish National party to the Bill on Second Reading, in Committee or on Report. That is a gross failure on behalf of the SNP. The hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) and others have occupied the airwaves for the past four or five days telling us to boycott this place. The hon. Gentleman receives more than his fair share of attention in this place. As Peterhead prison is in his constituency, it is incumbent on him to represent its interests.
      I wish the Opposition to be associated with the good work that is going on in Peterhead prison with regard to the vicious circle of sex offences. Under a project being carried out at Peterhead prison, treatment is given to inmates to try to break the cycle of sex offences. The Glasgow Herald of Saturday 12 December contained a good report by James Freeman, the home affairs

      501
      correspondent, of his visit to Peterhead prison. I should like the Government to support the work undertaken in that prison by the governor, Alec Spencer.
      I mentioned the SNP and, to be fair, I shall mention the Liberal Democrats. The hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) said on Second Reading that hardly a Christmas goes by without a tabloid newspaper describing the pleasures enjoyed by those who happen to be in prison at that time. He said that in no way would the reporters exchange their life for that of the prisoners. That is extremely important, and with Christmas so close we should bear it in mind. I commend those comments by the hon. and learned Gentleman and congratulate him on his contribution in Committee.
      The Opposition welcome the parole recommendations, the work of Kincraig and the Minister's response to the issue of children's evidence. We hope that the Minister will place the Bill in the context that I mentioned at the beginning of his speech. He will have the full support and backing of the Official Opposition for progressive and enlightened measures in the Scottish prison service. We hope that the Bill will be followed by others so that we may have a more sensitive and enlightened criminal justice system in Scotland. We therefore support Third Reading of the Bill.
      8.1 pm
      Dr. Godman: I shall not speak for more than three minutes, because I am starving. Scots Members who are present will not be surprised to hear me say that I intend to confine my speech to clauses 33, 34 and 35. Those who urge us to boycott this place when it is debating such important Scottish legislation exhibit a lack of judgment. As I have said before, those three clauses give added protection to child witnesses who are caught up in the horrendous circumstances of sexual abuse and child abuse and often in cases of the most appalling neglect.
      Will the Minister ensure that the equipment and installations to enable child witnesses to take advantage of the Bill's provisions are installed as quickly as possible? As the Minister knows, only two courts in Scotland have closed circuit television links. They are in Edinburgh and in sheriff court No. 5 in Glasgow. England and Wales has more than 40 Crown courts with such installations. I hope that at least one sheriff court in each of the sheriffdoms will be given such equipment. That is the least that we can demand on behalf of children who are caught up in such cases. It is wrong to expect child witnesses to travel hundreds of miles to give evidence in a court or a building containing such a television system.
      We are debating remarkable measures which will place Scots law in advance of the law elsewhere, because they will give added protection to children while at the same time maintaining the rights of the accused.
      8.4 pm
      Mr. Hood: My hon. Friend the Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) said that he would speak for only three minutes because he was starving. I am a bit peckish myself and I look forward to dining with my hon. Friend in about five mintues. My hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) referred to the Scottish National party. I shall not comment for partisan reasons
      502
      —[Interruption.] Perhaps in my naive way I am not explaining myself properly and people will think that I am being mischievous.
      My constituency covers more than 600 square miles and is one of the largest in the United Kingdom. On television and in the press I see reports about people who share my profession and are paid a good salary to come here and represent those least able to represent themselves. The Bill is the best example for politicians who engage in rhetoric, play gesture politics and tell us that we should not be here. They say that we should sit on our backsides, swan off on rallies or push umbrellas up and down in the pouring rain. That is not my way of representing the 60,000 people who sent me here.
      Such an attitude is complete nonsense and those who hold it should speak to George Beattie, an innocent man who has served 13 years in prison and whose only chance of representation is to have his Member of Parliament speak in the House on his behalf. They could also speak to Margaret Smith, who has been in prison for 10 years. It is about time she was out, and she needs someone to speak up for her. Those who want to play silly political games should speak to people who need consideration.
      The Bill seeks to improve the running of our prisons and look after the people who are in them. There has been much agreement about the Bill's aims, and for that reason they will probably succeed. We always have our failures and I am sure that we are not smug enough to think that this time we have got it right. However, all hon. Members will agree that we must seek continually to improve the way in which we treat people in our prisons and run our criminal proceedings. I have referred to George Beattie and Margaret Smith. There are also 14-year-old children in Scottish prisons. That is not right, and while it continues we must seek to improve the way in which we operate.
      8.8 pm
      Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I agree entirely with the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall): it is preposterous that Scottish National party Members do not appear for a major debate on important Scottish legislation. The hon. Gentleman referred to the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond), who has a significant prison in his constituency. This legislation is extremely important to the officers who work in that prison.
      I pay tribute to the Kincraig committee, whose report has largely been implemented through the Bill. I am grateful to Opposition Members and to my hon. Friends for their constructive contributions to the debates on the Bill. We have made substantial strides on the issue of children's evidence, in which the hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) has always been especially interested.
      I pay tribute to the Scottish Law Commission for its work. The Lord Advocate particularly appreciates the immensely detailed hard work carried out by the commission. The Bill will be important both for prison officers and for prisoners. The prison service has made significant improvements in the management of prisons and further positive changes will be made in the next few years.
      I say to my hon. Friend the Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) and to the hon. Member for Dumbarton that the change in the law to allow the right of appeal against

      503
      sentences which are too lenient is a substantial reform to the law of Scotland, and one that I believe will be welcomed. I believe that the protection of children in court proceedings will also be regarded as extremely important.
      I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe), who put the case for disadvantaged groups. Any fears expressed by Helena Kennedy about the blindness of justice have not been borne out in the House on this Bill. We have carefully considered how accused persons, people with disabilities, prisoners on appeal and others will be affected by the matters on which we are legislating. I also pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kynoch) for his efforts to enhance the protection of Scotland's rare birds.
      I am glad that the House has made its will plain to the other place. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made it abundantly clear in his speech that this House opposes any exclusion of evidence from proceedings brought under the War Crimes Act 1991. I firmly believe that it is right that proceedings under that Act should be conducted under the same evidential regime as other proceedings in respect of serious crimes. I hope that the other place will now accept the decision of the House of Commons.
      It is fair to say that the Bill has attracted a large measure of cross-party support and I strongly commend it to the House.
      Question put and agreed to.
      Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed, with amendments.

    Environmental Information
    8.11 pm
    The Minister for the Environment and Countryside (Mr. David Maclean): I beg to move,
    "That the draft Environmental Information Regulations 1992, which were laid before this House on 8th December, be approved."
    I shall start with a disclaimer. Having heard the points of order after Scottish questions today to the effect that too many English Members of Parliament had participated, and having sat through a large part of the Scottish debate that has just finished, I thought it right to point out to the uninitiated who, hearing my Scottish accent, might think that this debate is a continuation of Scottish business, that I am introducing Great Britain regulations.
    These regulations give the public new legal rights of access to environmental information. As long ago as 1984, we accepted a recommendation by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution that there
    "should be a presumption in favour of unrestricted access for the public to information which the pollution control authorities obtain or receive by virtue of their statutory powers".
    The Government have consistently supported the principle that the public should have rights of access to environmental information, and we have demonstrated our commitment by establishing public registers of environmental information through successive legislative provisions.
    In seeking the support and agreement of the House to these regulations, I should like first to say something about the background, then to describe the overall approach and then to deal with some of the issues which have emerged in the course of preparing the regulations and consulting on them.
    First, the background to the regulations is that they implement United Kingdom policies, but they take their present form because they also have to apply European Community directive 90/313 on freedom of access to information on the environment. When the text was finalised during the Irish presidency in 1990, we in the United Kingdom were already well advanced in the process of putting in place statutory registers of environmental information. We supported the overall aims of the directive not only because it was consistent with our national policy, but because it placed comprehensive duties to provide access to environmental information on member states elsewhere in the Community.
    We published a consultation paper in January this year setting out our proposals for implementation of the directive. We received more than 170 responses from a wide variety of bodies covering industry, local government and the voluntary sector. As one would expect, most people welcomed the principles behind the proposals.
    At the end of October this year, we invited comments on draft regulations to implement the directive, together with draft guidance intended to help provide the detail for which many consultees have asked. Again, we received a substantial number of responses to the draft regulations and draft guidance. We have considered the responses carefully and have made a number of changes to the draft regulations and guidance. The draft regulations, taking account of those amendments, are before the House tonight.

    505
    During the drafting of the regulations, we had to consider extremely carefully a number of technical drafting issues. I shall come back to those later. That has had an effect on the time available for consultation and the consequent timetable for parliamentary consideration. I am sure that the House will agree, however, that it is imperative that we do everything we can to honour our obligations in EC law. We are especially concerned about the performance of some other member states in that respect. It will not help our arguments in Brussels if we fail to meet Community requirements and then criticise others for the same failing—so we do not intend to fail.
    In drafting the regulations, we needed to acknowledge that there was already a substantial body of existing legislation covering public rights of access to environmental information. We wanted to be sure that people continued to enjoy those rights. Therefore, the approach followed in the draft regulations is to apply their requirements to environmental information that is not already available on request under any existing statutory provision. In addition, to ensure compliance with the directive, the arrangements for making available information to the public under statutory provisions must be sufficient to satisfy the requirements set out in the regulations.
    Under the regulations, "relevant persons" must make available environmental information on request. I hope that the House will bear with me if I continue to use the term "relevant persons" in the rest of my remarks as shorthand for all the bodies subject to the regulations' requirements. Relevant persons have up to two months to respond to requests for information. Refusals must be in writing and show the reasons. Relevant persons may charge for making information available, provided that the charge does not exceed a reasonable amount. Failure to comply with the regulations will be a breach of duty and an aggrieved person could seek a judicial review or pursue the matter through a private action in the courts.
    Relevant persons can protect certain types of confidential information. That could include information relating to international relations, national defence or public security, internal communications or to commercial or industrial confidentiality. Relevant persons will be under a duty to protect other types of confidential information—for example, any of the types of information which may be treated as confidential and are already the subject of restrictions on disclosure. Other types of information that relevant persons will be under a duty to protect include personal and volunteered information, unless the supplier of the information agrees to its disclosure or it is otherwise authorised.
    I shall now deal with some of the comments made by consultees on the draft regulations. First, on the scope of the regulations, we have carefully considered whether we should include a list of bodies to which the regulations apply. We are conscious, however, that any list that we include in the regulations will soon become out of date and will need frequent updating. We also have to recognise that production of a list which is not definitive may not be very helpful to anyone and could expose us to challenge in the European Court of Justice for failure to implement the EC directive. It will be for the bodies concerned to take a view on whether they are "relevant persons" under the regulations. Ultimately, it would be for the courts to rule on those questions.
    506
    The question of the extent to which charges should be made for supplying information has attracted much comment. There is the very reasonable concern that charges will be too high and will discourage the public from requesting information. However, there is the equally reasonable concern that new obligations to supply information will bring extra costs. We have tried to strike a balance between those concerns. There is therefore a discretionary power to make a charge in respect of the costs reasonably attributable to the supply of information. The payment of such a charge can be made a condition of supplying information. Holders of information can make a charge to cover their costs, and those requesting information may be charged only a reasonable amount. Inspection of statutory public registers will remain free of charge.
    Mr. Simon Hughes: I do not wish to anticipate what others may say, but one of the questions which always crops up when one talks of "a reasonable charge" is whether it is the real, additional cost to the provider of the information, or levied according to a more subjective test. Is it the Government's view that the cost should be only the additional cost to the provider of providing that information to the person who has requested it?
    Mr. Maclean: I do not intend to pontificate on what may be the reasonable cost. I shall not be the judge and jury on that matter. I have introduced the regulations and made a requirement that the cost shall be reasonable. The company must ensure that the cost is reasonable. If the person who requested the information feels aggrieved and feels that the cost is not reasonable, he or she has rights of redress.
    I stress the fact that inspection of statutory public registers will continue to remain free of charge. The House should take that fact on board. We have also considered, but rejected, suggestions that we should prescribe a standard charging regime applicable in all cases. A standard charging regime would place a straitjacket on all the many and different bodies responsible for providing information, and would inevitably fail to take account of all their different circumstances and how they operate. The regulations therefore leave it to the discretion of the relevant person concerned whether to charge for information and, if so, how much.
    On the key issues arising from comments on the exceptions to the right to information dealt with in the regulations, there has been concern that information of commercial value provided to environmental regulators and other relevant bodies could become available to competitors through the arrangements set out in the regulations. Those fears are unfounded. Where there are statutory restrictions on the release of commercially confidential information or trade secrets, they must continue to apply under the regulations. Where other information has been provided in response to statutory requirements, the relevant person has discretion not to provide the information to others if it is commercially confidential. Where information has been provided on a voluntary basis, the relevant person is under a duty not to provide the information to others without the agreement of the supplier. The regulations are not a charter for one company to poach commercially sensitive information from another.

    507
    I shall now deal with concerns that the provisions allowing relevant persons to refuse to supply information if it is contained in internal communications or incomplete documents provides a ready formula for refusing all requests for information. The provisions are aimed at enabling organisations to conduct their internal administrative work in private. I hesitate to generalise on those issues because every case would need to be dealt with on the facts available, but that is precisely the point: it will be a matter of fact whether a document really is incomplete or whether it really is an internal communication. In addition, relevant persons will be under a duty to separate out environmental information and make it available, unless it is incapable of being separated. Ultimately, a court could be asked to take a view on those matters and be the final judge.
    As for volunteered information, I know from my experience in the Ministry that regulatory authorities and industry find it very helpful to discuss information volunteered by industry when considering applications for authorisations or consents. This is information which a company will not be required by statute to disclose, but none the less it is of immense assistance in helping the regulatory authority to understand the operating practices and background of the company concerned.
    Although much of that information will be "environmental information"—under the terms of these regulations, it is quite likely—indeed, I am fairly certain —that it would not have been volunteered in the first place if the supplier believed that it would be passed on to somebody else, particularly competitors. We recognise those concerns, and the regulations therefore provide relevant persons with no discretion at all to disclose volunteered information to others without the prior consent of the volunteer supplier. We think that that is essential to ensure the continued supply of important volunteered environmental information.
    I must now refer to rights of redress for a person who is refused information. Under the regulations, everyone refused information has a right to that refusal being in writing and the reasons for the refusal being specified. That should establish clearly why the information has been refused, but it will also provide an opportunity to resolve any misunderstandings which may have arisen.
    If a person requesting information believes that he or she has been wrongfully refused, additional rights are available under the regulations. He or she may seek judicial review of the decision concerned or pursue the matter through a private action in the courts. It should be of some reassurance to suppliers of information who feel that they have been financially damaged by its disclosure that they could, if they wished, pursue a claim for damages by a private action. But court actions are not welcomed by anyone. We saw in the last debate how only lawyers become rich as a result of such actions. It will be the responsibility of every relevant person to be open and fair in how requests for information are dealt with and they must do everything possible to explain why, if it really is necessary, information cannot be supplied.
    There is clearly much support for the general principle of providing the public with access to environmental information. I have many more pages of compelling arguments which could support the regulations, but that
    508
    information is entirely confidential and I cannot reveal it to the House, so I merely commend the regualtions to the House.
    8.27 pm
    Mr. Chris Smith: I am tempted to begin by observing how far we have come in the past five years. Five years ago, I introduced into a House a private Member's Bill, which is now the Environment and Safety Information Act 1988. Surreptitious attempts were made by the Government, emanating especially from the Whips, to stifle the Bill at birth. Eventually, however, a combination of public opinion, governmental embarrassment and Bernard Levin managed to ensure that we got the Act on the the statute book. I pay particular tribute to my late and noble colleague the Baroness Ewart-Biggs, who helped to pilot that measure through the House of Lords subsequent to its passage through the Commons.
    Matters have moved on since then and I welcome the Government's introduction of regulations to improve access to environmental information. It is crucial that the general public has as much access to information about what is happening to the environment as possible. After all, environmental degraduation affects us all. Even the Prime Minister appears to have woken up to this fact. About 16 months ago, he made a speech at a conference organised by The Sunday Times, in which he said:
    "We have opened the door to environmental information."
    He was a little ahead of himself in that claim, because it is only now that the door is really open. He continued:
    "Every individual, every group, will in future have access to the information they need in order to act as an environmental watchdog. That information is the citizen's right, and the Active Citizen will use that right constructively."
    The Prime Minister was correct. The rhetoric was fine, the objective is excellent, but I am afraid that the regulations do not measure up to the ideals. The Government are submitting them late—this is the last possible moment at which they could do so. They are seriously inadequate in a number of key respects. Not only do they fall far short of embracing the spirit of European Community directive 90/313, but I have some major questions about whether they fulfil the letter of the directive.
    The Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments has unearthed a couple of explanatory documents from the Department of the Environment that are helpful in so far as they go, but they do not address some of the concerns raised outside the House by Friends of the Earth and other organisations. I have a list of some of those concerns. First, what actually counts as environmental information? Paragraph (2)(b) of regulation 2 speaks of
    "any activities or measures … which adversely affect anything mentioned in sub-paragraph (a)".
    That is water, air, soil, fauna, flora and so on. How will this work in practice? How will we know whether a particular piece of information is regarded as adversely affecting some of the essential components of our environment?
    Mr. Roger Evans: I accept the point that the hon. Gentleman makes, but I do not understand—perhaps he would kindly explain—how the drafting in the regulations differs materially from article 2(a) of the European directive on the point that he has just described.
    Mr. Smith: I am not criticising the regulations for differing from the directive in that regard. I shall come on to a number of other points of that nature, but that does not invalidate the point, which is that if we are to have regulations, we need to be certain how the basic definitions in them will be interpreted.
    Let us take two examples of what counts as environmental information. One has recently come to public notice. The Secretary of State overturned a recommendation by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution that information about the inputs to power stations run by National Power should be made accessible to the public. National Power contended that this information was not relevant to the environmental impact of running power stations. HMIP demurred. The Secretary of State clearly sided with National Power. Inputs to a power station may not directly impact on the environment, but will have an inevitable consequence eventually on the environment once they have been used through the power station. In such cases, does that count, under the regulations, as environmental information? That is a valid question to which the answer is unclear.
    Let us take another example, that of the contracts that British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. had for the reprocessing of nuclear wastes in the new thermal oxide reprocessing plant at Sellafield. The nature and content of those contracts have never been made public, yet, they have a considerable impact on the future running of the plant and are crucial to an assessment of the case as to whether that plant will have an environmental impact. In that instance, it is unclear whether that counts as environmental information. We need to have the broadest possible definition, but will that be what the regulations mean in practice? There is a serious question mark about that, and it ought to be addressed.
    Secondly, the definition of "response" in relation to the two-month deadline is unclear. There is a world of potential difference between a mere acknowledgement of a request and the provision of a full answer, both of which could qualify as a response. Surely this ought to be more clearly spelt out. If a response is to be required within two months, we ought to know precisely what sort of response is required. Will it have to be more than an acknowledgement? The regulations are ambiguous about that.
    Thirdly, it is worrying that a charge can be made for the provision of information. That has already been the subject of an exchange across the Floor of the House. Notwithstanding the qualification of reasonableness, there is always a danger that the ability to charge will be used as an effective barrier to the seeking of information. Rather than removing my concern about that fact, what the Minister said in response to questions across the Floor of the House intensified it.
    Challenging a judgment of reasonableness in the courts would be a prohibitively expensive course for the applicant to embark upon. While charging of the public for access might be reasonable if strict rules about the actual costs incurred by the body providing the information were to be inserted, where no such rules apply—there are none in the regulations it is possible that the ability to charge will be used to prevent access.
    Fourthly, the exclusion from access to information relating to matters affecting international relations is a broad definition, putting anything with a third-hand connection with international relations outside the scope
    510
    of the regulations. What will this involve—action taken in accordance with the biodiversity treaty, international discussions at Copenhagen on ozone depletion or in Paris about dumping at sea, safeguarding the shipment of plutonium at sea? All those could conceivably fall under the definition of the exclusion. None of them should.
    Let us take another specific example—matters relating to the import of toxic wastes. The Basle convention and the recent Luxembourg agreement are matters subject to international discussion and agreement and conceivably related to international relations. In this respect, I fear that the Minister has not been particularly forthcoming. During oral questions to the Secretary of State for the Environment on 9 December the Minister of State touched on the Basle convention and the import of toxic waste, following the Luxembourg agreement. He answered my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham) as follows:
    "We have just negotiated a regulation in the EC which will, for the first time, give this country the power to turn off the tap of waste coming from developed countries for disposal here."
    Later he answered a subsequent question as follows:
    "Waste for final disposal should be dealt with in developed countries. That is what we have negotiated and we are implementing national plans to ensure that it is put into place when the directive is ratified."—[Official Report, 9 December 1992; Vol. 215, c. 836.]
    That is all well and good. The impression given was that, following the agreement at Luxembourg, the Government would get stuck into the process of drawing up measures to ensure that waste coming into Britain from developed countries would be stopped.
    Only six days beforehand, however, in an answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller), the Minister had said of the regulations that would be considered following the Luxembourg agreement:
    "We expect no change as a result of the regulation to existing practice within the United Kingdom."—[Official Report, 3 December 1992; Vol. 215, c. 289.]
    It appears, then, that the Government speak with two voices. On 9 December they give the House the clear impression that there will be change, new regulations, action. When they answer my hon. Friend on 3 December, they say that there will be no change.
    Why? Having sight of the relevant documents would help, but I suspect that they will fall under the exclusion of matters "related to international affairs". That is a broad-brush exclusion.
    Fifthly, the regulations lack any realistic appeals procedure for occasions when access is denied. Article 4 of the directive speaks of the need for some such system:
    "A person who considers that his request for information has been unreasonably refused or ignored, or has been inadequately answered by a public authority, may seek a judicial or administrative review of the decision in accordance with the relevant national legal system."
    So the Government are complying with the terms of the directive by saying that judicial review is possible when an access request has been refused.
    There are, however, a number of problems. Judicial review can be a costly and cumbersome procedure. With the latest Government cuts in legal aid there is no guarantee that those in need of financial assistance to mount such a review would be able to do so. The only matter that can be considered by such a review is a matter of procedural fairness, not a matter of the real substance of a refusal. That too is a limiting factor.

    511
    In most cases judicial reviews do not permit of the cross-examination of witnesses or the discovery of documents, so it would be difficult realistically to contest a claim of refusal of access on grounds of commercial confidentiality. It would be much better if the Government adopted the proposal that we submitted many months ago in our freedom of information Bill at the start of this year —a proposal for a proper system of appeal to a commissioner who would act on behalf of the citizen, with the back-up of an appeal to a tribunal for the citizen, the relevant authority or a third party, if the commissioner's action did not resolve the issue. The Government have not got the need for a genuine appeals mechanism right.
    Sixthly, there is also an exclusion from access for matters subject to a local or public inquiry or hearing. It baffles me why the Government included this provision. The directive states that member states may—not shall —provide for refusal of access for a number of reasons. It may be refused where it affects
    "matters which are, or have been sub judice, or under enquiry (including disciplinary inquiries), or which are the subject of preliminary investigation proceedings".
    There is no requirement that the regulations should exclude public inquiries, and it seems that the Government are going rather further than the directive suggests they should by cluding local and public inquiries.
    The regulations also fly in the face of existing practice at such inquiries, where the earliest disclosure of each side's case has consistently been argued for by the Department of the Environment. A vital feature of our public inquiry system is that full information is available to the public throughout the proceedings. These regulations would permit that principle to be overturned. Is this a case of backtracking by the Government, and if so why? I do not understand why the Government would want to diminish the public's access to information that they have at the moment. Why not omit public and local inquiries from the list of exceptions?
    Mr. Roger Evans: Perhaps I can assist the hon. Gentleman. I have not examined the French text of the directive, but it looks as though the directive is directed towards a dossier in the process of compilation by, for instance, a French examining magistrate, which is not made public until the conclusion of that process. that would be logical and understandable. Meanwhile, I agree with the hon. Gentleman: I cannot see how that can possibly be relevant to the wording of regulation 4(2)(b). The other point to which he has drawn attention, regulation 4(5), seems a classic case of mistranslation.
    Mr. Smith: The hon. Gentleman is quite likely to be right about the origin of this feature of the regulations. It seems on this point that the directive permits a Government to decide to be more open when drafting their own national regulations, and the Government should have followed that principle when drawing them up.
    Seventhly, one of the other exclusions from access mentions commercial confidentiality. Regulation 4(2)(e) tells us that information can be treated as confidential if it is
    "information relating to matters to which any commercial or industrial confidentiality attaches".
    Note the words "relating to". They allow a fairly broad scope.
    512
    Compare and contrast this with the wording of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Section 22(11) talks about information being commercially confidential
    "if its being contained in the register would prejudice to an unreasonable degree the commercial interests of that individual or person."
    The Government have therefore taken two different approaches. In the 1990 Act they specifically said that commercial confidentiality should be allowed only on tough grounds where it was judged that disclosure would
    "prejudice to an unreasonable degree the commercial interests of that individual or person."
    The definition of exclusion on the grounds of commercial confidentiality is remarkably broad in the regulations:
    "information relating to matters to which any commercial or industrial confidentiality attaches".
    The Government have adopted the easiest possible approach to drawing up the regulations. They have been minimalist in the way in which they have interpreted the requirements of the directive. Where it has been possible to exclude information from access, they have taken the opportunity to do so.
    They should not have approached the exercise in that way. They have acted late and grudgingly. They have done the bare minimum that they needed to do, and even that is questionable in some respects.
    The regulations raise serious questions about definition, interpretation and exclusion. They could have represented a real provision for full access to environmental information and a real strengthening of citizens' power. Instead, we have a flawed set of proposals. I sincerely hope that the Government will think more carefully about this and come forward in the near future with revisions that meet some of the objections of which they need to take account. As they stand, I fear that the regulations, although a small step forward, are a sadly missed opportunity.
    8.51 pm
    Mr. Roger Evans: I respectfully suggest that the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) has been a little curmudgeonly in his response to the regulations, which are a classic piece of Euro legislation in the very best sense.
    Enormous benefits will flow from the amount of environmental information that will become available as a result of the regulations. There is no virtue in deceiving people through ignorance. The opposition that has been mounted in certain parts of the press to the publication of the history of landfill sites, lest that adversely affects the development of houses thereon at a later time, is wholly unfair and unrealistic. People have a right to know.
    It is interesting that seven substantive criticisms have been made of the way in which the regulations have been drafted. However, it appears that the Government and the parliamentary draftsmen—with one exception, to which I have already referred—should be heartily congratulated and have followed the drafting of the directive.
    The first criticism made against the regulations was the test of "adversely affect." It may well be that that raises an issue of fact, but the actual wording is
    "adversely affect … or likely adversely to affect."
    That is wide language, and, provided that there is something conceivable and practical in the way of a factual nexus between the information and the adverse reaction to it, a court will order disclosure. This is how, for example, the treaty of Rome is creating actionable rights for

    513
    individual subjects for the first time in areas of public law that we have never known in this country. That is why it should be welcomed. That change represents, no doubt, in the language of the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury, the spread of civil liberties in a practical, direct and important manner. I have no doubt that if there was a refusal to disclose information on the inputs to power stations, and provided that there is some scientific basis, as we strongly suspect that there must be, between what goes in and what might come out, that could be challenged in the courts for the first time.
    Mr. Chris Smith: Will the hon. Gentleman therefore give that message to the Secretary of State, who has said that precisely such information shall be kept confidential?
    Mr. Evans: We are debating the regulations because we are going to change the law; the Government have accepted that. Under the regulations that we are about, I hope, to pass, there will be power for the first time to challenge such a decision to refuse to disclose any information.
    Let us re-examine Sellafield. I have no doubt that the undesirable and highly secretive practices of the nuclear industry will be exposed to the ray of truth and light to an extent that we have never seen before. Such disclosure will not be limited just to ourselves. Those of us who have always been suspicious of the French habit of putting nuclear power stations near Cherbourg and along the coast of Brittany, opposite the Channel islands, will now have an opportunity, for the first time, to press the French nuclear industry to reveal a whole host of information that might be of great interest.
    The whole point about Community action rather than national action is that pollution knows no national frontiers, and the regulations are an excellent example of the Community at work doing a great deal of good.
    Complaint has been made about charging and overcharging for the supply of information. Surely some reasonable payment must be made for the burden on various organisations that must supply information. Otherwise, every otiose and unreasonable request would simply be imposed as an additional burden upon the taxpayer, ratepayer or a commercial concern, which would pass that on through its prices to the consumer. We have already accepted under the Data Protection Act 1984 a system of charging. If one has a right to know, it is reasonable that one should pay a reasonable charge.
    I do not understand why a complaint about disclosure
    "capable of affecting international relations"
    should be laid at the door of my right hon. Friend. That is the precise language in paragraph 4(2) and, in any event, such a restriction, even if it were taken up, would not apply to inter-Community relations. I should be grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister for guidance on that when he winds up.
    The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury has also complained that there is no proper appeal procedure, but I would suggest to him that judicial review is a cheap, economical, speedy and effective process for challenging Ministers. Even on legal aid we have seen the radical growth of the ambit and scope of that remedy in recent years. Individual legally aided plaintiffs have challenged Ministers with increasing enthusiasm, backed up by the legal profession. law centres and so on.
    There is a right under order 53 of the rules of the Supreme Court to obtain discovery of documents and a
    514
    power to order interrogatories. Cross-examination is not impossible and it may be ordered at the discretion of the judge. Real remedies of substance are offered, by way of the process of judicial review, which is well established and is effective.
    As to confidentiality in respect of commercial transactions and the phrase "relating to", that phrase is customary and well known and it is used in the case of discovery of documents "relating to" the issues in an action. What is proposed in the regulations is perfectly conventional and has wide-reaching implications.
    However, I share the amazement and puzzlement of the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury about local inquiries. For years there has, quite properly, been an increasing degree of the prior disclosure of information. I do not understand how the exception of local inquiries has crept into the regulations, unless because of a mistranslation.
    I am also puzzled about another, connected matter. Regulation 4(2)(b) refers to
    "information relating to, or to anything which is or has ben the subject-matter of, any legal … proceedings".
    I would understand the enthusiasm of the French Government to preserve secrecy if a secret dossier were being compiled, given the inquisitorial system that operates in that country. Under the British system, however, all documents in the court process—whether they are pleadings or affidavits—are normally deemed to be public documents which are matters of public record.
    The provision is peculiar; I do not know why it was included in the first place. It also leads to a serious anomaly. Let us suppose that a plaintiff sues a polluter for defamation, or a polluter sues someone else on the same grounds, and those proceedings compromise in the traditional way of the record being withdrawn. The information will then become secret, and the regulation encourages it to remain secret. I do not see why matters that are the subject of litigation should not be in the public domain when our court system is public.
    My constituents are very anxious about the effect of proposals that are now the subject of a public inquiry: we are awaiting the results, which will eventually reach the Secretary of State for Wales. They are concerned about the health consequences, and the effect on the environment, of opencast coal mining on the Blorenge at a site called Pwll Du. There has been a good deal of community action of the classic variety, which advances human knowledge, understanding and public awareness. I am thinking particularly of the work of Doctors Taylor and Temple, who have exposed real public concerns about the environmental effects of opencast mining.
    Such arguments should not take place in secret. The cards should be placed face upwards, and the promoters of opencast coal mining—or any other activity that may have adverse effects on health—should be forced to publish all the relevant information so that the public may form their own judgment and independent experts may do the same. That is precisely what the statutory instrument proposes, and I commend the European Community for its imagination. Here is a classic example of something that can be done better at Community level.
    9 pm
    Mr. Simon Hughes: In February this year, on behalf of my party, I launched a document entitled "Good Government for a Greener

    515
    Britain"—which no doubt was read assiduously by all hon. Members. I would like to remind the House of what I said then and I think that this is the first time in nearly 10 years that I have quoted my own words in this place, as I crave the House's indulgence.
    I said:
    "Secrecy is the number one killer of the environment in Britain today, and a Freedom of Information Act is the best possible deterrent to this type of crime. Our eco-system is being let down by our political system.
    The Government often uses the excuse of commercial confidentiality to keep facts from its citizens. Yet it is the countries which trust their citizens with information which are not only freer than us but more prosperous. Our unaided senses may tell us that something is wrong with the area we live in or the food we eat, but only hard information will point the way to remedy it.
    The citizen must be properly informed. Green knowledge is green power."
    Like the hon. Member for Monmouth (Mr. Evans), I am enthusiastic about what the treaty of Rome and subsequent legislation have done for freedom of information and for the environment. I have always been enthusiastic about the European Community, partly because it has pushed us further and faster towards good environmental practice. I therefore welcomed the directive requiring member states to introduce legislation to enact those proposals.
    As the hon. Member for Monmouth rightly said, one of the great advances in our legal system in recent years is the interest in public law on rights to environmental information. The fact that many associations and individuals now practise environmental law is not unrelated. There is now an Environmental Law Federation, and some practitioners deal with almost nothing else. That is because the public want or require information, and often have to take legal action to avail themselves of their rights.
    In recent years, Government legislation has done something to improve those rights. As he rightly reminded us, the initiative of the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith)—supported by freedom of information campaigns—also put a Private Member's Bill on the statute book; but we needed more, and the statutory instrument gives us the opportunity to secure more.
    Like other hon. Members, I shall not vote against the regulations because to do so might prevent us from complying with our European Community obligations—and far be it from me to wish that on the House. As the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury said, we are cutting it pretty fine. This is the last environmental debate of 1992 and of the British presidency, comment about which is often made elsewhere, and we are just in time in squeezing in these regulations, which we have an obligation to enact by the end of the year—so we had better be good and allow them to go through, even if we have some criticisms about their inadequacy.
    The regulations are welcome but, as the hon. Members for Islington, South and Finsbury and for Monmouth have said, we could and should have done better. I, too, shall suggest where we must do better and hope that the Minister, it being the week before Christmas, will be in a responsive mood and will say, "Yes, I accept that this is not a perfect document and we shall see whether we can improve it in due course." I hope that there will be an
    516
    opportunity to review the use of the regulations before too long. One of the problems with the House is that it passes much legislation that is not consolidated, which would help the public. Often we do not review legislation or regulations until we have discovered, far too late, that they are not working too well.
    Mr. Roger Evans: Article 8 of the directive places an obligation on the Government to report to the Commission within four years.
    Mr. Hughes: Indeed.
    Given the importance of environmental information and legislation, I hope that we shall hold an annual debate on the state of the environment, in which Ministers and other hon. Members could comment on the progress being made. Additionally, as with most Community legislation, there is a duty on the Government to report back for a Communitywide review. One of the benefits of this legislation will be that we will have access to information about what is going on not only in Britain but in other European Community countries—for instance, about nuclear power in France, pollution of rivers and seas by coastal countries, and so on.
    The Minister explained in his introduction that the regulations do not extend to Northern Ireland, and nearly told us why. We know why: the normal reason is that legislation for Northern Ireland is dealt with separately; none the less, we have a duty under the treaty to ensure that Northern Ireland is covered. I should like to know when the people of Northern Ireland will be given the same rights as the rest of us. Unless I have missed something, there is barely any time left to comply, and I should be disappointed if on 1 January the people of Northern Ireland found themselves unable to avail themselves of the same rights as the rest of us.
    I shall not elaborate on the criticisms that have been made but rather shall concentrate on those which seem the most germane. Lest I be accused of traditional Opposition churlishness, I should say that the regulations have been criticised by environmentalists as well. I ask the Government to take that criticism seriously.
    There is a problem with the term "relates to the environment", which is the definition given in regulation 2(1)(a) and expanded in 2(2)(a), as the Labour spokesman said. However, regulation 2(2)(a) is a limited expansion and the definition is also very limited. If we went out into the streets of London on this damp and dismal evening and asked people what they understood by the term "relates to the environment" the reply would be not so limited as the list in regulation 2(2)(a).
    Regulation 3 is entitled, "Obligation to make environmental information available", and covers the arrangements for replying to any response. There is also a problem with the test which is set out because it is deemed a failure only if there is no response after two months. As we know from parliamentary answers, a response can be anything and nothing—it can be helpful or unhelpful, minimalist or maximalist. It is inadequate to define a failure only as not having a request responded to at all after more than two months. I am sure that this will prove a loophole. People will be able to say that they have responded, but the response may often be nothing worth.
    Regulation 3(3) provides another let-out. When I worked in the secretariat for human rights at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, we had to apply tests which

    517
    debarred applicants from getting their case before the Commission, let alone the court. One of the tests was whether the issue was too general and not specific enough. We are creating a problem here by building in a threshold which states that a request for information can be refused when the request
    "is manifestly unreasonable or is formulated in too general a manner."
    We, the public, may not know exactly what information is held. That is half the battle, because the information is held by the person whom we seek to challenge. Therefore, it is no good to be told, "Sorry, you are being too general—what exactly do you want?" when one does not know what information is held.
    There is also a problem with charges, which are covered in the following paragraph. There is a qualification of the test for the charges, nevertheless the charges should be no greater than the cost to the provider of providing information to the person who asks. It is unreasonable to levy charges other than the cost of reproducing a copy and the cost of personnel time for information that is held. That is a weakness, because the regulation goes no further.
    The hon. Members for Monmouth and for Islington, South and Finsbury and I would probably put at the top of our list of concerns the exceptions in regulation 4. The most general criticism is that regulation 4 has been chosen by the Government as a mechanism for including more and wider exceptions than were required by the directive or by good environmental practice.
    I expect that colleagues will have seen the report published in November this year in the journal of Environmental Data Services Ltd., but it is worth bringing it to the House's attention. Page 35 states:
    "Obstructing in Whitehall seems set to restrict the impact of the 1990 EC directive on public access to environmental information, which is due to be brought into force at the end of the year. An official from the Department of the Environment … has revealed that other Departments are likely to block requests for not only their own information but for industrial data claimed to be commercially confidential."
    I have not made inquiries to see whether that official is in the Box tonight and I do not mean to embarrass him if he is. He is nonetheless quoted in the article, so I shall quote him now.
    The article continues:
    "a DoE official, Dick Baxter, at a conference on international chemicals control in November"
    said that whereas his Department was quite positive, other Departments were certainly less so. He noted that the exemptions were quite wide and that other Departments had told his Department that they would probably be able to find some means of not disclosing. Mr. Baxter said:
    "If their culture is agin, I believe they can find a hook to hang it on."
    That is not very encouraging. Even if the Department of the Environment is being good, all the other Departments may not be good.
    The article continues:
    "Mr. Baxter revealed that several Departments are insisting that if industry insists that information is commercially confidential, that would be sufficient reason not to disclose it. It will be open to Departments to ask companies to reconsider, he said, 'but some might not wish to challenge it, others may.?"
    In summing up the situation in which people would be left, Mr. Baxter concluded:
    "The directive's success … is … likely to depend on people being willing to go to court. Groups such as Friends of
    518
    the Earth and the Freedom of Information Campaign have the resources to do so, and 'if I were in their shoes, I would go straight to the European Court of Justice.?"
    In the past few years, I have occasionally been to conferences where I have heard officials say interesting things—not only officials from the Department of the Environment. I remember a Department of Energy official saying that it was quite possible for Britain to do without the nuclear component for energy supply if we wanted to, provided that we had energy efficiency and energy conservation measures that worked.
    If Mr. Baxter is right—he seems to know what he is talking about—we have substantial cause for concern. Departments can be obstructive and companies in the private sector can be obstructive. The regulations will rely on people going to court, which should not be the case. We should not make people go round a great obstacle course —we should be opening the doors wide so that people can go straight through.
    The exception clause is therefore a great problem. Although we could argue that it is the normal legal text, the phrase in regulation 4(1)(a)—
    "Nothing in these Regulations shall … require the disclosure of any information which is capable of being treated as confidential"
    is far too wide. The other half of the regulation says:
    "or authorise or require the disclosure of any information which must be so treated."
    The specific and obvious example of where the regulations are drawn in a way that is far too wide—I do not intend to elaborate on the well-made points about international negotiations which relate to regulaton 4(2)(a)—regulation is 4(2)(b). The regulation says:
    "For the purpose of these Regulations information is to be capable of being treated as confidential if, and only if, it is … information relating to, or to anything which is or has been the subject-matter of, any legal or other proceedings (whether actual or prospective)".
    It is a ridiculous proposition that one will allow an exemption—the hon. Member for Monmouth went down this road too—for anything that has ever been the subject of any sort of legal proceedings, no matter how widely defined. Once the case is over, whether traditional legal battle, public inquiry or any of the other proceedings set out in 4(5), under the British system, information should be open and available. There is no excuse at all for such documents to be exempt and it is completely unjustified.
    Many issues are the subject of public inquiries. Examples are whether Sizewell B should be built, whether THORP—the thermal oxide reproducing plant—should be brought into operation, whether the M3 bypass should go across Twyford down and whether there should be an east London river crossing at Oxleas wood. All those are the subject of public debate, possible legal cases or applications for judicial review. All that should be in the open. It is disgraceful that we are seeking to grant that exemption, particularly as the directive, as I understand it, does not require it. It provides an opportunity, but not a requirement. The Government are being traditionally defensive on the subject. I do not know whether it is the Department of the Environment or other Departments which have urged the Government to be so.
    The list of confidential information on the following page also allows room for ambiguity and prevarication. It states:
    "information relating to the confidential deliberations"—
    Mr. Mike O'Brien: At the end of regulation 4(2)(b) there is reference to

    519
    "any legal or other proceedings (whether actual or prospective)".
    The word "prospective" makes the condition so expansive that anyone seeking to restrict any information, according to the regulations, need only say that they intend to consider taking legal proceedings and they will not have to reveal the information.
    Mr. Hughes: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. He is absolutely right. I was so carried away with my earlier point that I forgot to deal with that. It would be as if we, in this place, were told that matters could not be raised because they were sub judice simply because they might be the subject of legal action at some future date. That would allow anything to be exempted. If there were controversial proposals for orimulsion and it was reported in a newspaper that a campaign group would take legal action if BP went ahead, the regulations would threaten us if we revealed the information.
    The regulations also refer to
    "information relating to the confidential deliberations of any relevant person".
    That contains a hidden question relating to the relevant person—who could be a local councillor, or a member of a Government Department or a quango—and whether specific parts of their deliberations should be confidential.
    Regulation 4(2)(d) could allow for real skulduggery. It refers to
    "information contained in a document or other record which is still in the course of completion".
    We all know how hon. Members occasionally chance upon documents. If we wave our spoils about and say that we have found a secret document belonging to another party, the defence used is normally that what we have is not the final document, but only a draft. It is very difficult to know when a document has been completed, and it is always a defence to say that it has not. The regulations we are debating tonight are not complete—they are only draft regulations. We do not know whether it is a completed document or not. Would it be completed if it had been shown to one person in the Department, or to one person and an expert outside the Department, or to 25 people? The regulation provides a minefield of excuses.
    Regulation 4(2)(e) refers to
    "information relating to matters to which any commercial industrial confidentiality attaches or affecting any intellectual property".
    Public interest should override commercial confidentiality. It is not good enough for a private sector company or a nationalised company, or a company such as PowerGen, which is an in-between company, to say that the matter is commercially confidential. That assertion must be tested. We know that, if the matter is taken to court, a plea can be entered stating that the information is commercially confidential and the matter will not be aired.
    There should be a public interest test. Environmental information is no good if it is available only from the public sector. People living in Pontypool need to know what ReChem is doing, and people living just outside Presteigne or Kington near the borders of Powys need to know what the local garage is doing burning tyres—
    Mr. Dennis Skinner: Or Coalite.
    Mr. Hughes: The hon. Gentleman refers to Coalite. There are loads of issues, and they include opencast
    520
    mining, the Bolsover farmers and the allegations about the pollution of milk. It is no good allowing the private sector merely to say, "This is a confidential matter."
    The next part of the regulations elaborates on what "confidential" means. It really is not good enough to define "confidential" in such a way as effectively to allow pleas of confidentiality always to win the day. That is the danger of the regulations: although they open a door, someone the other side of that door who wants to close it can do so by saying that commercial confidentiality is at stake.
    The problem is that the directive allows Governments to be far too restrictive. It would have been better had there been a standard way of providing information, but that opportunity has gone. It would also have been better if the Government had not availed themselves of the right to exempt unfinished documents or data. That blanket restriction is not necessary and should not have been included.
    Finally, as the official from the Department of the Environment said, we should not have regulations which need constantly to be tested in court. Like many other hon. Members, I trained as a lawyer, but I believe that the test of good legislation, particularly freedom of information legislation, is not the amount of work that it gives to lawyers but the extent to which it allows the public access to information without having to have recourse to lawyers —in other words, how easy it is for the public to get the information that they require.
    I hope that we shall review the workings of the legislation in the light of experience, before the end of next year, and yearly thereafter. As far as they go, the regulations are welcome, but they do not prove that the Government are yet converted either to the cause of environmental openness or to real freedom of information. To some of us, that comes as no surprise; even so, we had hoped that, after all this time, this very necessary open door might have been opened slightly wider tonight.
    9.27 pm
    Mr. John Denham: Let me take the opportunity to make some comments about the relationship that surely exists between the availability of environmental information and public confidence in the way in which the Government and other bodies handle environmental issues. It seems to me self-evident that, even if the Government took all the correct action, full public confidence in their actions would be unlikely to be forthcoming unless sufficient environmental information was available to members of the public.
    I hope that the Minister will be able to tell me whether the regulations would assist the public on two specific issues. If the answer is no, the regulations are deficient. If the answer is yes, they may be helpful. The first issue concerns the import of toxic waste into the United Kingdom from developed countries, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) has already referred.
    For several months, hon. Members, including me, have been engaged in a fruitless correspondence with Ministers and in exchanges at oral questions on this issue. We have regularly been told that the Government have negotiated the power to limit the import of toxic waste. We have not yet extracted a simple pledge that the import of toxic waste from developed countries will be stopped. That is a matter

    521
    of considerable local concern in Southampton, both because thousands of tonnes of toxic waste from developed countries are imported through the docks and travel our roads and railways and because there is a ReChem incinerator plant on the waterside.
    The fact that ReChem was recently successfully prosecuted for exceeding discharge limits has done nothing to reassure local people about the operation of the plant. Having listened to the debate, and given ReChem's tendency to find itself in court over these matters, I wonder to what extent the regulations will help local people to obtain the information that they need about the ReChem plant's operations. Will the regulations make it easier to get an idea of what the Government intend to do about importing toxic waste from developed countries?
    Secondly, I am concerned about the ability of the regulations to reduce the conflict surrounding projects with major environmental implications. Every hon. Member will be aware that the construction of the M3 through Twyford down is one of the most controversial and environmentally damaging projects under way in the United Kingdom. The scheme has been bitterly opposed by many people, both locally and nationally. Within the past week the conflict has degenerated into violence and thuggery against protesters on Twyford down.
    The inadequacy of the environmental impact assessment of the scheme, and of assessment of the benefits of alternative schemes, has been one of the consistent themes behind opposition to cutting a major road through the down. The absence of good assessment and decent information has disillusioned environmentalists throughout the United Kingdom, and has been a source of dispute with the European Commission.
    Having listened to the debate, and recognising how much of the information has been subject to local inquiries, I wonder whether the regulations would enable better environmental information to be made available to the public. It is certainly true that the deep and widespread belief that the environmental consequences of the M3 cutting have been ignored has directly fuelled continuing protests against the motorway in recent months. They also fuelled the violent scene on the down last week.
    I have spoken to reputable witnesses, and it has been widely reported in the press that the peaceful protesters on Twyford down were subjected to unprecedented violence by the employees of private security firms—violence that took place under the eyes of the police.
    Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): Order. That is not covered in the regulations. The hon. Gentleman is right to raise queries on what is contained in the regulations, but it is not in order for him to go into detail about local issues.
    Mr. Denham: I accept your ruling, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I wished to make it clear that, if environmental information is not made available to the public in an acceptable and usable form, it contributes to a breakdown in public confidence in the planning process and in Government actions, which triggers a chain of events. At Twyford down, that led to peaceful protests and a response by private security firms and—I am told—by the police, which I find utterly unacceptable.
    The House must face up to the question whether the regulations will give the public sufficient confidence in the planning processes for projects such as the M3 and
    522
    whether they will lead to a consensus that the Government are acting properly. If the regulations contribute to that, they are helpful. If they fail to lead to that consensus, they are not.
    People who have studied the regulations in detail have mentioned exclusions on the grounds of confidentiality, on the grounds that projects are subject to public inquiries —as are motorways—and on the grounds that they are subject to international law, which presumably refers to the European Community challenge as to whether the M3 scheme has been planned properly.
    The regulations will not restore public confidence. If it is not restored, protests of the sort that I described will take place. Young people with what some may view as eccentric or unusual life styles are Thatcher's children. They have never known a Government with values different from the materialistic and anti-environmentalist attitudes of this Government. That is why they became involved in the protest. If the Government wish to restore widespread confidence in their planning processes, good environmental information must be made available.
    I am grateful to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for your tolerance. I accept that I have stretched the debate a little beyond the narrow legalistic terms of the regulations, but it is important to note that the sort of conflicts that have been witnessed recently stem from a breakdown of public confidence in the planning process. Therefore, the regulations are not dry legalistic matters, but relate to the way in which the Government and our society conduct their affairs without conflict and by consensus.
    9.34 pm
    Mr. Mike O'Brien: We are better off with the regulations than without them, but they do not go far enough. They could have been so much more and so much better.
    Access to information on the environment is fundamentally important to environmental groups such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, to individuals who have an interest in environmental protection and to legislators. It is also essential to business and industry, and the regulations fail to address the needs of business and industry.
    There is in the regulations an assumption that confidentiality is important to business. It is a bureaucrat's assumption. Access to a free market in information on the environment is important to business. The regulations allow too many bureaucrats to put too many obstructions in the way of people seeking information to which they should have a right.
    The taxpayer will often have paid, through grants or contracts, for information to be collated and, in principle, access should be denied only in rare cases. The opportunities that the regulations provide for bureaucratic obstruction are legion. For example, regulation 4(2)(d) allows unfinished data or information to be kept confidential. That is much too broad. Organisations could unreasonably withhold information on the excuse that it forms part of a larger and still incomplete study. That may allow important information to be withheld almost indefinitely.
    Regulation 4(2)(e) allows information to be restricted if it relates to commercial or industrial information or affects any intellectual property.

    523
    There is a nice restrictive definition of what relates to the environment in regulation 2(2)(a), but when we come later to the nature of information relating to commercial or industrial information, it is left open. It simply refers to "information relating to". It does not have to be the actual confidential information itself. Any information which relates to any other information which may be confidential can also be excluded. Again, that is much too broad an exclusion.
    Yes, there is a legitimate area of business and product secrecy. Businesses will want to protect some of their processes. But business also has a right to know. I am looking here just at the way in which business would view the matter. A free market in industrial and commercial information is to be encouraged to enable all companies to take advantage of best practice and to ensure that they protect the environment. Regulation 4(2)(e) gives licence to bureaucratic secrecy and it encourages the wrong thing in terms of the needs of business.
    In addition, that regulation is either badly worded or it simply says that there is a right to exclude information relating to any intellectual property. That is a definition with a real blunderbuss approach to the law. Business needs an open market to information, and as open a market as possible, to ensure that it can influence legislation to be able to seize the initiative in a new green market for products and to ensure that, unknown to itself, it is not polluting. For example, if data show that a business is polluting in a way previously not known, it is important that that information should be readily available.
    Towards the end of the 1990s and into the 21st century, business will move into a much greener market. Whether from Europe or domestically, there are likely to be more laws to protect the environment, perhaps new taxes and new customer requirements. All that must be planned for and anticipated, and new investment programmes have to be framed, within the context of knowledge about the environment. If some of that important knowledge is not available to business because the bureaucrats who hold it are able to use the clauses to restrict it, business will not be able to be involved in the early stages of deciding what sort of environmental regulations are required.
    In Germany and other EC countries, the large companies have lobbyists who are always ready to become involved at an early stage in framing legislation to regulate the European economy. All too often, German businesses can become involved at the beginning in framing Euro-regulations in a way that will benefit them. That is because they have access to information supplied by the Government. Under the regulations, such Government support may well be denied to industry in this country. Business in Britain is not encouraged to become involved at an early stage in framing regulations. There is an unwillingness to allow information to be made available to British companies. The Government should encourage business to become involved.
    I am lucky enough to have in my constituency a 3M factory at Atherstone. That company has a very good attitude towards the environment. It wants to be involved and to have as much information as possible about its processes and the products that it will provide for customers in the green market of the future. That company
    524
    needs access to as much information as it can get, because it has to make long-term commercial decisions about the sort of future market in which it will operate. The regulations do not address the needs of that business or of other businesses which should be encouraged to deal with regulations at an early stage. Access to information that can be used to frame arguments in the EC and in Whitehall is essential. If local authorities or the Government hold back on such information, it could have a long-term impact on jobs.
    Out there is a large, new green market which is estimated to be worth £50 billion. Many consumers are interested in buying products with a green tinge, products that are environmentally sound. They want to buy from companies in which they can have faith, and those companies must be able to demonstrate integrity. In order to be in that green market, businesses must invest. Their products in which they have invested so much may have been subjected to research, the data on which are controlled by the Government or by local authorities and not revealed. As a result of the regulations, bureaucrats will be able to withhold that information, and those British companies will not be able to take full advantage of a market in which they might well have been the leaders.
    I say again that the regulations do not respond to the needs of business. Companies must be able to anticipate the changes in environmental legislation. Governments may well legislate on the basis of information that is available to them and which they will not divulge. Therefore, businesses do not know about it and cannot make essential plans. This bureaucrats charter will prevent information being revealed about the environment. The Government pride themselves on being pro-business, but the regulations have a narrow view about what is good for business. They should be about open information that will help citizens and business. Instead, it is about how to create conditions for restricting information. It is a failed opportunity.
    In some ways, inherent in the regulations is a restriction on information that might be available in other EC countries. That could damage British industry and British jobs in the long term. It is time that the Government reconsidered the needs of business in access to information. They should realise that a free market in information on the environment is now essential. Business is moving into a different market position, and it must have access to information. The regulations do not provide it with that access, so they should be reconsidered. As has already been said, they will result only in more lawyers earning more money from more litigation in an attempt to get greater access to information. That is not the way to approach these matters.
    When I mentioned information being available in other EC countries, the Minister shook his head—obviously suggesting that it would not be available. He kids himself. The contact of many other countries with their business communities in providing information is much more open, direct and valuable than the Government's attitude to our businesses. That is evident from the regulations.
    Mr. Simon Hughes: I hope that the Minister will respond to the hon. Gentleman's valid points—and, indeed, to the valid points raised by other hon. Members. It appears that there is concern within the Department —for example, the quote from the official—and it is clear that other Departments have put pressure on the

    525
    Department of the Environment. It may be that it is those other Departments that do not understand the benefits of more open access for the commercial world. It would be interesting if the Minister specifically answered the question about where the pressure to restrict information has come from—his Department or elsewhere. If we knew that, we would know where to apply pressure in the months ahead.
    Mr. O'Brien: I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it would be useful if the Minister identified the culprits. They are prepared to put not only the environment at risk, but many businesses that want both to protect the environment and to take advantage of the big green pay-off that will be available if they manage to get a lead in the green market of the future. If there are culprits among Ministers and bureaucrats in Whitehall, the House and the public have a right to know the identity of those enemies of the environment. They may not be the Minister and his Department, but we must know who they are.
    9.48 pm
    Mr. Dennis Skinner: One thing is certain: during the time that I have been a Member of Parliament there has been a huge change in people's perception of the environment. That is no better demonstrated than in my constituency, where there were 15 or 16 pits when I first became a Member of the House. Now there are only four, and if the Government have their way there will be none in north Derbyshire in a few weeks. I hope that the great public show of determination during recent weeks will persuade the Government to think again.
    Because of that change in people's perception, many more of our constituents are now aware of their rights and powers in environmental protection which hitherto they would not have thought to use. It used to be argued that, if a Member of Parliament had a middle-class constituency and loads of suburbia-land, he had a great number of complaints about the environment. My experience in Bolsover over recent years with the Coalite issue has been staggering. Many of those directly connected with the firm and many who work in the pits have wanted to exercise over and over their right to express an opinion on the environment.
    That is why, when I listened to my hon. Friends and others discussing the regulations, I was drawn to the conclusion that the Government were simply seeking the least common denominator among the regulations. They have obviously said, "How can we best use the regulations without giving too much away? How can we protect our business friends who pay large sums of money to the Tory party at election time?"—as opposed to the business people my hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshire, North (Mr. O'Brien) referred to. My guess is that that is what motivates Tory Members in everything that they do. If they add a little flavour and try to attack trade unionism at the same time, it adds grist to the mill. That is the angle from which the Tories approach such matters. The previous Prime Minister used to ask whose side people were on before they were appointed.
    The regulations would help companies such as Coalite Management in my constituency. Coalite has got by pretty nicely as a result of the Tory Government. In the past 18 months, it has put three farmers out of business, and made the population of Bolsover and Shuttlewood live in fear.
    526
    The Government have now come along with regulations that will fortify such firms, which do not want to let people into their secrets.
    In the Evening Standard the other day I spotted the fact that Coalite's shares had fallen to 6.5p. I also find that the National Farmers Union is belatedly suing Coalite for compensation for the three farmers who have been out of business for some 18 months.
    I then hear that a planted question was tabled by a Derbyshire Tory Member today, asking about dioxins in my constituency. That hon. Member has never raised the matter before and I am bound to conclude that some fishy business is going on. When I saw the regulations, it all added up: the Government are operating on the basis of tightening the regulations to their benefit in the finest possible way while at the same time giving the green light to a beleaguered company called Coalite by saying that certain things involving farmers can now take place. From what I hear from the farmers, that can only benefit the firm. The Minister knows a little about that subject, as he used to be in the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
    Why have the Government found it necessary to have that question planted and stage this reply about the matters affecting Coalite? Why, under the regulations, do the Government always favour their friends?
    Were it not Christmas, with many hon. Members already gone, we should have voted against the regulations.
    Mr. Maclean: The hon. Gentleman can still do so.
    Mr. Skinner: I am searching for a teller, because one Member cannot divide on his own. I am toying with the idea at present. Some of my hon. Friends have said that half a loaf is better than no bread at all. Perhaps we shall sustain that argument for tonight.
    Why do the Government feel it necessary to give Coalite the green light when it is in trouble, with its shares having plummeted, the National Farmers Union suing it, and the National Rivers Authority having taken out a case against it for river pollution? Why cannot the Government just sit idly by? Why do they feel the need to rescue the company's directors?
    The regulations will not make it easier for people who are protesting against Coalite and the thousands of people who have signed a petition to stop an incinerator at Coalite. Is it possible, under the regulations, for the people who do not want the new incinerator to seek redress from the Government? Do they help them? What I have heard from my hon. Friends makes it sound as if they do not. It sounds as though they will not give them any assistance, and I thought that the regulations were to help people not only to be informed about environmental protection, but to protest against what they see in their locality. From what I gather, they will not be able to do anything of the kind.
    The Minister is well informed on this subject, so I hope that he will answer in the affirmative and make it clear that, as a result of the regulations, the people in Bolsover who are protesting against the new incinerator to be built by Coalite will stand a chance of stopping it.
    9.55 pm
    Mr. Maclean: I shall respond first to the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). As usual, I admire the way that he can walk into the Chamber reasonably near the end of our debate and pick up the thread of the argument and still make his local case on behalf of his constituents—in this instance over the dioxin and Coalite case. He will be aware from his reading of the regulations, which implement an EC directive—it is intriguing that he does not, at the moment, intend to vote against them—and from my opening remarks that his constituents will have considerable new rights to obtain information from the relevant bodies and organisations. He will be able to decide, from the careful consideration that he will have given my opening remarks—wherever he may have heard them—whether Coalite would consider itself a relevant body to give information.
    I cannot comment on what was presumably a written question, which may have been answered by another Department. The hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that, when the question was answered, I was still in Brussels negotiating for his constituents even more rights over access to information. It must be a matter for him to decide, on his reading of the regulations, whether they are of as much help to his constituents as I believe they are.
    Mr. Chris Smith: The Minister entirely misses the point. The question is not whether Coalite is a relevant body, because clearly it is, but whether Coalite will take refuge in the commercial confidentiality clauses in the regulations to claim that information that is material to the constituents of my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) is commercially confidential. That is the loophole that it will use.
    Mr. Maclean: It is clear that relevant bodies are under a duty to provide information, but that there are certain exceptions to that, although each case must be decided on its merits. If the bodies fail to provide information, those who wish access to it have the right of redress.
    I have one point to make about public bodies and Departments in relation to the hon. Gentleman's constituency. In my time in the Ministry—if anything, that trend will have strengthened over the past few months—it has made available all relevant information which it had on the dioxin incident, commissioned research and made available as much of the resulting information as possible. I should not speculate at the Dispatch Box, but I suspect that the National Farmers Union has only now been able to take legal action because of the Government's information, which the research came up with, which was published and which the hon. Gentleman's constituents are able to make use of. If they are to take action, I shall not comment further on the case because I should not want to prejudice it.
    The hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) came along with a long wish list of what he would ideally like in terms of freedom of information law. He seems to have forgotten that the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is committed—the Prime Minister has committed the whole Government—to reviewing Government information access. A paper will be published in the new year dealing with the wider question of access to all Government information.
    The hon. Gentleman's wish list is simply not relevant when we are faithfully trying to implement an EC directive
    528
    such as this. I suspect that his party's view is that we should always faithfully implement EC directives; if we depart from that and come up with something different that would bring us into the European Court in no time at all, and presumably he would not be pleased.
    The hon. Gentleman asked whether we would review progress on legislation. My hon. Friend the Member for Monmouth (Mr. Evans) in a splendid intervention—adding to his brilliant speech—reminded us that we are under a duty to report on progress within four years—
    Mr. Skinner: He is after the Minister's job.
    Mr. Maclean: In many circumstances, I would be happy to hand it over, especially when answering technical or legal debates such as this one.
    In Brussels this morning we reached agreement on a unique British initiative on reporting and reviewing legislation. All Ministers of the Environment Council were unanimous on this. The EC is good at churning out information; it has not been particularly good at reviewing legislation or monitoring its progress. At our instigation, the Commission produced a paper that received unanimous approval. In future Environment Councils—I hope that the practice will spread to all others as well—we will find time every year to review existing legislation, to report on progress and to amend legislation where necessary.
    Mr. Simon Hughes: I remember that the Government set that as one of their objectives for the presidency. It is wholly commendable. The Minister said that I was inconsistent in arguing for the implementation of the directive at the same time as arguing for the widest possible freedom of information. There is no inconsistency in that. As he well knows, the directive would have allowed the Government to do more than they did, but they refused to use that leeway to the full. They have implemented the document too narrowly—that is the criticism.
    Mr. Maclean: I reject that, but I accept the hon. Gentleman's point that this was one of our presidential objectives. I have today answered a written question setting out our achievements over the past 48 hours in Brussels. The achievement of this objective was only one of many. They include the drastic tightening up of the Copenhagen agreement on chlorofluorocarbons and ozone. We shall return to look at hydrochlorofluorocarbons and methyl bromide in the new year—another British aim. This morning we unanimously agreed the fifth action programme. We have drastically tightened up on van emissions; and we have given a full agenda to Denmark to go on with, even though we inherited a rather lighter agenda. I hope the the whole House will read that written answer. It has been a spectacular triumph, and I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State on it. We like to have our little triumphs to add to the Edinburgh triumph.
    The hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey asked me about Northern Ireland. He knows that separate legislative procedures operate for Northern Ireland, and it will be up to the Northern Ireland office to implement the regulations as soon as possible.
    The hon. Gentleman asked what will happen if someone who has approached a relevant body for information gets an inadequate response. The inquirer has a right of redress if he or she feels that the response has

    529
    been inadequate. The hon. Gentleman also said that often inquirers might not have a clue what information they wanted. I would say: tough luck. An inquirer should not be able to ask for all the information that a body has and then fish through it to see whether anything hits the fan. He must be more specific than that.
    The hon. Gentleman made great play of what he saw as an obstruction in Whitehall. If there were any truth in that, I would not tonight be urging the House to agree to regulations that apply to all Government Departments.
    We have got agreement across Whitehall. We would not have been able to reach agreement two years ago unless we had such agreement. The hon. Gentleman shows his complete lack of knowledge of how government works. Before we go to any European Council and agree legislation, all Departments must, of course, be in agreement; otherwise, we would not sign up to any legislation. We reach such agreement automatically, as a matter of course. Whitehall was in agreement two years ago when we agreed the directive under the Irish presidency. We were in agreement when we produced the regulations. There is no obstacle course.
    Mr. Simon Hughes rose—
    Mr. Maclean: No, I will not give way. It is pointless.
    The hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham) asked whether individual constituency cases will be covered by the regulations. All I can say is that they give the public many more rights to acquire environmental information from many public and relevant bodies. There is one point on which I must take issue with him. He must not inadvertently mislead the House on the subject of toxic waste by saying that we have not announced our policy. I made our policy abundantly plain in Question Time two weeks ago. We had yet another success at the meeting of European Environment Ministers this morning, when we managed to get agreement on how we would implement the Basle convention on the trans-frontier movement of toxic waste.
    We have made our policy clear. We fought hard to include the self-sufficiency principle in the regulations on the trans-frontier movement of shipments of waste. We fought hard for it and we got it. That will allow us to draw up national plans, which we are starting on now, in readiness for when the EC regulations take effect. Ratification of the Basle convention is a matter for the Community—we cannot ratify it unilaterally, because that would be illegal. Once that convention is ratified and the regulations take effect in 1994, we intend to have our national plans in place. They will allow us to turn off the tap on the importation of toxic waste from major developed countries.
    Mr. Denham: The Minister has just said, as he has on a number of occasions, that the regulations will allow our Government to turn off the tap on toxic waste imports. That is not in dispute. However, we have not heard yet from the Minister that the Government will use that power to turn off the tap. I will be entirely satisfied if the Minister can give a pledge that toxic waste imports from developed countries will stop.
    Mr. Maclean: I have made that pledge before. The only reason that we argued for that power to be included in the regulations was to use it, not to leave it on the shelf. I am drawing up plans to take advantage of, use and implement
    530
    the regulations so that I can turn off that tap. It is not a question of just having the power to do that, otherwise there would be no point in agreeing to the regulations.
    Mr. Denham: That is the first time that pledge has been given.
    Mr. Maclean: Please check back in Hansard.
    The hon. Member for Warwickshire, North (Mr. O'Brien) claimed that bureaucratic obstruction would somehow destroy the ability of British industry to seize the green initiative. That is absolute nonsense. He was unable to cite one instance where the regulations that we were putting through tonight depart from the directive by one jot or tittle. We are implementing an EC directive, and it also happens to be British Government policy.
    The hon. Gentleman was unduly pessimistic about the way in which British industry will react to the initiative. In the past few months, I have addressed a number of seminars of representatives of British industry on matters such as eco-audit, eco-labelling, and the follow-up to the Earth summit at Rio. The message has got through to British industry that the environment and environmental equipment, techniques and technology represent mega bucks in the future.
    If industries want customers, staff to work for them, their shareholders to be happy, insurance companies to insure them and the banks to lend them money, they better be clean and green in the future. They should develop such products. That is why an unprecedented number of industries are applying for information on the new British standard, BS 7750. That is a positive sign.
    The hon. Gentleman also said that many individuals would want to know whether the products from certain companies are environmentally friendly. We are keen, of course, on eco-labelling, and it is a pity that there have been some problems in the EC in getting some of the rules and systems for that labelling up and running. We have clearly said that, unless things move much more quickly, we reserve the right to take our own action—although I do not want to do that; I want to stick with an EC-wide regulation.
    This morning, we nearly secured agreement on the eco-audit scheme. Under the scheme, all EC companies that show that they have environmentally friendly policies will satisfy the requirements of the legislation. We encountered severe difficulties last night: seven major objections were advanced by other countries. None the less, my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment persuaded all those countries to withdraw their objections—with the exception of Germany, which maintained a general reserve. I hope that we shall secure agreement early in the new year. To get the whole eco-audit regulation up and running would be a tremendous achievement, and I hope that Germany will appreciate the wishes of the other 11 countries.
    The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) came up with what seemed to be a strong list of objections. He presented seven points of substance which, he seemed to think, proved that the regulations were inadequate, or that we were not implementing the directive in some respect. To be fair, he began by saying that, generally speaking, the regulations were very good, and that we had made considerable progress.
    A casual observer would probably have concluded that there was something in the hon. Gentleman's seven points

    531
    —until, that is, my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouth demolished every one of them. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend: I have never seen a more competent demolition job applied to an Opposition spokesman's argument. All seven points were proved to be spurious, and my hon. Friend demonstrated that we had faithfully implemented the directive without departing from it.
    Mr. Chris Smith: Will the Minister address himself to the one point with which the hon. Member for Monmouth (Mr. Evans) agreed—the inclusion in the regulations of a provision limiting access to information on matters relating to public and local inquiries?
    Mr. Maclean: I shall come to that in a moment.
    Let me deal with another aspect of the hon. Gentleman's speech, which I consider very important. I had always considered the hon. Gentleman to be fair—slightly misguided, perhaps, but fair. Tonight, however, he was very unfair when he inadvertently gave the House a misleading impression of the terms of a written answer that I gave. Let me place on record exactly what I said.
    The hon. Gentleman seemed to imply that I had given a duplicitous reply to a question about the waste shipments regulation. He seemed to suggest that I had said that we would implement it and ensure that we had national plans, having said in an answer six days earlier that there would be no changes to existing UK law and practice. In fact, I answered two questions together. I was asked what steps I intended to take
    "to implement the EC regulations agreed on the supervision and control of shipments of toxic waste; and when he will publish the regulations".
    I was also asked whether I would make it my policy, in implementing the proposals,
    "to ensure that toxic waste is disposed of as close as possible to its source within the United Kingdom and that no waste is imported for commercial gain."
    In answer to the first question, I said:
    "The regulation will be published in the Official Journal after adoption by the Council and is likely to apply 15 months after publication. We shall be giving careful consideration to the application of the regulation's provisions in relation to imports for final disposal."
    In answer to the second question, I said:
    "We expect no change as a result of the regulation to existing practice within the United Kingdom."—[Official Report, 3 December 1992; Vol. 215, c. 289.]
    In view of my assurances now and at the last Question Time that we are keen to implement the regulation on toxic waste imports and to ratify the Basle convention, and that I shall draw up national self-sufficiency plans which will allow me, for want of a better phrase, to turn off the tap of toxic waste, will the hon. Gentleman accept my assurances and that he has misled himself about the interpretation of my answer? Will he kindly say that my explanation is correct?
    Mr. Chris Smith: I am happy to accept the Minister's explanation, but the distinction that he draws between the two parts of his answer is not specified and it is not clear from the answer as it stands on the printed page. He has, however, admirably clarified what he meant, and tonight he has given us for the first time a clear assurance that the Government intend to stop the importation of toxic waste
    532
    from other developed countries. That is an extremely welcome assurance. We have been demanding it for months and we are glad to hear it from the Minister.
    Mr. Maclean: I accept the hon. Gentleman's explanation. It was obvious from the answer that I was answering two separate questions: it is slightly disingenuous of the hon. Gentleman to suggest otherwise. There is no need for me to repeat what I said about toxic waste. We shall take advantage of all the provisions in the regulations that will allow us to make national plans as far as the EC regulations allow us to go in turning off the tap of toxic waste from developed countries.
    The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury and my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouth asked about local inquiries. The discretion to withhold the information in regulation 4(2)(b) will be exercised in a few cases where such information is not automatically available—for example, where it may be withdrawn from the record or background documents and advice. I accept that this is a complex issue. I am happy to write to my hon. Friend and to discuss it with him.
    We have had quite a good debate. I am sorry that some Opposition Members, while saying that they support the regulations and their party's policy on the EC and are keen to implement EC regulations, were then so carping about the fact that we have faithfully implemented the regulations I did not hear a single comment from an Opposition Member to suggest that we have failed in any way to implement the provisions of the directive.
    Mr. Simon Hughes: Will the Minister give way?
    Mr. Maclean: No, I will not. The hon. Gentleman made a long speech, and I must wind up.
    It would be foolish in the extreme for us to introduce regulations that we did not believe implemented an EC regulation, because we know full well that that would land us in the European Court of Justice. We consulted widely on the regulations and prepared them carefully. They provide new rights of access to environmental information to 56 million people in this country. I commend them to the House.
    Question put and agreed to.
    Resolved,
    That the draft Environmental Information Regulations 1992, which were laid before this House on 8th December, be approved.
    Mr. Simon Hughes: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Will you confirm that, procedurally, nothing would have prevented the Government from laying before the House the Northern Ireland regulations—the missing part of the jigsaw of the regulations that we have just debated—after the last debate and before the two orders that you are about to put to the House? Could that have been done, because if it could people should realise that the Government chose not to do so?
    Madam Speaker: That is rather hypothetical, because no such order has been presented to me.

    Statutory Instruments, &c.
    Madam Speaker: With the leave of the House, I shall put together items Nos. 3 and 4 on the Order Paper.
    Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.).

    Statutory Instruments, &c.

      NORTHERN IRELAND
      That the draft Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries (Repeals) (Northern Ireland) Order 1992, which was laid before this House on 19th October, be approved.
      That the draft Firearms (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 (Amendment) Regulations 1992, which were laid before this House on 30th November, be approved.—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]
      Question agreed to.

    WAYS AND MEANS

      ROAD TRAFFIC (DRIVING INSTRUCTION BY DISABLED PERSONS) BILL
      Resolved,
      That, for the purpose of any Act resulting from the Road Traffic (Driving Instruction by Disabled Persons) Bill, it is expedient to authorise the payment of any fees into the Consolidated Fund.—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]

    Expo '92 (Seville)
    Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]
    10.19 pm
    Mr. Anthony Steen: Between 20 April and 12 October this year, Seville hosted the first universal exposition to be held in Europe since the Brussels exposition of 1958. One hundred and eight nations displayed the best that they could offer. As with the Olympics, the Spanish showed their flair for organisation. The event, which was fittingly proclaimed the eighth wonder of the world, brought back fond memories of the 1951 Festival of Britain and was an ideal opportunity for the British Government to show the very best of Britain.
    In April this year, expectations were high. The Today newspaper wrote:
    "a £28 million showcase of British excellence will be the main attraction at EXPO 92. The British Pavilion, a steel and glass structure the size of Westminster Abbey, will bring lucrative business deals to fifty UK sponsoring firms."
    The pavilion, which reputedly cost £25 million of taxpayers' money—perhaps the Minister will say whether that was so—was built for that occasion and for that occasion only. It had a six-month shelf life. Other pavilions were built with a second purpose in mind once the expo was over. For example, the Spanish pavilion was sold to Spanish universities and is being put to good use. Am I right in presuming that there is no function for the British pavilion and that taxpayers are paying £25 million which is then to be written off?
    The Department of Trade and Industry claimed:
    "Britain will have a first-class pavilion to demonstrate her originality and the scale of her resurgence in many areas of manufacturing, technology and services."
    Tragically, the reality was very different.
    The British pavilion was on one of the main promenades where some of the larger pavilions were based. It was not far from the United States pavilion, but it was a pity that our Government did not take a leaf from the Americans' book. The American pavilion was funded not by the taxpayer but business sponsorship. I am told that the entire bill for the British pavilion is to be picked up by the British taxpayer.
    Our pavilion looked like some others—water flowing from the roof and a pond below. That seems to be the favoured design today. The only trouble was that there was nothing much inside other than a procession of escalators transporting people to small floor areas which were supposed to reflect the essence of Britain. There were three or four displays illustrating Britain as a leader in the scientific world.
    Oddly enough, the public seemed to judge the success of each country's exhibition by the length of the queue outside. The question was, "How long is the queue at such and such a pavilion?" Canada topped the list with a five-hour wait but the United Kingdom's queue was only about 40 minutes, in spite of the fact that the designers had so designed the pavilion that there was a bottleneck at the entrance which restricted the number of people who could enter.
    The governing factor was the number who could watch a video being shown in the entrance to the pavilion. In the meantime, the rest of the pavilion was virtually empty. It was a pity that the video made so little mention of our heritage: our grand buildings, the history of our

    535
    monarchy, our traditions, the beauty of our countryside, the peculiar British institutions, the wonders of Scotland—the highlands and the islands—the mountains and language of Wales and the special flavour of Northern Ireland.
    Once the eight-minute film had finished, there was a rush to the escalators like the first day of a Harrods sale or the Northern line during the rush hour. On one floor there was a Land Rover perched in the middle of nowhere; on another, in a sealed container, Marks and Spencer underwear. Such was the dearth of products that it looked as though the bailiffs had made a recent visit to the inside of the British pavilion. Perhaps it was a true, but unfortunate, reflection of our country. Certainly those experiencing Britain through the pavilion must have come to the sad conclusion that the country must be nearly bankrupt. That is not so. This country has history, imagination, flavour, creativity, skills, ingenuity, a race of various cultures, colours and religions, a variety of different political views, democracy and a rich culture. It is a country in which it is safe to invest and it is a unique place in which to live.
    The public wanted souvenirs, but I am afraid that they were nowhere to be found. All the other pavilions had stickers and souvenirs and people rushed to get them. In the British pavilion, there was none. At the information desk, I was told that there were no stickers, no pins, no tourist information and no shop in which to buy things. That was not entirely true. There was a shop, but I am afraid that it was not doing much business: a young man who was hovering around the shell of the shop confessed in hushed tones that the shop was in fact in liquidation and that the liquidator was somewhere about, but not easily located.
    What other country at a worldwide exposition would tell the world that the sole concessionaire to a great pavilion, which had won the franchise against all other competition and been granted this special favour by the DTI, had gone bust? Perhaps, of course, it was a somewhat novel idea of the DTI that the pavilion was designed to exploit our skill as a country in dealing with bankruptcy. Perhaps, after all, this was part of the DTI's grand design. Perhaps it was proud that we were the only country able to provide on-the-spot advice on liquidations. The bareness of the area and the windswept look of the first floor gave the impression of one of the British seaside resorts off-season—Clacton, perhaps.
    In its wisdom, the DTI selected Bickerton Associates as exclusive concessionaire for all the products displayed in the pavilion. Bickerton was the sole distributor and was appointed as such. No doubt the DTI officials were most cautious when selecting the concessionaire, bearing in mind that it would reflect the business profile of Great Britain to the world. The DTI is the guardian of trade and industry. Those who dealt with Bickerton took it that the DTI had looked carefully at the antecedents of the company, its track record, its management and the acumen of its directors. All industries in Britain wishing to exhibit or to sell goods in the pavilion had to do so through Bickerton. It was an exclusive franchise.
    It is odd that DTI officials did not ascertain that an identical company, run by the same directors, had been struck off the Companies house records in 1989. That
    536
    company had failed to submit accounts and annual returns. Could one conceive of anyone, let alone the DTI, appointing as the United Kingdom's ambassador a company whose board comprised the directors of a bankrupt company?
    Bickerton representatives, together with DTI officials, selected British companies to sell stock at the shop. Bickerton requested advance payments of 8 per cent. of projected sales from each of the participating companies, including Dartington Crystal, whose managing director lives in my constituency. He was asked to send an advance of £10,200 to Bickerton and Bickerton was apparently supposed to forward that money, as an 8 per cent. advance, to the DTI. I should like the Minister to tell the House whether that money was actually sent to the DTI or whether Bickerton pocketed it. Bickerton took its stock to Spain without paying any of the British companies for it, and it started to trade. I should perhaps mention that we are not talking about peanuts but about £500,000-worth of goods or more.
    The number of people visiting the pavilion was unfortunately far below the DTI's expectations. That is no wonder when one realises that there was not much inside to see. The DTI predicted, quite wrongly, 18,000 people a day. It now says that it got the figure wrong and that the actual figure was 12,000 a day. The British companies involved say that the real figure was 9,000 a day. Other pavilions had double or treble those numbers because people wanted to go and see what they had to offer. Understandably, sales were far lower than had been envisaged. The sales were less than £400,000, compared with Bickerton's forecast of £1.4 million and the DTI's own inflated sales forecast of £2.4 million.
    Bickerton went into receivership in August, leaving 54 companies stranded and owed more than £500,000. The companies have just recently had their deposits returned after a battle with DTI officials. As for the rest of the money owed—£40,000 in the case of Dartington Crystal—the DTI seems to be washing its hands of the matter, saying that it is not the Department's responsibility. Who is responsible? The DTI introduced Bickerton to all the companies, saying that it was Government-appointed, Government-selected and Government-approved. The DTI's claim that it is not responsible for the concessionaire's activity is one of the shabbiest attempts to avoid responsibility that I have ever heard.
    The DTI was involved in the pavilion's activities up to its eyeballs. When the concessionaire, Bickerton, discovered that under Spanish law it could not trade as the main retailer at Expo 92 without registering as a Spanish company, the DTI took on the main retailer role and banked all the credit card receipts in a DTI account set up in Seville. I am told that the account still exists. The Minister may wish to be briefed on the subject—I am prepared to give him time to be so—but will he tell the House how much money there is in the secret Seville account? Why did we open an account in Seville? When will the Minister get the money out and pass it over to the companies which have lost so much?
    Given that the DTI had an intimate involvement in the retailing operation, it must honour its commitments by repaying the suppliers who were persuaded to offer to sell goods at the exhibition. After all, we are the party of small firms, and I should have thought that the Minister would want to salvage some pride from what has become an appalling affair.

    537
    The scandal was not hidden away in the corridors of Whitehall: it was there for all to see at the most prestigious trade fair ever. That is the sort of incompetence that one might expect from a third-world dictatorship or a banana republic, not from a member of the exclusive G7 club of industrialised nations and the country that holds the presidency of the EC.
    As well as there being no pins or stickers, no propaganda or shop, and nothing for visitors to take away, those in the pavilion could not use the computers to show Britain's high-tech profile. I do not know whether the minister knows the appalling catalogue of disasters. The Apricot computer system crashed two months after it was installed, and was inoperative for three months, so it is understandable that there was not much throughput in the British pavilion: there was nothing very much for people to do—they could not buy or see anything; all they could do was go up and down the wretched escalators.
    After queueing for about 30 minutes, watching two films, travelling up and down the building and searching in vain for any little reminder of our day, I thought that nothing would be better than a refreshing cup of tea. I was with my brother-in-law, who works for the EC Commission, and we decided to go down to the basement and enjoy a nice cup of British tea. I thought that Twining or Jacksons would go down a treat, so we went to the bowels of the pavilion and asked, "May we have a pot of tea?" A smiling student offered us a teabag. "Cucumber sandwiches?" asked my brother-in-law. We were offered a scone the size of a football and as dry as the Nevada desert.
    The cakes were Spanish; the place was messy, undistinguished and unpleasant—like a typical British greasy spoon café. There were dirty plates and cups everywhere, napkins all over the floor and the staff seemed to be inexperienced students. I had heard rumors that the café was not only undistinguished, but was selling non-British goods, which was certainly borne out by the cakes. We had a battle even to get English wine in the pavilion.
    I heard about the appalling things going on at Expo 92 in June, and posed a number of parliamentary questions to the Minister of State about English wine. On 30 June I asked whether he would remove all Spanish wine from the British pavilion. It seemed sensible to have English wine at a British pavilion.
    Needless to say, the Minister said that he would not remove the Spanish wine. Even though it was the British pavilion, he wanted to keep the Spanish wine:
    "Although I have insisted that the catering concessionaire makes available a range of English wine"—
    that was good of him—
    "this alone does not provide the choice of price and varieties required to run a commercial operation."—[Official Report, 30 June 1992; Vol. 210, c. 530.]
    I am puzzled: was it the British pavilion or the Spanish pavilion that we were running?
    Then we had the problem with Bollinger, which insisted that no English sparkling wine should be sold in the pavilion because it had paid to sponsor the champagne. So all English sparkling wine was out. At this point, I should declare an interest: I am the adviser—originally, the honorary adviser—to the English Vineyards Association, which represents 200 commercial vineyards and was pretty sore that English champagne could not be sold in the pavilion. English champagne is delicious. One can buy it for £7 or £8 and, at a recent blind tasting, the English
    538
    sparkling wine was declared to be as good as the non-vintage champagne—a view that I can certainly support.
    Neither sparkling nor plain English wine was served on the occasion of the British national day. I believe that Spanish wine was served on that occasion. In his answer of 30 June, the Minister said that no English wine was suitable for the occasion of the British national day. What is wrong with Impresario, a sparkling white wine which has recently been ranked with the top three non-vintage champagnes, even though it cannot officially be called champagne because it is English? What is wrong with us that we will not promote our own products, and think that everything that we buy from abroad must be better?
    It seems to me that the Department of Trade and Industry officials were not up to the job. It would be invidious, in this short debate, to mention names, but I will let the Minister have the list. I hope that all the officials concerned have been promoted, because that is probably all that can be done with them. I was not so much upset and angry as dismayed that such a sloppy and bad impression should be given not only to millions of foreign visitors but to the renowned British companies which had been invited to sell their goods.
    We now reach the epilogue. Many of the pavilions had water themes, and ours was no exception—the water came down over the front of the pavilion, and there were pools of water, rather like a moat, around it. It was clear that the people visiting our pavilion felt that something had gone wrong with Great Britain. They were saddened by the image. They obviously had some affection for our people and some understanding of our plight. Unlike any other pond anywhere in all the acres of the site, our pond had coins thrown into it. Clearly, the public of the world realised that Britain was in a bad way, and threw coins into the moat to show that they understood our problem. I was concerned that there was no liquidator in the shop; perhaps he was down there in his gumboots picking up the coins to help the shop to make good its losses.
    Such was my experience of our great British pavilion that I feel that the DTI has something to answer for. I would not trust any of the DTI officials concerned to run a business in which I was involved, and I certainly would not give them a chance to spend my money.
    10.37 pm
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Technology (Mr. Edward Leigh): I am well aware of the keen interest of my hon. Friend the Member for South Hams (Mr. Steen) in promoting British industry—an interest that is shared by every hon. Member. We all admire and respect his unflagging energy and vigour. My hon. Friend is also a firm believer in "buy British" campaigns, especially if they include the sale of English wines. I recall that my hon. Friend tabled no fewer than 12 parliamentary questions in March and June about the availability of English wines at the British pavilion at Expo. I shall return to the specifics of English wine if time allows.
    In summer 1988, the Prime Minister, then Mrs. Thatcher, made it clear that Britain's contribution to Expo was to be
    "the best, the very best";
    and from the reports that I have received, it was. That is not to say, in fairness to my hon. Friend, that there were no lessons to learn from our participation. With the benefit

    539
    of hindsight, there were. But, as I shall explain, the British pavilion at Expo' 92 attracted a great deal of interest and a great deal of comment—the vast majority of it favourable comment.
    The British pavilion was acclaimed as the most significant and attractive pavilion on the whole Expo site—and there were more than 100 pavilions from which to choose. It was the envy of many other national participants. The man-made water wall along the length of the frontage attracted universal admiration. It was technologically the most advanced pavilion, both in structure and design. Moreover, it won four awards for construction and design and one for the audiovisual presentation, and has been entered for three more.
    During the planning stage, an early decision was taken that the pavilion should be truly designed and built in Britain. With the exception of groundworks, that objective was achieved. The architects, engineers, quantity surveyors and the supporting professional team were all well-established United Kingdom practices, and were all appointed on a competitive basis. To conform with Spanish law, we were required to appoint a local associate architect to advise on the requirements of the building regulations in the locality. That role did not include any creative input.
    Construction work on the pavilion was tendered competitively in the United Kingdom, in the form of approximately 50 works packages.
    Mr. Steen: I am complaining not about the design but about what, or what was not, inside the pavilion.
    Mr. Leigh: I shall get to that, but my hon. Friend has made some serious allegations about our efforts, and it is important to set the record straight.
    The structure was built in the United Kingdom and shipped to Seville for erection under the supervision of British engineers and technicians. Unskilled labour was recruited locally. The supervisory management contractors were also from the United Kingdom.
    The interior design is obviously of particular interest to my hon. Friend and he has been critical of the interior arrangement of the pavilion. I respect his views, even if I cannot share them. However, he may not be aware that private sector management consultants were appointed to examine Spanish perceptions of the United Kingdom and of the British people before detailed planning of the interior began.
    The consultants' findings were: the British were viewed as being not very friendly; there was a lack of awareness of United Kingdom artistic and technical creativity; there was a strong interest in the United Kingdom as a tourist destination; and the Spanish response to British fashion was negative.
    Those findings were taken fully into account in the interior design developed by Conran Design, which was chosen by a panel of judges representing the private sector and the sponsoring Government Departments. Conran's interpretation projected an outward-looking, thrusting and forward-looking nation. That was reflected in different ways through audio-visual and static displays and through the multi-media theatre production.
    The interior layout contained five elements, which each addressed the overall concept: a welcome area, where a
    540
    288-screen video presentation invited visitors to discover Britain today; the upper terrace depicting British scientific and engineering achievements in the four elements; the theatre, where a multi-media spectacle showed how future discoveries depended on communications, in which Britain excels in many ways; the lower terrace, where visitors continued to explore the elements; and the concourse, where Royal Doulton, Land Rover and Marks and Spencer displayed examples of original British products.
    The consultants who had been commissioned to analyse Spanish perceptions were retained to question visitors to the pavilion. Well over 4,000 interviews were carried out. Most visitors thought that the pavilion was impressive, and 38 per cent. thought it very impressive.
    The pavilion aroused increased interest in Britain as a leisure location, and nearly half the visitors left with a more favourable impression. The theatre show was considered excellent by visitors of all nationalities and several said that it was the best that they had visited. The British team of young navigators was highly praised. I hope that that sets straight the record on the interior design of the pavilion.
    The British pavilion was one of the largest. It occupied nearly 7,000 sq m and stood 27 m high—almost as high as Westminster abbey. In short, the pavilion was, and remains, a glowing tribute and testimony to British engineering and arthitectural expertise.
    The pavilion attracted a total of 2.2 million visitors, which required an orderly throughput of 12,000 visitors per day throughout the six months of the Expo. Some pavilions had a larger throughput but on a free-flow basis, not in such a structured way. Furthermore, no other pavilion had pre-planned that its visitors would spend at least 45 minutes touring the various displays.
    Mr. Steen: What will happen to it?
    Mr. Leigh: My hon. Friend keeps asking me what will happen to the pavilion. There has been a lot of interest in its future. It is generally recognised that it was one of the best designed and most successful, and there is every possibility that it will be retained on site as part of the science park. I hope that that reassures my hon. Friend.
    The organisers predicted, fairly accurately, that there would be a total of 40 million visits during the Expo—an average daily throughput of more than 200,000 visitors. No pavilion, including that of the host nation, Spain, could hope to cater for that number.
    Some pavilions allowed a free flow of visitors, as we had done ourselves at other Expos. That was certainly one way to build up impressive numbers, but on this occasion the design team for the British pavilion devised a system under which multilingual navigators escorted groups of 200 visitors through the pavilion at 15-minute intervals.
    Even expert opinions vary on the effectiveness of that approach, and my hon. Friend is entitled to be critical. Some are critical that the 2.2 million visitors to the British pavilion, representing a little more than 5 per cent. of the total Expo visits, was too low. Others would argue that to hold captive the attention of more than 2 million visitors for at least 45 minutes was a very laudable achievement.
    I believe that there is something to be said in favour of both the brief and the extended visits. On the one hand, more people get at least an impressionistic view of what

    541
    Britain has to offer; on the other hand, the 45-minute visitor is likely to go away with a more lasting impression of what he or she has seen.
    I should point out that the concessions to operate both the shop and the restaurant in the British pavilion were put out to competitive tender. The successful tenderers for the shop were selected partly on the basis of their experience in operating gift shops in museums and at fairs.
    The Department of Trade and Industry tender for the shop concession specified that the products available should be British and of high quality. The selection of products was made by the concessionaire, but the DTI retained the power of veto.
    The DTI guaranteed that the products of four British sponsoring companies would be available in the shop, provided that they met the terms set by the concessionaires. In all other respects, the business conducted between the concessionaires and their suppliers was a private commercial matter.
    As my hon. Friend has explained, the concessionaire ran into financial difficulties when sales targets were not reached and they could not meet payments due to the suppliers. It is too easy to blame the problems of the shop concessionaires on lack of foresight, but nobody could have predicted that the Expo visitors in the first three months of Expo would come almost entirely from Seville and spend very little.
    Nobody could have predicted the financial difficulties faced by a large number of Expo concessionaires. The British pavilion shop was not the only one which failed to reach its sales targets. Nor could anyone have expected the very high entrance fees to Expo to dampen on-site sales so dramatically. [Interruption.] In reply to my hon. Friend's sedentary intervention, let me say that, unlike some states, we were not prepared to subsidise the shops. It was a commercial arrangement.
    An unexpectedly high proportion of Spanish visitors brought picnics to the Expo and spent relatively little in the shops. One reason may have been the excessively high entrance charges which, for a family of two adults and three children, could have been up to £100. There is little doubt that the high royalty payments demanded by the Expo authorities added to the problem by exerting upward pressure on prices in shops, restaurants and other concessions.
    Mr. Steen: What concerns me is that £500,000-worth of British industry's money is locked up with the DTI or lost. What will the DTI do about that?
    Mr. Leigh: If my hon. Friend will allow me, I shall come to that as quickly as I can, but it is important that I should set out the facts in order to put the matter straight.
    It is hardly surprising that some concessions lost money. One could argue that a larger retail company might have coped better with the cash flow problem. The House should know that the many large retailers invited to tender all declined that opportunity.
    Because of the unforeseen failure of the pavilion shop, DTI Ministers decided to make an ex gratia payment to those British suppliers who had made advanced royalty payments to the concessionaires. To help finance their own royalty payment to the DTI, the shop concessionaires had required an up-front royalty payment from their suppliers. Although there was no legal requirement to do so, the DTI made a without-prejudice ex gratia refund of those royalty payments to the suppliers.
    A total of 15 separate ex gratia payments have been made to companies which supplied the pavilion shop. I am aware of only two companies which have expressed dissatisfaction with the amount of money that they received. Their disputes, however, involve wider issues and it would not be appropriate to discuss the detail of them in the House. I hope that that answers some of the questions that my hon. Friend asked about the concessionaires.
    The total budget allocation from Government funds for the British participation at Expo was set at £28.9 million. The £1.2 million expenditure on the cultural programme was included in the overall cost. Private sector sponsorship, in cash and in kind, was valued at £5 million.
    Expo '92 was staged in Seville to commemorate the 500th anniversary of the discovery of the new world. It ran from 20 April to 12 October 1992, attracted more than 40 million visitors and 110 nations participated which, together with theme pavilions, corporate participation and the autonomous regions of Spain, collectively amounted to a larger number of pavilions than at any previous Expo. The theme was the "age of discovery" —
    The motion having been made after Ten o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, MADAM SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
    Adjourned at eleven minutes to Eleven o'clock.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

  Citizens Charter
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will list and describe briefly each of the initial commitments in the citizens charter to which he referred in his oral statement of 25 November,Official Report, column 869, and give against each of these commitments the level of performance currently being achieved.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  The citizens charter is a major programme of improvement to our public services. The aim is a comprehensive and durable change in the way that the services are managed and delivered, so that the citizen always comes first. Initial commitments were set out in the original "Citizen's Charter" White Paper of July 1991, Cm. 1599. The bulk of these, and much more, have already been delivered, as the "Citizen's Charter First Report: 1992", Cm. 2101 shows. The table summarises the original specific commitments and how they have been met or put in hand. References are to Cms. 1599 and 2101 where fuller descriptions can be found.

  The Government's position is one of openness and constant improvement, and progress against remaining Cm. 1599 commitments, the new commitments in Cm. 2101, and the further commitments we shall be making will also be published from time to time.

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  IMPLEMENTATION

  Implementation Unit and Panel of Advisers to be set up (p.7).

  Met. Citizens' Charter Unit and Prime Minister's Advisory Panel set up July 1991.

  HEALTH

  Patient's Charter to be published in England, Scotland and Wales (p. 10).

  Met. England—October 1991 Scotland—September 1991 Wales—October 1991 (p. 5).

  Health authorities to produce charters specific to their own services. (p. 11).

  Met. Local standards set by all health authorities in England. Local charters published in all health authorities in Wales; all health boards in Scotland; all four health and social services boards in Northern Ireland. (p. 5).

  Hospitals to set out for patients the standards of service they offer. (p. 11).

  Met. Standards set out in Patient's Charters and local charters (p. 5).

  NHS Management Executive to set out the main areas in which local standards must be set, monitored and published. (p. 11).

  Met. Set out in Patient's Charter (p. 5).

  194

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  District health authorities (health boards in Scotland) to set standards for service in their contracts with hospitals (p. 11).

  Met. District health authorities required to ensure that all relevant Patient's Charter standards are included in contracts with provider units (p. 5).

  Targets to be published maximum admission times to hospital (p. 11).

  Met. Contained in Patient's Charters (p. 5).

  Specific times to be set for hospital outpatient appointments (p. 11).

  Met. Contained in Patient's Charters (p. 5).

  EDUCATION

  Parent's Charters to be published (p. 14).

  Met. Published in England, Scotland, Wales in 1991; in Northern Ireland in 1992 (p. 10).

  All parents to receive a written report on their child's progress (p. 14).

  Met. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland parents now receive a written report once a year. In Scotland new report cards to be issued in 1992–93 (p. 10).

  Schools, further education and sixth form colleges to publish their annual public exam results in a common format (p. 14).

  In hand. Published November 1992 by DFE in relation to schools. FE and sixth form colleges requested to publish the information in 1991–92. Publication compulsory from Autumn 1993 (p. 10–11).

  Comparative information on all schools to be collected and published locally (p. 14).

  In hand. Comparative information on public exam results sent out through schools, LEAs and public libraries in November 1992 (p. 10).

  Audit Commission to be empowered to publish comparative tables on efficiency of administration and support services in different LEAs. (p. 14).

  In hand. Audit Commission consulting on a range of indicators.

  Regular and independent inspection of all schools with the results reported to parents. (p. 14).

  Met. OFSTED (England) and OHMCI (Wales) will inspect schools regularly (p. 50).

  Schools to publish truancy information (p. 14).

  Met. School prospectuses and governors' annual reports now required to include truancy rates (p. 10).

  Guide to the National Curriculum to be reissued (p. 14).

  Met. Published in 1991.

  Independent lay assessors to be appointed to Appeals Tribunals (p. 49).

  In hand. Measure in Education Bill now before Parliament (p. 12).

  TENANTS

  Improved Tenant's Charter to be published for local authority tenants. (p. 15).

  Met. Charters published in Scotland in 1991; in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 1992 (p.28).

  More freedom to exercise the right to transfer to a new landlord. (p.15).

  In hand. First two transfers to housing associations have taken place. (p.28).

  195

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  Local authorities to delegate management to tenant bodies. (p.16).

  To come. DOE to issue consultation document on delegated management shortly.

  Tenants to bid for Housing Action Trusts (p.15).

  In hand. HATs being set up in Liverpool, Hull and Waltham Forest (p.28).

  CCT to be extended to local authority housing management (p.16).

  In hand. Consultation document published June 1992. Paving legislation introduced (p.29).

  All tenants to receive information about standards of local authority housing management performance (p.15).

  Met. Annual reports to Tenants published in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Legislation introduced to extend this to Scotland (p.28).

  Improved rights of repair for council tenants' homes. (p.15).

  In hand. Primary legislation introduced. Implementation planned for 1994. (p.29).

  Local authorities to be encouraged to introduce improved refurbishment contracts. (p.16).

  In hand. Guidelines to be published shortly (p.29).

  Stronger Tenants Guarantee for housing association tenants (p. 16).

  Met. Published in 1991 in England and in September 1992 in Wales.

  TRANSPORT BRITISH RAIL (BR)

  British Rail to publish a Passenger's Charter (p.17).

  Met. Published March 1991 (p.18)

  BR to review and publish its conditions of carriage (p. 17).

  In hand. To be published by the end of 1992 (p. 18).

  BR to display figures for reliability and punctuality at stations (p. 17).

  Met. "TrackRecord" displayed at major stations throughout Britain (p. 17).

  BR staff who deal with the public to wear name badges (p. 17.)

  In hand. All BR stag who come in to direct contact with the public are to wear name badges by the end of 1992 (p. 17).

  BR to restructure pay for key staff better to reflect performance (p. 17).

  In hand. New pay restructuring deals incorporating performance pay introduced for some 25,000 staff, including uniformed station staff and engineers. Similar deals being negotiated for a further 40,000 staff.

  BR to accelerate with its contracting out programme (p. 17).

  In hand. Contracting out of train and station cleaning begun. Contracting out of other support functions being considered (p. 66).

  London Underground

  London Underground to publish a Customers Charter (p. 49).

  Met. Published in Summer 1992 (p. 18).

  New quality of service targets to be published (p. 18).

  Met. 12 new quality of service objectives set in May 1992 (p. 18).

  Performance against targets to be published (p. 18).

  Met. Performance information available from ticket offices and customer service centres.

  196

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  Information on targets and performance to be displayed prominently (p. 18).

  Met. Information displayed at every underground station (p. 18).

  Compensation scheme to be publicised more widely (p. 49).

  Met. New refund scheme introduced and advertised at every station (p. 18).

  London Underground to accelerate its contracting out programme (p. 18).

  In hand. Tenders invited for the maintenance on the Bakerloo line trains (p. 66).

  Performance related pay to be extended to drivers, guards, signalling staff and other grades (p. 18).

  In hand. Performance related pay to be developed and extended (p. 67).

  Larger proportion of LT board members pay to be linked to performance (p. 18).

  Met. Percentage determined by performance increase from 16 per cent. to 35 per cent. (p. 67).

  Driving tests

  Driving standards Agency to introduce telephone booking (p. 19).

  Met (p. 15).

  Driving standards Agency to accept payment by credit card or payment card (p. 19).

  Met (p. 15).

  Driving Standards Agency to introduce tests on summer evenings and Saturday afternoons (p. 19).

  Met (p. 15).

  Driving Standards Agency to explore feasibility of Sunday tests (p. 19).

  Met. Idea explored and option not pursued (p. 15).

  Motorway service areas

  Development of motorway service areas be deregulated (p. 19).

  Met. New arrangements introduced in 1992 (p. 15).

  EMPLOYMENT SERVICES

  The Employment Service to publish Charter (p. 21).

  Met. Jobseeker's Charter published in December 1991 (p. 27).

  Details of all services to be displayed in all local offices (p. 20).

  Met. Posters and leaflets in all local offices (p. 25).

  National targets to be published each year (p. 20).

  Met. Targets set and published (p. 25).

  Performance against national targets to be published in the Employment Service's annual report, (p. 20).

  Met. Employment service annual report available in every local office gives results (p. 25).

  Local targets, to be displayed at all Job Centres, to include: waiting times; telephone answering targets; promptness and accuracy in benefit payments and information about local labour market (p. 20).

  Met. Local offices display all standards as described. These match or better national standards.

  Local office network to be integrated (p. 20).

  In hand. Programme will be completed by the mid 1990. (p. 27).

  Integrated Offices to offer pleasant, well designed office interiors (p. 20).

  Met. All new integrated offices have been refurbished.

  197

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  People attending Job Centres for advisory interviews to see the same person on each occasion where possible (p. 20).

  In hand. By April 1993 clients will normally see the same person each time (p. 35).

  Local managers to decide opening hours suitable to clients within a minimum of 36 hours a week (p. 21).

  Met. Arrangements in place (p. 25).

  Annual national customer surveys to continue, supplemented by local customer surveys (p. 21).

  Met. 1991 annual survey has been published. Local customer satisfaction surveys piloted this year and to continue (p. 25).

  All offices to have easy to use complaints arrangements. Names of local manager, area manager to be displayed (p. 21).

  Met. New complaints/suggestions procedure published in leaflet "Help us to get it Right … And How to Complain" (p. 25). Names of the area manager and local contacts for complaints displayed in each local office.

  SOCIAL SERVICES

  For individuals needing care, more reliable information to be available on services (p.21).

  Met. Since April 1992 local authorities required to publish annual community care plans.

  Individual care plans to be provided. (p.21).

  In hand. From April 1993 people requiring community care services to be able to ask local authority for assessment of their needs; their views and preferences and those of their carers to be taken into account in all decisions about their care.

  Inspection to be independent of services (p21).

  Met. Inspection units, set up by local authorities in April 1991 at arms' length from directly managed services.

  Complaints procedures to be improved and made more independent (p.21).

  Met Statutory complaints procedures introduced during 1991 now fully operational.

  For people in residential care clear standards of service and quality to be identified and promulgated (p.21).

  Met. Guidance on standards settings published by HMSO in four volumes in a "Caring for Quality" series. Work on the fifth and final volume has started.

  SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS

  Benefits Agency

  Customer Charter to be published (p.22).

  Met. Published January 1992 (p.27).

  National targets to be set and published for main services (p.22).

  Met. In Customer Charter (p.27).

  Equivalent targets for districts to be published and displayed. (p.22).

  In hand. By the end of 1992 all 159 districts will display local targets and standards (p.27).

  Annual report to be published.

  Met. Annual Report available for consultation in every local office (p.27).

  198

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  Information on local office performance to be displayed prominently in every office. (p.22)

  In hand. Targets and standards displayed in all Benefits Agency districts by end 1992 (p.27).

  Clear procedures for customer enquiries and difficulties (p.22).

  Met. Procedures set out in Customer Charter (p.27).

  Customer service managers in each office (p.22).

  Met. Customer service managers appointed (p.27).

  Programme to improve service by telephone (p.22).

  In hand: a number of separate initiatives under way.

  Customers normally to be dealt with by named staff (p.22).

  In hand. Staff will normally wear name badges by Spring 1993 (p.38). Customer care training introduced for all staff who deal with customers.

  Single point of contact where this is in customers interest (p.22).

  In hand. "One Stop" consultation paper invited views on the best means of delivering services, and these are being considered, together with financial implications of the options (p.28).

  Improved office environment (p. 22).

  In hand. Over half of local office public areas have been refurbished. Agency's business plan, published April 1993, will set out plans for 1993–94. (p. 27).

  Results of customer survey to be published (p. 23).

  Met. Published June 1992 (p. 27).

  Option of automated payment to a bank or building society account to be extended (p. 23).

  In hand. Availability of automated payment extended to Income Support, Invalidity Benefit and Sickness Benefit by October 1993; Unemployment benefit and Income Support for the unemployed) by December 1994 (p. 28).

  More flexible opening hours, where necessary to meet the needs of the local community. (p. 22).

  In hand. Benefits Agency offices consulting customers about the most convenient opening hours (p. 26).

  Contributions Agency

  Contributor's Charter and Employer's Charter to be published (p. 23).

  Met. Published August 1991 (p. 28).

  To publish an independent survey of services (p. 23).

  Met. Published October 1991 (p. 28).

  INLAND REVENUE AND CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

  New Taxpayer's Charter to be published (p. 24).

  Met. Joint Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise Taxpayers Charter published summer 1991 (p. 32).

  Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise to re-design some forms and literature (p. 24).

  In hand. 800 Inland Revenue forms to be redesigned. 25 most frequently used forms already being revised (p. 32).

  199

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  New Inland Revenue leaflets to be published for particular groups of people (p. 24).

  In hand. Leaflets produced, eg. on income tax for school leavers; married couples; and the tax aspects of child care (p. 32).

  Inland Revenue to issue new leaflets to invite comments and explain how to complain to customer service managers if dissatisfied (p. 24).

  Met. "You and the Inland Revenue" issued August 1991. Named customer service managers appointed in all Executive Offices (p. 32).

  Inland Revenue to set standards for replying to taxpayers letters (p. 24).

  Met. Targets for substantive replies and acknowledgements set. Performance to be published (p. 32).

  Selected Tax Enquiry Centres to experiment more with flexible opening hours to test public demand (p. 24).

  In hand. 17 Tax Enquiry Centres experimenting with flexible opening hours since April 1992 (p. 26).

  Inland Revenue to seek people's views about services (p. 24).

  Met. A major survey of taxpayers has been carried out. Further surveys planned (p. 32).

  Customs and Excise to publish Charters for VAT, Excise duty payers and travellers; (p. 24).

  Met. Published 1992 (p. 35).

  Customs and Excise to expand and report on achievements and use of quality of service indicators (p. 24).

  In hand. Indicators now included in plans. Reports to follow after the end of the financial year.

  Customs and Excise to review complaints system and publish improved procedures (p. 24).

  Met. Review complete; new leaflet issued. Network of complaintsco-ordinators established (p. 35).

  THE POLICE

  Police services to publish targets and indicators of performance (p. 24).

  In hand. From January 1993 there will be a core set of performance indicators for all police services in England and Wales (p. 37).

  Police officers to be readily identifiable by name (p. 24).

  In hand. Some police services wearing name badges (p. 37).

  Police services to set and publish target times for answering telephone calls, and responding to incidents requiring rapid reaction (p. 25).

  In hand. A number of police services have now done so (p. 37).

  Information to be published on results of police action, as well as response times (p. 25).

  In hand. First results to be published in 1994 (p. 37).

  From 1991, systematic information on quality of performance to be gathered (p. 25).

  In hand. From Spring 1993 all police services will be required to collect this information (p. 53).

  Police effectiveness to be tested in inspections (p. 25).

  In hand. From Spring 1993 to be tested by Inspectorate annually. All HMIC reports now include a chapter in quality of service (p. 53).

  200

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  THE COURTS

  Court Services

  Receptiveness to the needs of victims, witnesses and jurors to be increased (p. 26).

  Met. Courts Charter (England and Wales) published (p. 40).

  Management of the courts to be placed under closer scrutiny (p. 26).

  Met. Courts Charter (England and Wales) published (p. 40).

  Lord Chancellor to publish performance standards and indicators in his annual report on the Courts services (p. 26).

  In hand. Standards to come into effect January 1993.

  Information on performance at court level to be made available to the public locally through the Court user committees (p. 26).

  In hand. The Court Service will ensure that performance details will be available to court user committees.

  More effort to be made to obtain the views of those who use the courts (p. 26).

  In hand. A number of surveys have been carried out already; others will take place

  Further improvements in reducing delays in bringing cases to court (p. 26).

  In hand. National targets published (p. 39).

  Jurors

  Friendlier and clearer summons letter and leaflet (p. 26).

  In hand. New versions to be issued early 1993 (p. 40).

  Better training of those receiving jurors and explaining procedures to them (p. 26).

  Going ahead. New improved training for Crown Court staff (p. 40).

  Better explanations to be given to jurors (p. 26).

  Met. Video available in over 80 Crown Court locations (p. 40).

  Problems for those seriously inconvenienced by jury service to be reviewed (p. 27)

  Met. System reviewed, revised jury summons available early in 1993.

  Study to be commissioned to investigate why defendants change to guilty at last moment (p. 27)

  In hand. Research to be completed in the Summer of 1993. (p. 39).

  To bring forward measures to allow juries to go home at the end of the working day (p. 27).

  To come. Legislative opportunity awaited.

  Witnesses

  Order to attend court to be clearer, more informal (p. 27).

  To come. Legislative opportunity awaited.

  Leaflets to be sent to witnesses explaining what to expect when they arrive at court (p. 27).

  Met. Standards set out in the Courts Charter (p. 40).

  Information point to be established in each Crown Court centre (p. 27).

  In hand. Available in some locations.

  Witnesses in long running cases to be called only when needed.

  Met. Target that prosecution witnessess should not have to wait more than two hours before being called to give evidence (p. 40).

  Signs within court buildings to be revised with special attention to the needs of victims and witnesses.

  In hand. One of the tasks of the named court building manager.

  201

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  Chief clerks to respond sympathetically to seating requests from those closely linked to particular cases (p. 27).

  Met. Court officials instructed to try to find seating (p. 40).

  Victims called as witnesses to be allowed to familiarise theselves with the court room surroundings before they appear in court (p. 27).

  Met. Arrangements are now made (p. 39).

  Government will encourage similar improvements in the magistrates courts (p. 27).

  In hand. White Paper "A New Framework for Local Justice" outlined arrangements for setting up a Magistrates Court Inspectorate dedicated to raising standards (p. 53).

  Prisons

  Prison officers expected to be readily identifiable by name
  (p. 27).

  In hand. Name badges to be worn in England and Wales from April 1993 and in Scotland (p. 38 and 40).

  Prisoners to receive better information about decisions affecting them and preparations for their release (p. 27).

  Met. Prisoners now given information pack. Prisoners "compacts" are being piloted (p. 40 and 41).

  PRIVATISATION AND COMPETITION

  Transfers of work involving civil servants: anomalies relating to redundancy payments to be removed (p. 28).

  In hand. Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill now before Parliament (p. 58).

  British Rail

  Detailed plans for privatising BR to be published in 1992 (p.29)

  Met New opportunities for the Railways Cm 2012, published July 1992 (p. 57)

  Buses

  London bus industry to be deregulated (p, 29).

  To come. Legislation to be introduced as soon as possible (p. 57).

  London Buses to be privatised (p. 29)

  In hand. Privatisation proposals being taken forward (p. 57).

  The Post Office

  Post Office monopoly to be lowered from £1 to a level closer to the price of a first class stamp.

  In hand. Proposals being taken forward in Government's wider review of the structure and organisation of the Post Office (p. 24).

  New independent regulator to be established, (p. 31).

  In hand in wider review (p. 24).

  Improved scope for contractors to trunk mail to final delivery services (p. 30)

  In hand in wider review (p. 24).

  Performance standards to be set by the Secretary of State and not by the Post Office (p. 30).

  To come. Legislative opportunity awaited.

  Clearer and more local information to be provided on service targets and performance against them (p. 30).

  Met. Posters in more than 80 per cent. of Post Offices (100 per cent, by end 1992) (p. 24).

  POUNC to report on redress arrangements (p. 49).

  Met. POUNC report published early 1992 (p. 24).

  202

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  Better information to be provided about redress when service falls below standard (p. 30).

  Met. Detailed information being distributed to every household during 1992 (p. 24).

  Current compensation arrangements to be reviewed (p. 30).

  Met. Improvements now being implemented (p. 24).

  Roadworks

  Lane rental to be extended to cover half of all major contracts with eventual extension to about two thirds (p. 32).

  Met. In England two-thrids of all major maintenance contracts will be subject to lane rental by 1993–94 (p. 14).

  Maximum length of carriageways that can be coned off at any one time to be stipulated (p. 32).

  Met. Standard maximum is now two and a half miles (p. 14).

  Streetworks

  New controls under the new Roads and Streetworks Act 1991 (p. 32).

  In hand. New controls to take effect from 1 January 1993 (p. 14).

  COMPETING FOR QUALITY

  A White Paper to be published setting out how contracting out is to be taken forward in both central Government and the NHS (p. 33).

  Met. "Competing for Quality" Cm. 1730 published November 1991 (p. 58).

  Obstacles to successful contracing out to be removed (p. 33).

  In hand. Treasury guidance note reissued. March 1992. Further guidance being considered. Removal of other obstacles including those concerning aspects of VAT, treatment of redundancy payments etc in hand (p. 59).

  Step change required in volume of market testing (p. 33).

  In hand. New central government targets represent fifty fold increase on previous levels: cover 40,000 staff and £1 ·4 bn worth of work (p. 60—p. 64).

  In the NHS, procedures for contracting out to be simplified and streamlined (p. 33).

  In hand. Revised guidance, to be published in early 1993 (p. 65).

  Scope of market testing in the NHS to be extended (p. 33).

  In hand. In addition to catering domestic and laundry, 20 other services have been market tested. From April 1993 health provider units to report annually on plans and progress for new areas (p. 65).

  Compulsory competitive tendering (CCT) to be extended to professional local authority employees (p. 34).

  In hand. Targets set in Cm 2101 (p. 65).

  Private firms to have a fair chance to compete for local authority work (p. 34).

  In hand. New regulations and code of guidance to be brought into effect in early 1993 (p. 65).

  PERFORMANCE AND PAY

  Rewards for performance and penalties for failure to be part of the normal package of pay and conditions (p. 35).

  In hand. The principle of performance pay being progressively established, eg. new performance pay schemes for half a million civil servants (p. 67).

  203

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  Pay review bodies to be urged to take performance more into account in their recommendations (p. 35).

  In hand. Government has given evidence to this effect to the pay review bodies.

  Greater delegation and flexibility in the determination of pay (p. 35).

  In hand, eg. Inland Revenue to introduce new pay and grading arrangements for 68,000 staff from April 1993; government agencies to put forward proposals for their own pay and grading arrangements (p. 68).

  The School Teachers Pay and Conditions Act 1991 gave Grant Maintained schools freedom to opt out of statutory pay arrangements, and develop their own systems (p. 67).

  New bargaining machinery introduced in BR from August 1992 giving the five business unit managers greater influence over their employees pay and conditions (p.68.).

  Top management rewards for BR and London Underground to be more closely linked to the delivery of improved services to the travelling public (p.35).

  Met. Both BR and LUL managers now have a proportion of their pay linked to performance (p.67).

  NEXT STEPS

  All executive activities of Government, as far as practicable, to be operating along Next Steps lines by the end of 1993 (p.36).

  In hand. More than half of all civil servants now work in organisations run on Next Steps lines. Ultimately around ¾ could do so. All further candidates for agency status to be announced by the end of 1993 and launched as agencies by the middle of 1995 (p.60).

  Legislation will be introduced to remove technical impediments to delegation of decisions about how the Civil Service is managed (p.36).

  In hand. Civil Service (Management Functions) Bill now before Parliament (p.66).

  AUDIT

  Local authorities to publish their response to auditors reports (p.33).

  Met. Local Government Act 1992 requires local authorities to respond within four months to auditors reports (p.55).

  Audit Commission to publish league tables of local authority performance (p.38).

  Met. Audit Commission has consulted on local authority performance indicator and will issue a Direction very shortly (p.55).

  League tables to be published for health services' performance (p. 39).

  In hand. Performance indicators being developed jointly by the NHS Management Executive and Audit Commission. League tables to be published in early 1995 (p. 7).

  204

  Cm. 1599 Commitment

  Present position

  INSPECTION

  Legislation to be introduced to permit Audit Commission to identify individual authorities in performance league tables (p. 39).

  Met. Introduced in the Local Government Act 1992 (p. 55).

  Major reform of Schools Inspectorate (p. 35).

  Met. OFSTED set up in England and OHMCI in Wales (p. 10).

  New independent element to be introduced into the Inspectorate of Constabulary (p. 33).

  In hand. Two lay inspectors to be appointed next year (p. 53).

  Consultative proposals to be published on Social Services Inspectorate (p. 38).

  In hand. Consultative proposals for the reform of Social Services inspection published (p. 50).

  Generally, Inspectorates to be opened up and a greater lay element introduced.

  In hand. Progress set out in Cm 2101 pages 51–53.

  COMPLAINTS AND REGULATION

  Complaints systems to be improved. Consultation to take place on a 'lay adjudicator' scheme (p. 43).

  In hand. Complaints team to be set up to look at whether public services are in line with charter principles and identify necessary improvements (p. 49).

  Legislation to be introduced to strengthen powers of regulators (p. 48).

  Met. Competition and Services (Utilities) Act 1992 has brought the powers of all the utility regulators up to the level of the strongest (p. 55).

  IMMUNITIES

  Government activities not to be immune from inspection and enforcement on, eg. health or safety regulations; existing limitation to be reviewed (p. 46).

  In hand. Crown bodies being brought within regulatory provisions which apply to others as legislative opportunities arise; meanwhile required to behave as if bound (p. 58).

  Citizens to be given the right to bring legal proceedings to stop unlawful industrial action affecting the services covered by the Citizen's Charter (p. 46).

  In hand. Legislation introduced in Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill now before Parliament (p. 58).

  Research and Development
  Mr. Mans
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement about international comparisons of research and development spending.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  The Office of Science and Technology is today publishing a report on international comparisons of research and development spending. Copies are being placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  London Prisons
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what has been the number of reported incidents at each of the London prisons as from 1 January to 1 December.
  205
  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  There has been a total of 1,471 reported incidents in Prison Service establishments in London from 1 January 1992 to 1 December 1992 inclusive. The table shows a breakdown of these incidents:—

  Establishment

  Major

  Minor

  Total

  Belmarsh

  56

  178

  234

  Brixton

  22

  142

  164

  Feltham

  29

  210

  239

  Holloway

  32

  150

  182

  Pentonville

  31

  121

  152

  Wandsworth

  24

  249

  273

  Wormwood Scrubs

  18

  209

  227

  Total

  212

  1,259

  1,471

  Major and minor incidents are defined in CI 18/1988, a copy of which is in the Library of the House.

  Crime Statistics, Warwickshire
  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which areas of North Warwickshire are most affected by burglary and incidents of violence and car theft.

  Mr. Jack
  The information is not collected centrally. Information for areas within Warwickshire is published in the annual report of the Chief Constable for Warwickshire; a copy of which is available in the Library.

  Bogus Callers
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures are being taken to alert the elderly to the dangers of allowing into their homes thieves posing as officials or trades people.

  Mr. Jack
  Individual police forces continue to develop crime prevention initiatives to reflect the needs of their areas, including measures to combat the risks posed by bogus callers. Several forces are known to have launched recent initiatives in this area working with local utility companies or crime prevention panels. For example, in November 1990 the Metropolitan police set up a dedicated unit operating in selected areas under the title of Operation Worker specifically to detect bogus callers. So far, more than 3,000 of these crimes have been cleared up throughout the areas covered by the project, representing a 58 per cent. clear-up rate for these offences.

  The Home Office publication "Practical Ways to Crack Crime" and the poster and leaflet "Be Safe Be Sure" contain advice on dealing with callers at the door and have been widely distributed. Supplies are available free of charge to members of the public or, in support of local campaigns, to police forces and other agencies. The Association of British Insurers has also produced a helpful leaflet "The Knock Code" giving similar advice which has been distributed through the insurance industry and citizens advice bureaux. More than 2 million copies of the leaflet have been distributed so far.

  Organisations such as Help the Aged and Age Concern through their local offices and often working in conjunction with the police and other organisations such as victim support groups, also provide practical help and advice. For example, Help the Aged ran a campaign in 1990 called "Who's There?" specifically to address the
  206
  problem of bogus callers. It produced publicity material including videos for use by its local offices, which in turn arranged seminars and publicity campaigns. This material is still being used. Age Concern, through its nationwide network of 1,000 groups, has provided "security cards" with advice and local contact points, for distribution to the vulnerable.

  Bullwood Hall
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what response he is making to the report by Judge Stephen Tumin on Bullwood Hall.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  I made a statement on Judge Tumin's report on 1 December when the report was published. I shall send the hon. Member a copy.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints he has received on conditions at Bullwood Hall during the last 12 months.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Four complaints about conditions at Bullwood Hall have been received by the area manager during the last 12 months.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has for improving the conditions of prisoners serving life sentences at Bullwood Hall; and for how many hours each day they are currently locked in their cells.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The governor and her staff are constantly striving to improve life for all prisoners in Bullwood Hall as resources allow. New staff attendance systems will be in place by January to meet the recommendation of the chief inspector of prisons that prisoners should spend at least 12 hours each day out of their cells.

  Prisoners are currently locked up for either 14 and a half hours per day with evening association or 16 and a half hours without. Evening association is currently provided on an average of four nights each week.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will arrange for children's visits to Bullwood Hall to be allowed at weekends.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Every Monday afternoon Bullwood Hall provides visits solely for children and their carers. Children may also visit Bullwood Hall on any domestic visit on every Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday and Sunday afternoon. The governor hopes that she will be able to provide special children's visits at the weekend in the future.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to increase the recreational, educational and language learning facilities for female prisoners at Bullwood Hall.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The gymnasium has recently been refurbished. There are plans to repair and enclose the swimming pool which will enable it to be used all year round. Money has been allocated to complete the conversion of workshops to an education and activity centre. Facilities for learning languages are already available to prisoners on an open learning basis as required.
  207
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will provide facilities for prisoners at Bullwood Hall to telephone their lawyers.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  All prisoners in Bullwood Hall can use the card telephone system to contact their lawyers if they wish. In addition, urgent telephone calls at public expense will be allowed if necessary.

  Assaults on Women
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many violent assaults, including rapes, were committed against women in each police area in each calendar year since 1981 inclusive and in the 12 months ended June 1992.

  Mr. Jack
  The available information by police force area is in terms of notifiable offences recorded by the police, with the most appropriate offence categories available being rape—offence category 19—and indecent assault on a female—offence category 20. Other types of assault do not distinguish between male and female victim. These figures are published annually in table 3.1 of "Criminal Statistics, Supplementary Volume 3", copies of which are in the Library. Statistics for the 12 months ended June 1992 are given in the table:

  Notifiable offences recorded by the police Year ending June 1992

  Police force

  Rape

  Indecent assault on a female

  Total

  Avon and Somerset

  94

  352

  446

  Bedfordshire

  52

  154

  206

  Cambridgeshire

  66

  243

  309

  Cheshire

  41

  234

  275

  Cleveland

  57

  174

  231

  Cumbria

  20

  119

  139

  Derbyshire

  43

  239

  282

  Devon and Cornwall

  59

  394

  453

  Dorset

  43

  199

  242

  Durham

  51

  228

  279

  Essex

  77

  329

  406

  Gloucestershire

  37

  199

  236

  Greater Manchester

  225

  825

  1,050

  Hampshire

  133

  626

  759

  Hertfordshire

  46

  187

  233

  Humberside

  75

  497

  572

  Kent

  147

  543

  690

  Lancashire

  48

  291

  339

  Leicestershire

  38

  220

  258

  Lincolnshire

  36

  142

  178

  City of London

  0

  20

  20

  Merseyside

  88

  402

  490

  Metropolitan Police District

  1,143

  3,128

  4,271

  Norfolk

  59

  207

  266

  Northamptonshire

  35

  144

  179

  Northumbria

  102

  426

  528

  North Yorkshire

  15

  107

  122

  Nottinghamshire

  110

  630

  740

  South Yorkshire

  70

  363

  433

  Staffordshire

  55

  273

  328

  Suffolk

  69

  185

  254

  Surrey

  38

  271

  309

  Sussex

  73

  414

  487

  Thames Valley

  111

  543

  654

  Warwickshire

  19

  104

  123

  West Mercia

  53

  220

  273

  West Midlands

  195

  888

  1,083

  West Yorkshire

  195

  812

  1,007

  Wiltshire

  63

  201

  264

  Dyfed-Powys

  46

  173

  219

  Gwent

  44

  155

  199

  208

  Police force

  Rape

  Indecent assault on a female

  Total

  North Wales

  51

  181

  232

  South Wales

  88

  282

  370

  TOTAL

  4,110

  16,324

  20,434

  Car Crime
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement concerning his policies to combat car crime.

  Mr. Jack
  Our strategy to tackle crime consists of two main strands—promoting and encouraging practical ways to reduce this type of crime; and ensuring that car criminals are dealt with effectively under the criminal law.

  It is important that we should do what we can to tackle car crime by adopting measures that reduce the opportunities for them occurring in the first place.

  We have, therefore, been actively encouraging the motor manufacturers to improve the security of their vehicles. Many of the manufacturers are now responding positively, and more new cars are being fitted with advanced security equipment.

  It is equally important to tackle the second-hand car market and to upgrade the security of vehicles already on the road. Central to this is making the public more aware of the cost of car crime and providing them with the information they need to make their cars more secure and to reduce the risk of crime happening to them. This has been a major feature of our Car Crime Prevention Year campaign, which has been running throughout most of this year. A review of this has shown a greater awareness during the year, allied with increased sales of security equipment.

  We are also pressing the insurance industry to provide incentives for both manufacturers and the public to adopt appropriate security measures. Some insurers have now begun to take greater account of the risk of car crime and the presence of security features when setting premiums. This development is welcomed.

  The police, too, have developed many impressive car crime prevention initiatives during the year, including the "Sold Secure" initiative in Essex and the national "Secured Car Parks" scheme. The Government will, of course, continue to support and encourage the police in these efforts.

  Progress to date is encouraging. The recorded crime statistics for the most recent quarter—April to June 1992 —show a reduction in car crime of 2.5 per cent. on the corresponding quarter of 1991. Of course, we cannot draw too many conclusions from a single quarter's figures; we hope, however, that this downward turn is the start of a welcome trend.

  To help maintain the momentum in continuing with this strategy, I recently formed a specialist committee comprising people who are actively involved in all areas of car security and car crime prevention to advise me on these matters. I envisaged this body playing an important part in enhancing and taking forward the initiatives that we have been developing.

  Our strategy for tackling car crime does, however, go much wider than improving vehicle security, essential

  209
  though this particular factor is. It is also most important to tackle offending behaviour itself. We are therefore giving every encouragement to local probation services, the police and voluntary groups to work effectively to counter motor offending.

  The Government have also announced their intention to tackle the problem of people who commit offences—often vehicle related—while on bail.

  We are also committed to giving the courts the support and powers that they need, such as in the Aggravated Vehicle-Taking Act which came into force on 1 April, which deals firmly with those who take cars and cause damage, injury or death. My right hon. and learned Friend also announced on 16 July our intention to increase the maximum penalty for causing death by dangerous driving to 10 years, when parliamentary time allows.

  Police Road Blocks
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will call for a report from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis listing(a) the location of each road block recently set up by the Metropolitan police in the Greater London area, (b) the total number of people who have to date been stopped, (c) of that number, the number of members of ethnic minority groups and (d) the numbers of people who have refused to stop;

  (2) what specific discussions his officials had with the Metropolitan police in advance of the setting up of road blocks in parts of London; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The decision of the Metropolitan police, acting within their legal powers, to set up road checks in London is an operational one and as such falls within the discretion of the Commissioner. Officials in my

  Number of untried or convicted unsentenced prisoners received initially into Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, Durham, Brixton and Lewes: June to August 1992 Number of persons received Remand establishment

  Date of reception

  Leeds

  Liverpool

  Birmingham

  Durham

  Brixton

  Lewes

  1 June to 6 June

  39

  48

  52

  23

  46

  27

  7 June to 13 June

  36

  50

  49

  12

  38

  33

  14 June to 20 June

  32

  51

  31

  3

  35

  33

  21 June to 27 June

  26

  49

  54

  10

  47

  28

  28 June to 4 July

  12

  71

  45

  31

  58

  29

  5 July to 11 July

  27

  56

  35

  23

  28

  32

  12 July to 18 July

  25

  55

  42

  7

  37

  25

  19 July to 25 July

  36

  40

  44

  26

  53

  21

  26 July to 1 August

  42

  79

  58

  11

  38

  18

  2 August to 8 August

  35

  60

  50

  9

  33

  17

  9 August to 15 August

  29

  34

  43

  23

  31

  15

  16 August to 22 August

  26

  48

  54

  19

  30

  28

  23 August to 29 August

  43

  35

  58

  11

  33

  12

  30 August to 31 August

  7

  12

  6

  —

  4

  1

  Total receptions for period

  415

  688

  621

  208

  511

  319

  Number of prisoners received under sentence initially into Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, Durham, Brixton and Lewes June to August 1992

  Sentence establishment

  Leeds

  Liverpool

  Birmingham

  Durham

  Brixton

  Lewes

  Period date received sentence

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  1 June to 6 June

  15

  33

  30

  45

  33

  49

  8

  36

  —

  79

  9

  22

  7 June to 13 June

  17

  43

  32

  48

  30

  51

  3

  41

  —

  90

  8

  16

  14 June to 20 June

  21

  48

  41

  51

  35

  60

  —

  29

  —

  90

  7

  20

  210
  right hon. and learned Friends Department were not consulted in advance of the recent operations and there is no reason for him to call for a report from the Commissioner in relation to the matters listed in the question.

  Winson Green Prison
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will conduct an inquiry into the circumstances that led to a man's death from dehydration in HMP Winson Green in July 1992; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  No prisoner died from dehydration at HMP Winson Green in July 1992.

  The hon. Member may be referring to the death of John Joseph Ryan in July 1987 at Birmingham prison. The coroner found the causes of death to be electrolyte imbalance due to water depletion and to bronchopneumonia. The jury returned a verdict of lack of care, and Mr. Ryan's family is currently pursuing a civil action against the Home Office. It would therefore be inappropriate for me to comment further.

  Prisoners
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many(a) sentenced prisoners, (b) remand prisoners and (c) fine defaulters were received into Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, Durham, Brixton and Lewes prisons, respectively, each week from the beginning of September to date.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The latest readily available information is given in the table.
  211

  Sentence establishment

  Leeds

  Liverpool

  Birmingham

  Durham

  Brixton

  Lewes

  Period date received sentence

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  Fine defaulter

  Others

  21 June to 27 June

  36

  51

  33

  57

  30

  50

  1

  32

  —

  60

  11

  19

  28 June to 4 July

  10

  32

  17

  46

  28

  51

  5

  32

  1

  95

  5

  16

  5 July to 11 July

  10

  57

  40

  57

  27

  50

  2

  29

  —

  88

  9

  24

  12 July to 18 July

  13

  39

  38

  51

  30

  47

  1

  47

  —

  92

  4

  20

  19 July to 25 July

  17

  45

  33

  39

  38

  52

  3

  45

  —

  81

  6

  12

  26 July to 1 August

  36

  32

  34

  65

  25

  42

  1

  40

  —

  92

  1

  21

  2 August to 8 August

  29

  22

  38

  103

  33

  46

  2

  22

  —

  95

  4

  9

  9 August to 15 August

  28

  19

  34

  58

  30

  52

  2

  31

  —

  73

  4

  15

  16 August to 22 August

  26

  26

  28

  46

  28

  72

  1

  38

  —

  63

  1

  12

  23 August to 29 August

  28

  39

  36

  43

  28

  54

  —

  33

  —

  80

  4

  5

  30 August to 31 August

  —

  —

  —

  —

  2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Total receptions for period

  286

  486

  434

  709

  397

  676

  29

  455

  1

  1,078

  73

  211

  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was(a) the total prison population, (b) the sentenced prison population, (c) the remand prison population and (d) the number of imprisoned fine defaulters on each Friday from the beginning of the September to date.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The available information is given in the table which relates to Prison Service establishments in England and Wales and does not include prisoners in police cells. The data on the unsentenced population include inmates remanded in custody by magistrates courts, committed for trial in the Crown court and also those who have been convicted but not yet sentenced. Information on fine defaulters is currently only available for 30 September when the total was 256.

  Date

  Sentenced population

  Unsentenced population

  Total population

  4 September 1992

  37,838

  7,698

  45,536

  11 September 1992

  37,741

  7,771

  45,512

  18 September 1992

  37,906

  7,612

  45,518

  25 September 1992

  37,669

  7,642

  45,311

  2 October 1992

  37,075

  7,790

  44,865

  9 October 1992

  37,082

  7,505

  44,587

  16 October 1992

  36,800

  7,451

  44,251

  23 October 1992

  36,711

  7,434

  44,145

  30 October 1992

  36,450

  7,335

  43,785

  6 November 1992

  36,353

  7,204

  43,557

  13 November 1992

  36,125

  7,143

  43,268

  20 November 1992

  35,934

  7,157

  43,091

  27 November 1992

  35,893

  7,106

  42,999

  4 December 1992

  35,745

  7,023

  42,768

  11 December 1992

  35,436

  6,952

  42,388

  Racial incidents in the Metropolitan Police Areas for the twelve months ending June 1992

  Month

  Area 1

  Area 2

  Area 3

  Area 4

  Area 5

  Area 6

  Area 7

  Area 8

  Total

  1991

  July

  39

  106

  66

  23

  34

  29

  57

  8

  362

  August

  29

  84

  73

  28

  31

  21

  66

  3

  335

  September

  30

  80

  51

  18

  33

  17

  66

  8

  303

  October

  34

  90

  49

  25

  17

  20

  56

  9

  300

  November

  27

  59

  35

  22

  13

  17

  54

  4

  231

  December

  18

  45

  30

  23

  20

  15

  31

  1

  183

  1992

  January

  35

  71

  40

  28

  18

  11

  49

  7

  259

  February

  20

  78

  68

  22

  38

  17

  37

  7

  287

  Police Supernumerary Posts
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will allow police authorities to hold supernumerary posts to deal with problems of crime in city centres and town centres, on housing estates and in the community generally.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  No. Supernumerary police posts are considered only where there is a special commitment which is temporary. Supernumerary posts would not be considered for normal aspects of policing a force area.

  Highpoint Prison
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the incident at HMP Highpoint on 24 November; and what plans he has to review security procedures in the light of the incident.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  An inquiry is currently being conducted into the disturbances at Highpoint prison. The inquiry will review security procedures and systems.

  Racial Incidents
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many recorded racial incidents occurred in each London borough in each of the last 12 months.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Information in the form requested is not available. The information supplied is for racial incidents recorded by the police by Metropolitan police area. The following table gives details of reported racial incidents for the 12 months to June 1992, the last month for which figures are presently available.
  213

  Month

  Area 1

  Area 2

  Area 3

  Area 4

  Area 5

  Area 6

  Area 7

  Area 8

  Total

  March

  32

  93

  89

  28

  31

  13

  43

  2

  331

  April

  24

  99

  76

  35

  25

  20

  43

  6

  328

  May

  22

  98

  81

  45

  28

  18

  45

  5

  342

  June

  43

  94

  72

  47

  33

  13

  52

  10

  364

  Prison Visitors
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he will take to encourage persons from ethnic minorities to join the membership of prison boards of visitors.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  In making appointments to a board of visitors, consideration is given to the abilities of the individual candidate to discharge the duties effectively and the desirability of maintaining, so far as possible, a representative balance on the board in terms, for example, of age, sex, and social and ethnic background. No fewer than two members of the board are required to be justices of the peace. The membership of individual boards is reviewed every three years.

  Advice on the selection and appointment of new members forms part of the training of chairmen of boards and is also included in the "Notes for the guidance of Chairmen" in the "Handbook for Members of Boards of Visitors", a copy of which is in the Library.

  Chairmen are encouraged to seek members from the ethnic minorities wherever possible and to advertise as necessary.

  The current ethnic make up of boards is as follows:

  Ethnic origin

  Percentage of members in post on 14 December 1992

  Asian

  2.52

  Black

  3.69

  White

  64.35

  Other

  0.18

  Not known

  29.26

  Prison Education
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will continue to employ prison education officers at every prison.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Under present arrangements, each prison establishment has an education officer, usually employed by the local education authority. Following the current competitive tendering exercise, each prison establishment, from 1 April 1993, will have an education co-ordinator employed by the successful contractor. The education co-ordinator will be an on-site manager accountable to the governor for ensuring that the educational services required of the contractor are discharged effectively and efficiently.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to improve the morale of prison education personnel in Wakefield prison following the report of Her Majesty's chief inspector of prisons for 1991–92.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The report of Her Majesty's chief inspector of prisons, published in July 1992, related to an 214
  inspection of Her Majesty's prison Wakefield undertaken in October 1991. The education programme was then described as lacking in imagination and breadth with an absence of a team approach, a lack of openness, poor communications and unfilled potential.

  Since then, there have been changes in staff. It is also hoped, in due course, to provide improved accommodation for classes.

  One of the purposes of the current competitive tendering exercise is, of course, to stimulate new and better ways of carrying out tasks. More detailed specification by the Prison Service of its requirements, establishment by establishment, and more rigorous monitoring should improve standards of education provision and the morale of the staff delivering it.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many persons were employed in prison education within(a) individual prisons and (b) all prison establishments for each year since 1979.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  This information is not held centrally. The Prison Service currently obtains most education services for prisoners through local education authorities. It is generally the local education authorities which employ the full and part-time salaried staff and sessionally paid teachers required. The Prison Service reimburses local education authorities for the expenditure incurred and pays a small additional charge for administrative costs.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how the prison education service will be publicly accountable in terms of services provided and overall budget, following compulsory competitive tendering;

  (2) if teachers working in prisons will continue to be paid at the same level and conditions as non-prison teaching staff;

  (3) which national agency will have responsibility for managing personnel in the prison education services following the introduction of compulsory competitive tendering;

  (4) how administrative fees for the prison education service will alter following compulsory competitive tendering.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  In the current competitive tendering exercise, the Prison Service has specified what educational services it requires to be provided and the contracts will provide for payment for all the services which the contractor undertakes to supply. The pay and conditions of service of the staff to provide those services and responsibility for their management and career development is a matter for their employer. The Prison Service will wish to assure itself of the adequacy of the arrangements the employer has made and also to monitor the quality for delivery of the service for which it has contracted.

  This requirement that the Prison Service should specify, establishment by establishment, the services it requires and that the provider should be contractually liable if he fails to deliver is directed to improving effectiveness, public accountability, and value for money.
  215
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how recommendations in the report of Her Majesty's inspector of prisons for 1991–92 will be implemented for education following the introduction of compulsory competitive tendering within the prison education system.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The arrangements for responding to recommendations from Her Majesty's chief inspector of prisons will not change. The chief inspector makes an annual report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, as required by section 5A(5) of the Prison Act 1952. He also publishes reports of inspections of individual prisons, in which recommendations may be directed to the Secretary of State, the Director-General of the Prison Service, the responsible area manager or to the governor. These recommendations will continue to be considered and, where appropriate, implemented in respect of educational services bought in from contractors on and after 1 April 1993, as they are now in respect of services bought in from local education authorities.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the budget for prison education for each financial year since 1979.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Total expenditure on education services in prisons in England and Wales since 1979 was as follows:

  £ million

  1979–80

  6.5

  1980–81

  8.6

  1981–82

  8.6

  1982–83

  9.9

  1983–84

  11.0

  1984–85

  11.9

  1985–86

  12.3

  1986–87

  14.8

  1987–88

  16.9

  1988–89

  19.5

  1989–90

  22.9

  1990–91

  25.5

  1991–92

  29.5

  Prison Complaints Procedure
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to speed up the request and complaints procedure between prisoners and the prison service headquarters.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Seventy-one per cent. of Prison Service headquarters replies are already within the time target set. Prison Service management will be considering what can be done to improve on that proportion.

  Prisons (Suicide Prevention)
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to encourage greater staff training and awareness in suicide prevention in the prison service.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  A training package in suicide awareness forms part of the induction training for all new prison officers, and is also available to all prison establishments for local delivery. It is for individual governors to determine what priority such training should have, taking into account other staff training needs at different times.
  216
  Staff awareness is maintained by the suicide prevention management group within the establishment and by line managers. Prison Service headquarters provides active encouragement through the work of the national suicide awareness support unit. The unit issues regular newsletters as a way of sharing good practice within the Prison Service. It published an information paper in August 1992 which gives more details of national and local initiatives in this important area—my answer of 27 October, at column 580, refers.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many prisons suicide prevention management groups are established; and how he will encourage the involvement of the Samaritans.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Suicide prevention management groups are established in all prisons in England and Wales.

  The Samaritans are already extensively involved in prisons. Local branches are represented on almost all suicide prevention management groups. The nature of their involvement varies according to local needs, but many include regular surgeries for prisoners; confidential befriending of suicide prisoners by visit, phone and letter; and training and support of prison staff and prisoner befrienders. This work is co-ordinated by the national prison liaison and development officer for the Samaritans. The Prison Service is funding this post for a two-year period. In conjunction with the Samaritans, the Prison Service also issued, in January 1992 guidelines to prisons on the role of the Samaritans and how it can be developed.

  Prison Roofs
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what were the maintenance costs for(a) flat roofs and (b) pitched roofs in prison establishments for the last five years.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  It is not possible to provide the information requested, as maintenance costs are not recorded in such detail as to allow work to various types of roofs to be readily identified.

  Prisons (Fire)
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many outbreaks of fire have occurred within prison establishments in the last five years.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The available information on the number of fires occurring in prison establishments in England and Wales is as follows:

  Number

  1988

  435

  1989

  313

  1990

  421

  1991

  555

  11992

  642

  1 To 13 December 1992.

  Prison Inspections
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he has taken to speed up the publication of inspection reports for Her Majesty's prisons; and if he will make a statement.
  217
  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The Director-General of the Prison Service has been giving priority to securing speedier publication of the chief inspector's reports on individual prison establishments. Forty of these reports have been published to date this year, including some that had been delayed by staffing and operational difficulties last year. The time taken to clear for publication reports submitted by the chief inspector on his 1992 inspections has as a general rule now come down to under four months in the case of full inspections and under three months in the case of short inspections. The inspectorate's own preparations for publication normally take an additional month.

  Action to implement the chief inspector's recommendations starts as soon as we know what his findings are and is not delayed until the publication date.

  Prison Accommodation
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will review the certified normal accommodation system for prison capacity; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The Prison Service has no plans to review the system for certifying normal accommodation. Section 14 of the Prisons Act 1952 provides that cells may only be used where they are certified by an inspector. This function is carried out by Prison Service area managers.

  The certification process enables the Prison Service to establish the total capacity of the estate. For 1993–94 the Prison Service will be providing additional help to area managers in taking stock of the accommodation available in each establishment.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he will take to improve prison reception areas.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The standard design specifications for new prisons require a self-contained unit for the reception and discharge of prisoners in humane conditions, and in a logically ordered and efficient manner. Where practical, these specifications are also used for designing improvements to existing prisons.

  Between 1991–92 and 1993–94 improved reception and discharge facilities have been opened or are being provided at 17 prisons.

  In addition, an admissions guide on good practice in the management of arrangements for the reception and induction of prisoners has recently been issued to all Prison Service establishments. This is intended to enable staff to identify how best to provide prisoners with the support and information they need. A copy has been placed in the Library of the House.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will ensure that self-catering facilities are available to all long-term prisoners; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Facilities to enable long-term prisoners to cook their own food and prepare additional meals in the evenings are provided in a number of establishments, particularly dispersal prisons. The provision of similar facilities will be considered elsewhere when resources allow.

  Police Cells
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he will take to ensure regular HMI inspection of police cells.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Her Majesty's inspectors of constabulary already visit police stations, including the custody areas, during their regular inspection programme and will comment on any deficiencies.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many occasions of suicide and attempted suicide took place in police cells during 1991–92.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  There were 10 cases of deaths in police custody areas in England and Wales during 1991 in which an inquest verdict of suicide was returned. A further two cases have been reported in 1992, to date. Figures for attempted suicide are not recorded centrally.

  Prisons (Disabled Access)
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action has been taken to improve access for disabled persons within prison establishments.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The current design specifications for the construction of new prisons reflect the needs of disabled prisoners, staff and visitors. Wherever practical, these are used as the basis for modernisation work in existing buildings. The specifications require that circulation routes should be suitable for wheelchairs and provide for access ramps and for lifts in certain buildings together with lavatories for use by the disabled.

  Between 1990–91 and 1993–94, a total of 18 schemes within the programme for modernising existing prisons have or will result in improvement specifically for the benefit of disabled people. In addition, other improvements have been made by local management, of which there is no central record.

  Schengen Agreement
  Mr. Bell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the effect on the United Kingdom of the Schengen agreement coming into force on 1 January 1993.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  It is now clear that the Schengen convention will not come into effect on 1 January 1993.

  Life Prisoners
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will make a statement about the changes in the procedures for reviewing the cases of persons sentenced to life imprisonment.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I intend to bring the procedures applying to prisoners subject to a mandatory life sentence more closely into line with those which, since 1 October 1992, have applied to prisoners who are either "discretionary life sentence prisoners" as defined in section 34 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 or prisoners who have been certified under paragraph 9 of schedule 12 to that Act as prisoners to whom section 34 would have been applied if it had been in force at the time that they were sentenced. These new arrangements will also apply to any prisoners
  219
  sentenced to life imprisonment for an offence for which life imprisonment is the maximum penalty who are not "discretionary life sentence prisoners" and to any who have not been certified under paragraph 9 of schedule 12.

  The effect of these changes will be that in respect of all Parole Board reviews of the cases of mandatory lifers that commence in their local establishment after or on 1 April 1993, subject only to exceptions that may be necessary to safeguard the interests of third parties or the welfare of prisoners, or where disclosure would otherwise be against the public interest, all the papers that are before the board will be made available to those prisoners, in advance of the board's consideration. They will also be provided with the reasons for Parole Board recommendations and ministerial decisions regarding release. An implementation date of 1 April 1993 has been chosen in order to give Prison Service staff sufficient time to arrange for the necessary preparation and disclosure of the relevant papers to prisoners and for the Parole Board to provide the necessary training for its members.

  Lebanese Nationals
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is his policy towards Lebanese nationals applying for asylum: and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  All applications for asylum are carefully considered on an individual basis in full conformity with the provisions of the 1951 United Nations convention and 1967 protocol relating to the status of refugees, and refugee status is granted where appropriate.

  In addition, for some years Lebanese nationals who have expressed a fear of return to Lebanon, but who could not demonstrate that they were refugees within the meaning of the 1951 convention, have generally been allowed to remain here, exceptionally, outside the immigration rules.

  The Lebanese civil war ended last year and the situation there has now improved significantly. Following consultation with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary has decided that in all the circumstances this concession is no longer justified. Asylum applications made by Lebanese nationals from today will be assessed on their individual merits in the same way as those from nationals of most other countries. The United Kingdom will, of course, continue to honour fully its obligations under the 1951 convention and 1967 protocol.

  Shops Act 1950
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects the European Court of Justice judgment relating to the Shops Act 1950 to be delivered; and if he will make a statement.

  The Attorney-General
  I have been asked to reply.

  The European Court of Justice has today held that the prohibition in article 30 of the EC treaty does not apply to national legislation prohibiting retailers from opening their premises on Sundays. The Court thus accepted the argument that the relevant local authorities and I advanced on behalf of the United Kingdom that the Shops
  220
  Act 1950 is compatible with article 30. The House of Lords and other courts that referred cases to the European Court will now apply its ruling.

  Parliament has given to local authorities the primary role in enforcing the law about Sunday trading in their areas. Cases in progress can proceed and local authorities can continue to issue summonses or seek injunctions.

  I have considered whether I should also take action to enforce the law, but I have decided that the public interest does not require intervention by me at present. I shall continue to keep the position under review.

  Questions of policy are for my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary. He announced the Government's proposals to the House on 26 November and said that the Government will be bringing forward a Bill to enable Parliament to consider the options as soon as is practicable.

  Crime Prevention
  Ms. Glenda Jackson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to introduce the crime prevention measures recommended by the committee chaired by James Morgan.

  Mr. Jack
  [pursuant to his reply, 18 June 1992, c. 645]: My right hon. and learned Friend and I have carefully considered the recommendations in the report and the views of those organisations that submitted comments on it. I welcome the report's endorsement of the partnership approach to crime prevention, which is now the cornerstone of the Government's policy. Also accepted are its general findings on the valuable contributions that each of the local partners can and do make to creating safer communities. However, I have concluded that the future development of effective crime prevention partnership groups and schemes does not depend on the report's recommendation that local authorities are given a statutory crime prevention role. In forming this view, I am mindful of not adding new burdens to local authorities and the fact that a great deal in this field can be done within the existing statutory framework. In this respect, the Government's view is that the lead on crime prevention should, for the most part, be determined by local circumstances. Nor am I persuaded that the appointment of local authority crime prevention co-ordinators requires central funding.

  I am grateful to the Morgan working group for the effort it invested in its task. Its report, and earlier Home Office guidance, has stimulated the growth of local crime prevention action groups across the country.

  I have placed in the Library of the House a copy of the Department's response to the recommendations in the report which are directed at the Home Office.

HEALTH

  Medical Care Abroad
  Dr. Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what action she has taken to ensure that medical care provided by Spanish hospitals under United Kingdom holiday insurance schemes is administered by suitably qualified personnel;
  221
  (2) what steps she has taken to ensure that medical treatment provided abroad by British holiday insurance companies for British holidaymakers is of a standard consistent with that provided within the British Isles;

  (3) what steps she is proposing to take to prevent British holidaymakers to Spain, who fall ill, from receiving unsolicited and unwarranted treatment in the course of private hospitalisation paid for by holiday insurance companies.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The standard of health care supplied abroad under commercial holiday insurance is a private matter between the insurer, the insured person and the service provider.

  NHS Trusts (Contracts)
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list each contract made with NHS trusts by(a) Her Majesty's Government and (b) regional health authorities for the most recent available year.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The National Health Service Management Executive contracts centrally with units providing designated supra-regional services. For information on individual contracts I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham) on 23 October at column 394.

  Detailed information is not available centrally on contracts placed by regional health authorities.

  Wellhouse Trust
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what allocations in the current financial year were made by the North West Thames health authority directly to reduce the projected deficit of the Wellhouse Trust; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Health authorities do not make allocations to trusts. North West Thames has however agreed to allocate £1.4 million to Barnet district health authority, the principal purchaser of services from the Wellhouse Trust. This is to enable it to increase the value of its contract for patient services during 1992–93.

  Orthopaedic Services
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will place in the Library the statistical information used in the preparation of the Tomlinson report relating to the percentage of patients waiting longer than one year for admission to hospital for elective orthopaedic surgery in(a) inner London, relative to England as a whole and (b) the four Thames regions, relative to the national average.

  Mr. Sackville
  Information about waiting times by district health authority and specialty is given in the publication "Hospital Waiting List, In-Patients and Day Cases"—ISBN 1 85839 003 6, a copy of which is available in the Library.

  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has received from the British Orthopaedic Association on the provision of orthopaedic and trauma services in inner London; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  None.
  222
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list(a) the hospitals in inner London which provide a comprehensive orthopaedic and trauma service and (b) the total number of beds available to London orthopaedic surgeons for carrying out elective and traumatic surgery.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not available centrally.

  Nurse Prescribing
  Mr. Galbraith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will give the reasons for delaying the introduction of nurse prescribing; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  Competing priorities in the last public expenditure survey obliged us, very reluctantly, to postpone implementation of nurse prescribing. We will introduce nurse prescribing as soon as resources permit.

  Hospital Readmissions
  Mr. Quentin Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of patients discharged from the acute departments of NHS hospitals were readmitted to an NHS hospital within a month in the last 12 months period for which there are figures; and what were the comparable proportions for the comparable periods 10 and 20 years ago.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Romanian Adoptions
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent discussions have been held by her Department with the Romanian Committee for Adoptions; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Yeo
  A meeting, originally scheduled for December, to review the working arrangements of the adoption agreement will take place early in the new year.

  NHS Premises (Fire Safety)
  Ms. Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to provide extra funding to the national health service with a view to bringing NHS premises up to the standards required by fire safety legislation; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  I refer the hon. Member to the replies I gave to the hon. Member for Bristol South, (Ms. Primarolo) on 3 November at columns 179–80.

  Casualty Departments
  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what training and information is given to hospital managers and doctors to guide them in the preparation of policies and care philosophies for patient-centred management of casualty departments.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  It is for provider hospitals to determine the pattern of local services and to develop training programmes that provide staff with the requisite skills.

  Patient Discharges
  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is her Department's policy in respect of the extent to which a nurse manager in charge of a ward should be able to override a consultant's decision to discharge a patient.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Guidance was issued by the Department, in health circular HC(89)5, a copy of which is available in the Library. It makes it clear that no patient should be discharged from hospital without the authority of the doctor holding responsibility for that patient, unless there are clearly agreed protocols for this authority to be delegated.

  Transplants
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the number of organ or eye donations that could have been used for transplants and the actual numbers of transplants in the latest period for which figures are available.

  Mr. Sackville
  The table gives the number of organs and corneas donated and the number of organs transplanted in the United Kingdom for the latest period for which information is available. The principal reason why donated organs are not used is because of clinical unsuitability. The United Kingdom Transplant Support Service Authority collects data on and publishes the reason for not using organs, in its annual report, a copy of which is available in the Library.

  Period—1 January 1992 to 30 November 1992 United Kingdom1

  Organ

  Number donated

  Number transplanted

  Kidney

  1,532

  1,473

  Heart

  286

  254

  Heart/Lung

  52

  43

  Lung

  90

  73

  Pancreas

  47

  23

  Cornea

  3,518

  2,187

  1 Information provided by the United Kingdom Transplant Support Service Authority.

  Ozone Depletion
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many castrophic leaks of ozone-depleting substances have occurred within her Department's buildings in the last five years;

  (2) how many refrigeration and air conditioning systems in her Department are equipped with automatic leak detection systems;

  (3) what quantity of HCFC 22 is purchased by her Department per annum;

  (4) if she will provide details from the maintenance and servicing record of the quantity and type of ozone-destroying chemicals used annually in her Department's refrigeration and air conditioning equipment for servicing and in leakages; and what proportion is removed for recycling;

  (5) what are the latest available figures for her Department's total purchase of CFCs and HCFCs;

  (6) how many CFC and HCFC installations are contained within her Department's buildings;
  224
  (7) how much funding has been allocated or spent to specifically deal with measures to reduce her Department's consumption of ozone-depleting substances;

  (8) how many chlorofluorocarbon domestic fridges are contained within her Department's buildings;

  (9) to ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of her Department's consumption of ozone depleting substances becomes controlled waste in terms of section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990;

  (10) what is the quantity of ozone-depleting substances recycled within her Department and returned to the manufacturer.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not available centrally.

  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will give an undertaking to purchase only ozone-friendly fridges that do not contain chlorofluorocarbons or hydrochlorofluorocarbons for her Department;

  (2) what action has been taken to ensure that ozone-destroying substances consumed by her Department are identified as controlled wastes when they are no longer in use;

  (3) what measures have been taken to ensure that ozone-destroying substances in use by her Department identified as controlled waste under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 do not reach the atmosphere;

  (4) by what date her Department's use of ozone-depleting chemicals will conform to EC regulations on limits on these chemicals;

  (5) how the departmental Green Minister has promoted protection of the ozone layer with specific policy measures; which possible measures have been considered and rejected; and on what grounds;

  (6) what targets have been set for the recycling of ozone-depleting chemicals within the departmental buildings.

  Mr. Sackville
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) on 30 November at columns 74–75.

  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which current uses of ozone-depleting chemicals by her Department are considered essential.

  Mr. Sackville
  Equipment in the national health service that still requires ozone-depleting agents includes refrigeration equipment and plant, which uses the less damaging hydrochlorofluorocarbons, and certain fire extinguishing systems where no alternative materials are currently available. For chlorofluorocarbons used for essential medical purposes I refer the hon. Member to the reply my predecessor gave to the hon. Member for Bridgend (Mr. Griffiths) on 12 March 1992 at column 628.

  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance has been sought and received on alternatives or substitutes to the ozone-destroying chemicals in use by her Department.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department has been following technical developments both nationally and internationally and the information acquired is, and will continue to be used, in the preparation of guidance for the national health service. Guidance on refrigerants and air conditioning will be issued next year.
  225
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many portable halon fire extinguishers are contained within departmental buildings; and what measures are being taken to ensure their recycling and replacement.

  Mr. Sackville
  The information requested is not available centrally. Guidance will be issued in spring 1993 to assist the national health service to control the use of halon in accordance with the Montreal protocol.

  Limited List Prescribing
  Sir Michael Grylls
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if her Department will carry out a survey among United Kingdom pharmaceutical companies to establish how many potential new treatments for conditions covered by the proposed new limited list regulations are currently being investigated in their research and development laboratories;

  (2) what positive measures her Department will take to persuade United Kingdom pharmaceutical companies to continue research projects in the 10 therapeutic categories covered by the proposed new limited list regulations; and whether such intentions would be incorporated into a revised pharmaceutical price regulation scheme.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The Department does not collate information from the pharmaceutical industry on current research projects, and has no plans to do so. It is for the companies concerned to determine their research and development priorities within the framework provided by the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme.

  Stallington Hospital
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will establish an inquiry, following the North Staffordshire district health authority's report into Stallington hospital, into whether all similar hospitals are currently adequately staffed and resourced; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Yeo
  The National Health Service Management Executive issued health service guidance (HSG(92)42), on health services for people with learning disabilities, on 26 October 1992. A copy is available in the Library. Staffing levels in individual hospitals are a matter for local decision.

  Paediatric Nurses
  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many paediatric community nurses were employed by the national health service in each year since 1985.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not collected centrally. The Royal College of Nursing publishes a directory of paediatric community nursing services which has been place in the Library.

  Day Care
  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list those health authorities and national health service trusts which provide separate day care facilities for children from those provided for adults.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not held centrally.

  Children
  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list those health authorities and national health service trusts which provide access and facilities for sick children with disabilities.

  Mr. Yeo
  Advice on the requirement for national health service facilities to be accessible to the disabled and the means by which access can be provided is included in all relevant policy and building design guidance issued by the Department. We are generally satisfied with compliance with these regulations, but ease of access will vary across buildings of different age and configuration.

  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list those health authorities and national health service trusts which provide play therapists for children.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Prison Mother and Baby Units
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she intends to publish the report on mother and baby units in British prisons by the social services inspectorate.

  Mr. Yeo
  A report on the first inspection of the three mother and baby units in British prisons, carried out at the request of the Home Secretary by the social services inspectorate with medical and nursing advisers, was published in March 1992. Copies are available in the Library. A report on the second inspection, carried out in November 1992, will be published in the spring and placed in the Library.

  Young Offenders
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the capital cost per place of the most recently constructed secure unit for young offenders; and what is(a) the average cost, (b) the highest cost and (c) the lowest weekly cost of placement in such a unit.

  Mr. Yeo
  Secure units accommodate any category of child looked after by a local authority meeting the statutory criteria for restriction of liberty, including offenders. The average capital cost per place of the two secure units opening earlier this year was £192,720.

  Information about revenue costs in the form requested is not collected centrally.

  Nutrition Task Force
  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the nutrition task force will include a practising nutritional therapist among is members.

  Mr. Sackville
  No. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced the membership of the nutrition task force on 7 December.

  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what consultations the nutrition task force will have with professional organisations; and whether she expects those consultations to include meetings with the Society for the Promotion of Nutritional Therapy.

  Mr. Sackville
  The task force will determine its own methods of working at its first meeting on 16 December.

  Hospital Staff
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will give the numbers of whole-time equivalent hospital staff in post in England on 30 September 1991 and 30 September 1992, subdivided by grade and sex.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  [holding answer 8 December 1992]: The figures for the 30 September 1992 are not yet available. The required figures for 30 September 1991 are given in the table. It is not possible for non-nursing staff to code whether they work within a hospital. The figures exclude those for medical and dental staff which are not yet available. It is not possible to give non-direct care staff figures split by grade, as these are no longer collected centrally.

  Staff in each nursing and midwifery grade England (excluding agency staff) at September 1991 (wte)

  Grade

  Male

  Female

  ASC non-supervisor and chargehands

  Scale A

  2

  1

  Nurse learners student/pupils

  Pupil Nurse

  46

  371

  Student Nurse

  5,388

  30,438

  RGN/RSCN (4 year int. Course)

  9

  217

  RGN/RMN (4 year int. Course)

  19

  27

  Student Midwife (without nursing qualification)

  0

  38

  Other

  0

  0

  Nursing officer

  0

  1

  Other

  1

  1

  SNR Nurses (Clinical/Managerial, Staff Support and Staff Support—Education)

  Director of Nursing Services—6

  0

  0

  Director of Nursing Services—5

  1

  0

  Director of Nursing Services—4

  8

  14

  Director of Nursing Services—3

  10

  14

  Director of Nursing Services—2

  8

  11

  Director of Nursing Services—1

  4

  3

  Director of Nursing Services—1+

  0

  2

  Other

  0

  0

  District Nursing Officer

  DHA 3

  0

  1

  DMA 2

  0

  0

  DHA 1

  0

  1

  DHA 2(T)

  0

  0

  DHA 1(T)

  0

  0

  DHA1+(T)

  0

  0

  Other

  0

  0

  Regional Nurse

  RNO/R2

  1

  0

  RNO/R1

  0

  3

  Day Nursery Staff

  Day Nursery Assistant (Under age 19)

  1

  0

  Day Nursery Assistant (age 19 and over)

  0

  10

  Staff Nursery Nurse—NNEB

  0

  22

  Deputy Matron (under 60 places)

  0

  11

  Deputy Matron (under 60 + places)

  0

  0

  Matron (under 30 places)

  0

  7

  Matron (30 to 59 places)

  0

  6

  Matron (60 + places)

  0

  1

  Other

  0

  0

  Staff in Group A&B Establishments

  Matron—A (200 + beds)

  0

  1

  Special School Nurse—B

  0

  1

  Other

  0

  0

  Clinical Grading Structure

  Scale A

  6,239

  61,422

  228

  Grade

  Male

  Female

  Scale B

  2,574

  12,367

  Scale C

  851

  14,296

  Scale D

  5,821

  53,595

  Scale E

  7,771

  60,504

  Scale F

  3,255

  19,463

  Scale G

  6,126

  24,714

  Scale H

  1,151

  3,766

  Scale I

  971

  2,321

  Other

  5

  15

  Education staff

  Grade 1

  265

  850

  Grade 2

  903

  2,133

  Grade 3

  189

  352

  Grade 4

  174

  264

  Grade 5

  58

  83

  Grade 6

  10

  17

  Grade 7

  15

  19

  Other

  0

  0

  SNR nurses (Clinical/Managerial, Staff Support—Education)

  Senior nurse—6

  15

  20

  Senior nurse—5

  6

  15

  Senior nurse—4

  30

  48

  Senior nurse—3

  10

  24

  Senior nurse—2

  8

  9

  Senior nurse—1

  4

  3

  Senior nurse—1

  0

  0

  Other

  3

  8

  Senior nurse (Staff Support—Education)

  Senior nurse—8

  2

  1

  Senior nurse—7

  1

  10

  Other

  3

  10

  Senior nurses/midwives

  District/Unit

  152

  274

  District/Unit

  9

  6

  Unit—1st level

  145

  215

  District—1st level

  9

  6

  Region

  2

  9

  Region—1st level

  1

  1

  Other

  0

  0

  Undetermined

  984

  7,308

  Nursing and midwifery other

  44

  615

  Total nursing and midwifery

  43,303

  295,966

  Note: There are some 9,100 whole-time equivalent staff who do no have an Occupatiion or Payscale code that allows them to be allocated to a specific area of work.

  Staff in each PAMs, S&P, P&T grade England at September 1991 (WTE)

  Description

  Male

  Female

  PAMs

  Chiropodist

  3

  17

  Senior Chiropodist—Grade 2

  306

  914

  Senior Chiropodist—Grade 1

  213

  502

  Ch. Chiropodist—Grade 4

  67

  107

  Ch. Chiropodist—Grade 3

  75

  95

  Ch. Chiropodist—Grade 2

  10

  18

  District Ch. Chiropodist—Grade 2

  67

  47

  District Ch. Chiropodist—Grade 1

  21

  8

  District Senior Ch. Chiropodist

  7

  2

  Teacher—Chiropody

  4

  3

  Senior Teacher—Chiropody

  4

  3

  Principal—Grade 2—Chiropody (annual intake of 24 or more)

  1

  —

  —

  1

  Occupational Therapist Graduate entry with 4 years training

  79

  947

  1

  64

  Senior Occupational Therapist—2

  58

  1,091

  Senior Occupational Therapist—1

  89

  1,966

  Head Senior Occupational Therapist—4

  16

  279

  229

  Description

  Male

  Female

  Head Senior Occupational Therapist—3

  31

  569

  Head Senior Occupational Therapist—2

  8

  149

  Head Senior Occupational Therapist—1

  8

  98

  Teacher—Occupational Therapist

  4

  10

  Senior Teacher—Occupational Therapist

  —

  5

  Principal—Grade 2—Occupational Therapist (annual intake of 24 or more)

  —

  3

  —

  1

  District Occupational Therapist—2

  5

  94

  District Occupational Therapist—1

  1

  22

  Occupational Therapist—Grade 3 (designated district)

  —

  2

  Occupational Therapist—Grade 2 (designated district)

  —

  2

  Occupational Therapist—Grade 1 (designated district)

  1

  6

  Physiotherapist (Graduate entry with 4 years training)

  195

  1,495

  22

  145

  Senior Physiotherapist—Grade 2

  190

  2,472

  Senior Physiotherapist—Grade 1

  271

  3,374

  Supt. Physiotherapist—Grade 4

  29

  309

  Supt. Physiotherapist—Grade 3

  89

  766

  Supt. Physiotherapist—Grade 2

  17

  132

  Supt. Physiotherapist—Grade 1

  8

  137

  Student Teacher—Physiotherapist

  —

  2

  Teacher—Physiotherapist

  8

  43

  Senior Teacher—Physiotherapist

  11

  49

  Principal—Grade 2 (annual intake of 24 or more)

  —

  1

  5

  8

  District Physiotherapist—2

  15

  97

  District Physiotherapist—1

  6

  24

  Senior Rem. Gymnast—Grade 1

  —

  1

  Designated District Rem. Gymnast—Grade 3

  —

  1

  Orthoptist

  —

  11

  Snr. Orthoptist—Gr. 2

  2

  185

  Snr. Orthoptist—Gr. 1

  4

  211

  Head Orthoptist— Gr. 4

  —

  15

  Head Orthoptist—Gr. 3

  1

  32

  Head Orthoptist—Gr. 2*

  —

  8

  Head Orthoptist—Gr. 2

  —

  22

  Head Orthoptist—Gr. 4

  1

  26

  Teacher—Orthoptist

  —

  17

  Snr. Teacher—Orthoptist

  —

  4

  Principal—Gr. 2

  —

  4

  Principal—Gr. 1

  —

  1

  Radiographer

  454

  2,433

  Snr. Radiographer—2

  331

  1,843

  Snr. Radiographer—1

  284

  1,630

  Supt. Radiographer—4

  71

  306

  Supt. Radiographer—3

  159

  636

  Supt. Radiographer—2

  32

  112

  Supt. Radiographer—1

  32

  59

  Student Teacher—Radiographer

  1

  1

  Teacher—Radiographer

  16

  25

  Snr. Teacher—Radiographer

  17

  28

  Principal Gr. 2

  6

  12

  Principal Gr. 1 "(ann. intake of 24 or more)

  8

  12

  4

  3

  District Radiographer—3

  9

  8

  District Radiographer—2

  58

  48

  District Radiographer—1

  13

  4

  Dietician—Diploma Entry

  1

  12

  Dietician (Graduate entry with 4 years training)

  3

  199

  Snr. Dietician—Gr. 2

  5

  254

  Snr. Dietician—Gr. 1

  10

  562

  Ch. Dietician—Gr. 4

  —

  36

  Ch. Dietician—Gr. 3

  3

  88

  Dist. Ch. Dietician—Gr. 2

  5

  133

  Dist. Ch. Dietician—Gr. 1

  —

  28

  Dist. Snr. Ch. Dietician

  —

  3

  Art/Music Therapist

  5

  14

  Snr. Art/Music Therapist—2

  40

  83

  Snr. Art/Music Therapist—1

  51

  90

  Head Art/Music Therapist—4

  5

  3

  Head Art/Music Therapist—3

  7

  12

  Footcare Assistant

  9

  360

  Helpers in Occ. Therapy & Physiotherapy

  289

  4,042

  Helpers in Radiography

  46

  581

  230

  Description

  Male

  Female

  Supervisor—Qualified—26 to 100 patients

  1

  —

  Tech. Assts/Drivers Techs (MRU)

  3

  —

  Technical/Instructors—Gr. 3

  200

  1,370

  Technical Instructors—Grade 2

  274

  311

  Technical Instructors—Grade 1

  405

  145

  Drama Therapists

  —

  1

  Senior Drama Therapist—2

  2

  6

  Senior Drama Therapist—1

  4

  4

  Head Drama Therapist—4

  —

  1

  Head Drama Therapist—3

  1

  —

  Part-time Hospital Chaplains

  0

  0

  Others (PAMS)

  345

  677

  S&P (Pharmacists)

  Pre-reg. Student Pharmacist

  2

  4

  Pharmacist

  2

  5

  Staff Pharmacist

  4

  13

  DPO Scale C/Principal Pharmacist

  1

  2

  DPO Scale B/Grade 4 Pharmacist

  1

  1

  Pharmaceutical officer—non-teaching managed population—under 450,000

  2

  —

  Reg. Pharmaceutical Officer (i)

  1

  —

  Pharmacist (on call)

  2

  3

  Staff Pharmacist (on call)

  2

  9

  DPO Scale C/Principal Pharmacist (on call)

  —

  2

  DPO Scale B/Grade 4 Pharmacist (on call)

  1

  —

  Pharmacists (without Emergency Duly Commitment)

  Pre-reg. Graduate

  72

  218

  Grade A

  12

  67

  Grade B

  20

  89

  Grade C

  20

  159

  Grade D

  43

  176

  Grade E

  38

  61

  Grade F

  39

  21

  Grade G

  27

  7

  Grade H

  11

  4

  Pharmacists (with "On Call/Emergency Duly Commitment)

  Grade A

  14

  47

  Grade B

  100

  289

  Grade C

  75

  272

  Grade D

  270

  579

  Grade E

  211

  215

  Grade F

  144

  64

  Grade G

  106

  26

  Grade H

  30

  1

  Sandwich course student in 2nd period of practical training placement

  —

  3

  Other (S&P Pharmacists)

  2

  9

  S&P

  Assistant Psychotherapist (child)

  3

  5

  Biochemist—probationary period Higher qualification

  3

  5

  Basic Grade: post probationary period

  4

  5

  Senior Grade

  13

  8

  Principal Grade

  9

  3

  Top Grade

  4

  —

  Physicist—probationary period Higher qualification

  1

  2

  Basic Grade: post probationary period

  —

  0

  Senior Grade

  7

  3

  Principal Grade

  1

  4

  Top Grade

  3

  —

  Child Psychotherapist Grade A

  4

  9

  Child Psychotherapist Grade B

  2

  3

  Child Psychotherapist Grade B + 2 Discretionary point

  10

  13

  Child Psychotherapist Grade B + 4 Discretionary point

  4

  24

  Clinical Psychologist Senior Grade

  14

  37

  Clinical Psychologist Principal Grade

  26

  25

  Top Grade

  4

  6

  Top Grade (with greater responsibility)

  14

  4

  Reg. Scientific Officer

  1

  1

  Reg. Scientific Officer + 3 Discretionary point

  5

  0

  231

  Description

  Male

  Female

  Reg. Scientific Officer + 5 Discretionary point

  3

  1

  Child Psychotherapist Trainee Grade

  4

  35

  Basic Grade

  4

  31

  Senior Grade

  10

  38

  Principal Grade

  28

  40

  Top Grade

  2

  4

  Psychology Technicians

  4

  8

  Clinical Scientists Grade A

  153

  272

  Clinical Scientists Grade B

  1,204

  742

  Clinical Scientists Grade C

  456

  67

  Assistant Psychologist

  48

  170

  Trainee Clinical Psychologist

  82

  273

  Other (S&P)

  99

  676

  Clinical Psychologist—A

  344

  764

  Clinical Psychologist—B

  359

  275

  Speech Therapist Grade 1

  1

  106

  Speech Therapist Grade 2

  8

  590

  Speech Therapist Grade 3

  3

  109

  Speech Therapist Grade A

  4

  164

  Speech Therapist Grade B

  4

  453

  Speech Therapist Grade B +1 Discretionary point

  4

  78

  Speech Therapist Grade B + 2 Discretionary point

  2

  103

  Speech Therapist Grade C

  10

  716

  Speech Therapist Grade C + 1 Discretionary point

  1

  100

  Speech Therapist Grade C + 2 Discretionary point

  5

  128

  Speech Therapist Grade D

  8

  150

  Speech Therapist Grade D plus 2 Discretionary point

  2

  40

  Grade E

  1

  56

  Speech Therapist Grade E plus 2 Discretionary point

  1

  18

  Senior Speech Therapist I

  —

  19

  Senior Speech Therapist II

  —

  14

  Chief Speech Therapist III

  —

  3

  Chief Speech Therapist IV

  —

  1

  District Chief Speech Therapist II

  1

  5

  Speech Therapists' Assistant

  4

  114

  Whole-time Chaplains Assistants

  24

  28

  Whole-time Chaplains

  203

  15

  P and T

  Junior M.L.S.O. Scale A

  5

  17

  Trainee M.L.S.O.

  499

  1,200

  M.L.S.O.

  20

  22

  Senior M.L.S.O.

  22

  6

  Chief M.L.S.O.

  12

  4

  Senior Chief M.L.S.O.

  4

  —

  M.L.S.O. 1

  1,566

  3,594

  M.L.S.O. 2

  1,797

  1,632

  M.L.S.O. 3

  1,431

  478

  M.L.S.O. 4

  608

  78

  Medical Laboratory Assistant

  407

  3,102

  Trainee Cytology Screener

  2

  100

  Cytology Screener

  2

  288

  Trainee Pathology Technician

  1

  2

  Pathology Technician (unqualified)

  5

  —

  Pathology Technician

  10

  1

  Senior Pathology Technician

  22

  0

  Dental Therapist

  —

  19

  Dental Hygenist

  —

  6

  Student Dental Surgery Assistant

  —

  28

  Dental Surgery Assistant (unqualified)

  —

  21

  Dental Surgery Assistant

  —

  129

  Senior Dental Surgery Assistant

  —

  28

  Dental Technicians Student B

  —

  1

  Senior Dental Technician

  3

  1

  Chief Dental Technician

  2

  —

  Pharmacy Technician Student A

  —

  0

  Pharmacy Technician Student B

  —

  9

  Pharmacy Technician

  4

  17

  Senior Pharmacy Technician

  2

  11

  Senior Animal Technician

  —

  1

  Cardiographer

  —

  7

  232

  Description

  Male

  Female

  Senior Cardiographer

  1

  —

  Dark Room Technician

  12

  18

  Medical Photographers Trainee A

  —

  1

  Medical Photographers Trainee B

  2

  —

  Photographer

  —

  2

  Senior Photographer I

  2

  —

  Senior Photographer II

  1

  2

  Trainee Dental Auxiliary

  3

  326

  Dental Auxiliary—1

  5

  1,271

  Dental Auxiliary—2

  23

  430

  Dental Auxiliary—3

  2

  86

  Medical Physics Technician IV

  7

  6

  Medical Physics Technician I

  5

  —

  Physiological Measurement Technician Student A

  1

  1

  Physiological Measurement Technician Student B

  3

  3

  Technician

  —

  5

  Senior Technician

  1

  10

  Chief Technician

  —

  6

  Senior Chief Technician

  1

  1

  Anatomical Pathology Technician (unqualifed)

  —

  2

  Anatomical Pathology Technician

  2

  1

  Technician (para 3431 of PTB Handbook)

  1

  1

  Senior Technician

  3

  1

  Trainee Medical Technical Officer

  590

  988

  Medical Technical Officer—1

  449

  765

  Medical Technical Officer—2

  1,662

  2,209

  Medical Technical Officer—3

  2,258

  1,885

  Medical Technical Officer—4

  913

  535

  Medical Technical Officer—5

  345

  129

  Audio-Visual Technician

  2

  —

  Senior Audio-Visual Technician

  1

  1

  Graphic Designer

  —

  1

  Laboratory Aide

  —

  3

  Assistant Technical Officer

  377

  1,488

  Phlebotomist

  1

  7

  Senior Assistant Technical Officer

  125

  402

  Cytology Screener

  —

  2

  Hearing/Vision Screener

  —

  1

  Electrolysis (using Hospital equipment)

  —

  1

  Trainee ODA

  3

  1

  Basic Grade ODA

  5

  2

  Senior ODA

  15

  5

  Other (P&T)

  419

  329

  P&T (Opticians)

  Pre-registration Optometrist

  —

  3

  Dispensing Optician

  1

  2

  Senior Dispensing Optician

  —

  2

  Optometrist

  12

  11

  Senior Optometrist

  5

  6

  Principal Optometrist

  —

  2

  Pre-registration Optometrist

  9

  30

  Optometrist—Grade A

  3

  2

  Optometrist—Grade B

  17

  30

  Optometrist—Grade C

  8

  4

  Others (P&T Optician)

  6

  4

  Others

  —

  7

  Grand Total

  23,357

  63,536

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  United Kingdom Goods (Purchasing Policy)
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what guidance he gives to local authorities and other Government agencies about the advantages of buying goods manufactured in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  My Department gives no such guidance.

  Nuclear Industry
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will place in the Library a copy of the full text of the EC decision of March 1990 relating to state subsidy of the nuclear industry; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  It has been the policy of successive Governments to treat correspondence with the European Commission as confidential.

  Electricity
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will estimate the shares of electricity generated by National Power, PowerGen, nuclear power and by others.

  Mr. Eggar
  According to their respective annual reports for 1991–92, National Power accounts for a 43.6 per cent. share of electricity generated in England and Wales, PowerGen 28 per cent., and Nuclear Electric 18.5 per cent. Others would, therefore, account for 9.9 per cent.

  European Structural Fund
  Mr. Colin Shepherd
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) which county councils and Scottish regional councils have made submissions seeking inclusion of parts of their area as eligible for support under objective 5(b) of the European structural fund;

  (2) if he will place in the Library a map showing the parishes or wards covered by the submissions of local authorities in respect of areas for inclusion as being eligible for support under objective 5(b) of the European structural fund.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  My Department has been approached by a number of bodies and individuals, including some county councils and Scottish regional councils, on the question of possible future eligibility under objective 5(b) of the EC structural funds.

  Regional Assistance
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade, pursuant to his answer of 27 November,Official Report, column 900, if he will give the total amount spent by his Department on (a) regional selective assistance and (b) regional enterprise grants for 1991–92 and the amount intended to be spent in 1992–93.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  In 1991–92 my Department spent £74,280,000 on regional selective assistance project grants and £7,278,000 on regional enterprise grants.

  The amounts intended to be spent in 1992–93 are included in the 1992–93 supply estimates. For regional selective assistance project grants £98,900,000 was allocated, while for regional enterprise grants the amount was £7,760,000.

  Israel
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he has had with the European Commission on a draft competition directive covering the boycotts relating to trade with Israel.

  Mr. Needham
  None. No such directive is under consideration.

  Japanese-owned companies
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what estimate he has made of the number of people employed in Japanese-owned manufacturing industry within the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Needham
  From information available to my Department, based on estimates given by companies at the time of announcing investments, it is estimated that some 50,000 direct jobs have been created by Japanese manufacturing investment in the United Kingdom.

  Nuclear Reprocessing
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make it his policy to require the chairman of British Nuclear Fuels plc to publish in full the contracts signed with Japanese Electrical Utilities to reprocess spent nuclear fuel at Sellafield(a) for magnox fuel and (b) for thermal oxide fuel.

  Mr. Eggar
  No. Details of reprocessing contracts are a commercial matter for the parties concerned.

  Car Imports
  Mr. Hague
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on whether the restrictions on the import of cars from Japan will be maintained in 1993.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  The Government have decided that the United Kingdom will remain a restricted market in 1993 and 1994 for the purposes of implementing the agreement entitled the "Elements of Consensus" concluded last year between the European Community and Japan covering imports of cars after 1992. The position of the United Kingdom during the remainder of the period covered by the agreement up to the end of 1999 will be determined in the light of the circumstances at the time. I have placed a copy of the elements of consensus in the House of Commons Library.

  Plutonium
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he received the document "Plutonium: Deadly Gold of the Nuclear Age", released in December, a copy of which has been sent to him; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  The Department of Trade and Industry has no record of having received a copy of "Plutonium: Deadly Gold of the Nuclear Age".

  Coal Mining
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to prevent large-scale voluntary redundancies at British Coal collieries preempting the outcome of his energy review; what discussions officials of his Department have had with British Coal about these matters; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  British Coal is continuing its normal voluntary redundancy policy. This is an important element in its drive to reduce unit costs and improve the industry's competitiveness and does not pre-empt the outcome of the review.

  Oil and Gas Exploration
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make it his policy to require the environmental implications of oil and gas exploration and production to be fully assessed before further exploration is allowed in United Kingdom coastal waters.

  Mr. Eggar
  It is our general and established policy, before offering blocks for licence in any part of the United Kingdom continental shelf, to consult relevant statutory and non-statutory bodies in advance of any announcement and to attach licence conditions agreed with such bodies which reflect each block's sensitivities. In the course of this consultation, the environmental implications of oil and gas licensing are assessed on a block-by-block basis.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what environmental criteria are used in deciding the number, identity and distribution of blocks to be offered in the offshore oil and gas production licensing rounds.

  Mr. Eggar
  The number, identity and distribution of blocks to be offered for licence are decided after consultation with a range of statutory and non-statutory bodies. The environmental implications of licensing are assessed on a block-by-block basis, principally by the Department of the Environment, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Their criteria include a range of environmental indicators, including the presence of significant numbers of seabirds, fish and other sea creatures, either seasonally or throughout the year. On the basis of this advice, licence conditions may be attached to individual blocks. In some cases, environmentally highly sensitive blocks may be withdrawn at the consultation stage. In the present, 14th offshore licensing round, as a result of the consultation process, about 30 blocks nominated by oil companies and located in environmentally highly sensitive areas were not offered for licensing.

  Nuclear Energy
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how the decommissioning of nuclear-energy producing plants will be funded.

  Mr. Eggar
  This is a matter for the operator of the plant in question.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what were the annual profits and deficits for the British nuclear-generating industry for the last five years.

  Mr. Eggar
  Nuclear Electric plc, which is the only commercial nuclear generating company in England and Wales, has separately accounted for its operations only since 1989–80. Its annual report and accounts for the years since and including 1989–90 are available in the Library of the House of Commons. The same is true in Scotland of Scottish Nuclear Limited. Responsibility for that company rests with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland.

  Magnox Reactors
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what levels of public expenditure will be required to sustain safety levels throughout the remaining life span of the Magnox reactors.
  236
  Mr. Eggar
  The continued safe operation of the Magnox stations is the responsibility of Nuclear Electric plc. The company must pay full regard in safety matters to the requirements of the Health and Safety Executive's nuclear installations inspectorate. The cost of operating the stations is a commercial matter for Nuclear Electric.

  Nuclear Power Stations
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what subsidy is received by Nuclear Electric for the decommissioning of old and potentially unsafe nuclear power stations.

  Mr. Eggar
  Nuclear Electric plc receives income from electricity sales and a premium financed by the fossil fuel levy paid by electricity consumers. From this income Nuclear Electric will meet its liabilities as they fall due, including those relating to the decommissioning of its stations. The continuing operation of these stations and their eventual decommissioning must meet the stringent safety requirements of the nuclear installations inspectorate.

  Newspaper Recycling
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made with his proposed offer of financial support for investment in newspaper recycling at Aylesford, Kent.

  Mr. Heseltine
  Our proposal is to offer a £20 million grant under the assistance for exceptional projects facility to encourage the Swedish paper-making company SCA to invest in a newspaper recycling plant. We decided to offer this assistance because of the very significant environmental benefits which the project will provide. The plant would consume over 400,000 tonnes of newspapers and magazines, making a sizeable contribution to the Government's target to recycle 25 per cent. of household waste by the year 2000.

  Our proposed grant needed the approval of the European Commission. After our discussions with the Commission, it has today announced that it can see no objection to our proposed offer. I and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment are delighted to have secured this result. The project is an important environmental project which we very much want to see happen.

  The way is now clear for me to seek the authority of the House for the assistance I propose. I will lay before the House a resolution under section 8 (8) of the Industrial Development Act 1982 at the earliest opportunity. I shall then give full details about the project and the benefits it will bring.

  Sizewell B
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what expenditure is required to construct the Sizewell B nuclear plant.

  Mr. Eggar
  The estimated cost to completion of the Sizewell B project is £2,030 million of which, at 30 September 1992, £1,725 million has been committed and £1,548 million spent—all figures are in April 1987 prices. Nuclear Electric plc remains on target to complete the project ahead of time and within budget.
  237
  Mr. Peter Butler
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the purpose of the pre-OSART mission to the Sizewell B power station undertaken by a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency in late October and early November; and what were the findings of the mission.

  Mr. Heseltine
  The IAEA mission, which was invited by Her Majesty's Government at the suggestion of Nuclear Electric, the operators of Sizewell B, reviewed the arrangements for operational safety at the plant. A team of experts from seven countries and from the IAEA, together with observers from a further three countries, looked in depth at nine areas relevant to operational safety.

  An official IAEA report will be submitted to Her Majesty's Government in due course. However, in a press statement issued following the mission, the IAEA team leaders stated that the mission had concluded that
  "Sizewell B is a well-managed nuclear plant".
  The mission also identified
  "a number of commendable features in the programme of the power plant".
  Some areas were also identified where the team made suggestions for further enhancement of existing good performance.

  The IAEA's recommendations and suggestions have been welcomed by the station's management who regard them as opportunities for yet further improvement in the station's operational safety performance.

  Copies of the IAEA's and Nuclear Electric's press notices have been placed in the Library of the House.

  Matrix Churchill
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what information he had, at the time of signing public interest immunity certificates on the Matrix Churchill case, on work undertaken on behalf of Her Majesty's Government by defendants on the case; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 26 November 1992]: I have nothing to add to my responses to the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) during the debate on 23 November, at column 649. The Scott inquiry has specifically been asked to look at decisions taken by those signing public interest immunity certificates.

  Correspondence
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the average time taken by the Ministers in his Department, including himself, to answer letters from hon. Members, in each of the first three quarters of 1992, measuring the time from the receipt of the letter to the dispatch of the substantive reply.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 1 December 1992]: Figures from my Department will be published in the Official Report, and be made available to the House Libraries, early next year, showing the volume of ministerial correspondence from hon. Members and members of the public in 1992, the targets set for reply and the percentage of replies sent within target.

  Private Detectives
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the purposes for which private detective agencies are engaged by his Department, the procedures used to authorise such engagements, and the expenditure on the engagement of private detective agencies in each of the last two years.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: The information can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Bardsey Island (Exploration)
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what environmental impact assessment will be required before any further oil or gas exploration, appraisal or production takes place in block 107/1 off Bardsey Island; and if it will be made publicly available;

  (2) if he required a full environmental impact assessment to be conducted before exploratory drilling for oil and gas was allowed off Bardsey Island; and if he will make a statement;

  (3) what monitoring his Department is conducting to determine the environmental impact of the oil and gas exploratory drilling operation off Bardsey Island, Wales;

  (4) what advice was received by his Department from the Nature Conservancy Council concerning the proposed licensing of blocks 107/1 and 107/6 off Bardsey Island, Wales during the 12th round of oil and gas production licensing.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: Licences awarded in offshore licensing rounds allow the licensee to conduct seismic survey work in the licence area. Further approvals are required before the licensee may drill in the area on either an exploration or an appraisal basis. There is no statutory requirement for an environmental impact assessment—EIA—to be conducted prior to exploration or appraisal drilling, but additional approvals and an EIA are required before a licensee may develop a viable find for commercial production. EIAs will be made publicly available.

  In considering whether to offer blocks 107/1 and 107/6, off Bardsey Island, the then Department of Energy took full account of the concerns of the Nature Conservancy Council—NCC—regarding the ecological status of the area. On balance, the evidence did not justify its total exclusion from hydrocarbons exploration, but it was agreed that the blocks should be offered subject to special conditions attached to each licence. The Department of Energy accepted all the special conditions proposed by the NCC and attached these to the licences.

  The licensees have observed these conditions. In addition, although no formal EIA was required before exploratory drilling was allowed off Bardsey Island, they commissioned and published an independent appraisal of the area. In consultation with local environmental advisers, such as the Countryside Council for Wales, they have also commissioned independent monitoring of the environmental impact of the well currently being drilled in block 107/01.

  Sellafield
  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what provisions are being considered to ensure that any workers laid off as a result of delays in the start-up of
  239
  operations in the thermal oxide reprocessing plant at Sellafield are assisted by local initiatives for retraining or redeployment.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I have been asked to reply.

  Cumbria training and enterprise council and the local Employment Service deliver a range of employment, enterprise and training measures, to help any person who becomes unemployed at the Sellafield plant.

LORD CHANCELLORS DEPARTMENT

  Court Lists
  Mr. David Atkinson
  To ask the the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement of progress in the establishment of an electronic list distribution system to reduce delay in bringing cases to the courts.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Over a number of years, the Lord Chancellor's Department has participated in several initiatives to test the feasibility of distributing the Crown court lists electronically. Recent experiments have aimed at establishing the technical effectiveness of such a system, whether it could meet users' needs and whether there would be widespread demand.

  At present the lists are being transmitted from the Central Criminal Court to a number of barristers' chambers via the legal information exchange system. Plans are in hand to extend this experimental system during 1993.

  Defamation
  Mr. Garnier
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department whether he has considered the recommendations made by the Supreme Court Procedure Committee about practice and procedure in defamation.

  Mr. Hawkins
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department whether he has considered the recommendations made by the Supreme Court Procedure Committee about practice and procedure in defamation.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  In February 1990 the Lord Chancellor invited the Supreme Court Procedure Committee to examine the rules that relate to pleadings in actions for libel or slander with a view to recommending such changes as might appear desirable in the interests of reducing the complexity of the procedure without having an adverse effect on the interests of justice. The committee accepted my invitation to set up a working group under the chairmanship of Lord Justice Neill to undertake this task. In July 1991 Lord Justice Neill presented the committee's report to me. The recommendations made by the committee have been of great assistance to me in considering reforms to this branch of the law. I should like to pay tribute to Lord Justice Neill and the other members of the working group for all their hard work in producing the report. The report contains a number of recommendtions, including that:

  (i) there should be a new procedure for an offer of amends defence with damages to be fixed by a judge;

  (ii) judges should be empowered to rule as to whether words complained of are capable of bearing a particular meaning;

  240

  (iii) the rule in Scott v. Sampson, which prevents the defendant from proving specific discreditable acts in mitigation of damages should be abolished;

  (iv) in the case of a foreign publication a plaintiff should be required to prove the relevant foreign law;

  (v) generally, the limitation period should be reduced to one year; and

  (vi) protection to media reports afforded by section 7 of the 1952 Act should be extended to similar reports from abroad.

  I have considered these recommendations very carefully and I have decided to accept them.

  The new "offer of amends" defence to defamation claims will enable a defendant to curtail proceedings, by making an offer, where he recognises that the plaintiff has been defamed and is willing to pay damages assessed by the judge.

  I have also considered proposals which have been made by Lord Justice Hoffmann and others, for a new summary procedure which would enable the plaintiff to claim damages up to a fixed ceiling. Although the working group did not recommend that these proposals should be adopted, I believe that they would also provide valuable assistance to parties seeking speedy and economic disposal of defamation claims and I have therefore decided to accept them. The offer of amends defence will provide a benefit to defendants in particular, while the summary procedure would offer a counter-balancing benefit to plaintiffs. Implementation of some of these changes may be achieved by amending rules of court. I will invite the Supreme Court Rule Committee to proceed accordingly. Others, however, will require primary legislation, which will be introduced as soon as a suitable opportunity occurs.

  Court Fees
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, what representations he has received concerning the proposed increase in court fees; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The County Court Fees (Amendment) Order 1992, which revised the fees payable in the county court, came into force on 30 November 1992 in respect of general proceedings and, with effect from 1 April 1993, introduces a fee for proceedings under the Road Traffic Act 1991. There are no plans for immediate increases in other court fees. Representations on the revised county court fees have been received from eight hon. Members, the County Court Users Association and two firms of solicitors.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Sheep Dips
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the names and numbers, if appropriate, of sheep dips which the veterinary medicines directorate has ordered to be withdrawn with effect from March 1993; and if he will make a statement on the reasons for this withdrawal.

  Mr. Soames
  The veterinary medicines directorate has not ordered the withdrawal of any sheep dip products. As part of the review of long-standing licensed sheep dips which is currently under way, companies have been asked to provide additional data on product ingredients. For the
  241
  dips which contain phenols, a commercial decision not to provide the required data has apparently been taken on cost grounds. We understand that such products are therefore being reformulated so as to exclude phenols, or are being withdrawn from the market.

  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has yet received the report of the veterinary medicines directorate on organophosphorus sheep dips; when he will publish it; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the final advice expected from the independent Veterinary Products Committee following its review of licensed sheep dip products. The companies concerned have been asked to progress the additional work requested by the committee as quickly as possible. However the review will not be complete before mid-1993 at the earliest. The findings will be published in summary form.

  Tuberculosis
  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what research has been carried out into alternative and less expensive forms of animal testing for tuberculosis; and with what result.

  Mr. Soames
  Alternative forms of testing for tuberculosis in cattle and deer are undergoing assessment at the Central Veterinary Laboratory, but are not yet sufficiently developed to warrant field trials. Field trials are continuing to assess the effectiveness of the live test to diagnose tuberculosis in living badgers.

  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the annual cost of the testing of cattle for tuberculosis.

  Mr. Soames
  The cost of testing cattle in Great Britain for tuberculosis in the year 1 April 1991 to 31 March 1922 was £7.2 million.

  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what success the Department has had in its programme for the eradication of tuberculosis in cattle.

  Mr. Soames
  The Department has an extremely successful record in dealing with tuberculosis in cattle. It was estimated that in 1937 at least 40 per cent. of dairy herds in this country were infected with the disease: in 1991, new cases of tuberculosis were confirmed in only 0.115 per cent. of cattle herds in Great Britain.

  Dioxin, Derbyshire
  Mrs. Currie
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further information he has relating to the incident involving dioxin in Derbyshire; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  I am very pleased to announce that it is now possible to lift the order under the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 placed in March on a farm near Bolsover restricting its agricultural activities because of the presence of unacceptable concentrations of dioxins in milk and meat. Since this problem first became apparent in early 1991, my Department has undertaken 242
  extensive studies to investigate the extent and nature of the problem. The Department has already published two major reports giving the details of its investigations and I am pleased to announce that a further report is published today. The results in this latest report show that dioxin concentrations in meat from animals on this farm and milk from two dairy farms nearby have fallen significantly to levels which mean that these foods from the farms are safe to consume.

  This announcement is possible following a full assessment of the results and I am placing a report in the Library of the House. The key findings in the report are:

  the dioxins concentrations in the milk samples obtained in August and October from the two dairy farms are below the Maximum Tolerable Concentration previously set by the Ministry and Department of Health;

  the dioxin concentrations in both muscle and liver for animals on the farm on which the FEPA Order had been placed have fallen significantly to levels similar to those found in animals from other farmers;

  the dioxins in soil samples from the farm show little change but concentrations in the herbage have fallen considerably.

  These results are very encouraging, but my Department will continue to carry out some monitoring in the area to ensure that there is no recurrence of the problem. This incident also demonstrates the ability of the food surveillance programme undertaken by my Department o identify problems of chemical contamination of the food supply and our determination to ensure the fullest possible protection of the public.

  At the same time, I pay tribute to the farmers whose livelihood and peace of mind have been greatly disturbed by this incident. I am very grateful for the co-operation that they have shown my Department throughout what has been a very difficult period for them.

  Dietary Supplements
  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the prevalence of unsubstantiated claims of health benefits made in the United Kingdom about specific vitamin, mineral and other dietary supplements, and which were not covered by existing legislation.

  Mr. Soames
  The Food Advisory Committee examined these issues in its recent review of food labelling and advertising and made recommendations for some tightening of controls on the claims which may be made for foods, including food supplements. My right hon. Friend is, however, expecting proposals from the European Commission shortly which will include controls on claims made on food labels, and we need to await those before deciding the way forward.

  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has personally had with Ministers in other European Governments in an effort to enlist their support for his policy on the continuing availability of vitamin, mineral and other dietary supplements.

  Mr. Soames
  My judgment is that the personal intervention of a United Kingdom Minister would be premature at this stage. Officials have established the broad views of other member states in discussion in Brussels and will seek to persuade others of the merits of the United Kingdom view as negotiations proceed.
  243
  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he is expecting to receive from the European Commission a draft of the forthcoming directive on dietary supplements.

  Mr. Soames
  The timing of proposals is a matter for the Commission, but I have no information to suggest that any proposal on this subject is imminent.

  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information he has on which companies currently market in the United Kingdom vitamin, mineral and other dietary supplements in such high concentrations that they might reasonably be considered to be potentially hazardous; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  The question of potentially toxic doses of vitamins and minerals is a complex scientific issue which is currently being reviewed by the European Commission's scientific committee for food. At present dietary supplements must comply with food safety requirements set out in our food legislation which also enables us to take action to prevent unsafe products being sold.

  Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowances
  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on his proposals for HLCA payments; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  I refer to the reply given to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) on 10 December,Official Report, column 757.

  Farm Animals, Spain
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what arrangements he proposes to make for export of farm animals to Spain.

  Mr. Gummer
  As announced in the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Bowden) on 10 December, at columns 762–63, new arrangements for safeguarding the welfare of animals in transport will apply in 1993. In accordance with Community law, there will be veterinary inspection of animals for export at the start of the journey.

  Under the current arrangements, licences for export of animals for rearing or slaughter in Spain have been withheld because of doubts about compliance with Community welfare legislation in that country. The licensing system will no longer apply from January 1993, but these controls will be replaced by specific safeguards for ensuring that animals exported for slaughter in Spain are slaughtered in accordance with Community welfare legislation. Under these arrangements, any animals from the United Kingdom for immediate slaughter in Spain will only be sent to slaughterhouses that have been confirmed by the Spanish authorities as meeting Community welfare requirements. These arrangements are the subject of a formal agreement between the United Kingdom and Spanish authorities and will be kept under careful review.

  Beef Special Premium
  Miss Emma Nicholson
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, if he will apply the 90-head limit on the beef special premiums per age group of animals, and not on a per farm basis.
  244
  Mr. Gummer
  [pursuant to the answer, 18 June 1992, c. 626]: For the beef special premium, the most significant change in Great Britain is that the new scheme will be introduced on-farm from March 1993. This will give British beef producers the maximum possible flexibility to take advantage of the new, higher rate of premium. This can now be granted up to twice in the life of each animal: the first premium between the ages of 10 and 22 months and the second premium once it has reached 23 months. The headage limit of 90 animals per producer per year will apply separately to claims for first and second premium. Claims will also be limited by stocking density and by a regional ceiling. The exact rate of premium for the 1993 scheme year will depend on the green rate on 1 January 1993, but if currencies were aligned today the premium would be worth about £56.87.

  There will be tough anti-fraud measures to ensure that we can identify eligible animals. Details will be announced early in the new year.

  The current arrangements for claiming premium at slaughter and at live markets will continue broadly as they are at present until 31 March 1993.

  The EC rules for the new scheme do not allow payments of premium to be made before 1 November in the year of claim, when they provide for payment of an advance of 60 per cent. of the combined value of first and second premium claims. The balance will be paid before 30 June of the following year. These arrangements will apply to claims at slaughter until 31 March 1993 as well as to claims under the new on-farm scheme.

  Producers claiming premium at slaughter will be entitled to one premium claim only on each animal and this will count against the 90-head limit on claims for the first premium. Claims at slaughter until 31 March 1993 will also count towards producers' stocking density for 1993 and towards the regional ceiling.

  The new suckler cow premium scheme will be largely unchanged. The three main changes are the introduction of individual quotas; stocking density limits on producers' claims; and new arrangements for the timing of payment, which will be the same as for the beef special premium scheme. The EC rules allow some flexibility in fixing the application period and this will be announced later. The exact rate of premium for the 1993 scheme year will depend on the green rate on 1 January 1993, but if currencies were aligned today the premium would be worth about £66.35.

EMPLOYMENT

  Distributive Industries Training Trust
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what sums have been paid out in the form of grants by the Distributive Industries Training Trust in each year since its inception; and to what organisations these were paid.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Employment Department has no supervisory responsibilities for the Distributive Industries Training Trust. Inquiries about the payment of grants should be directed to the managing trustees.

  Earnings
  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will publish a table giving the proportions of full-time male manual workers, full-time male non-manual workers and all full-time male workers with earnings excluding overtime of less than(a) £190 per

  Full-time men on adult rates whose pay was unaffected by absence: proportion with average gross weekly earnings excluding overtime below the following amounts

  (percentages) April 1992

  Manual

  Non-manual

  All

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  West Midlands region

  33.8

  40.6

  13.9

  16.4

  24.2

  28.9

  West Midlands MC

  29.0

  35.6

  12.7

  15.2

  20.9

  25.4

  Hereford and Worcester

  47.6

  53.6

  13.2

  15.1

  31.7

  35.8

  Shropshire

  41.1

  48.1

  13.2

  15.9

  29.5

  34.6

  Staffordshire

  38.4

  47.2

  17.8

  20.5

  29.2

  35.2

  Warwickshire

  27.7

  32.0

  15.5

  17.6

  21.6

  24.8

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will publish a table giving proportions of full-time adult manual workers, full-time adult non-manual workers and all adult workers with(a) earnings excluding overtime less than £190 per week

  Full-time empolyees on adult rates whose pay was unaffected by absence: proportion with average gross weekly earnings excluding overtime below the following amounts

  April 1992

  Manual

  Non-manual

  All

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  West Midlands region

  42.1

  48.5

  28.2

  32.5

  34.0

  39.2

  West Midlands metropolitan county

  37.1

  43.6

  25.7

  30.4

  30.3

  35.6

  Hereford and Worcester

  55.5

  61.1

  29.4

  33.3

  40.3

  45.0

  Shropshire

  48.8

  55.5

  33.8

  37.6

  40.7

  45.8

  Staffordshire

  46.8

  54.4

  32.7

  36.6

  39.0

  44.6

  Warwickshire

  37.1

  41.4

  29.4

  33.3

  32.5

  36.6

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will publish a table giving the proportions of full-time female manual workers, full-time female non-manual workers and all full-time female workers with earnings excluding overtime of less than(a)

  Full-time women on adult rates whose pay was unaffected by absence: proportion with average gross weekly earnings excluding overtime below the following amounts:

  (Percentages)—April 1992

  Manual

  Non-manual

  All

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  West Midlands region

  81.1

  85.9

  45.4

  52.0

  53.1

  59.3

  West Midlands Metropolitan County

  77.3

  83.1

  42.0

  49.4

  49.1

  56.2

  Hereford/Worcester

  89.2

  93.1

  45.8

  51.8

  55.2

  60.8

  Shropshire

  91.2

  96.5

  55.6

  60.7

  63.1

  68.3

  Staffordshire

  81.1

  84.2

  49.7

  55.2

  57.8

  62.6

  Warwickshire

  83.3

  87.9

  48.9

  55.4

  56.5

  62.5

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will publish a table giving proportions of full-time adult manual workers, full-time adult non-manual workers and all full-time adult workers(a) with earnings including overtime of less than £190 per week and (b) less than £200 per week in (i) west midlands
  246
  week and (b) £200 per week in (i) west midlands region, (ii) west midlands metropolitan county, (iii) Hereford and Worcester, (iv) Shropshire, (v) Staffordshire and (vi) Warwickshire for 1992.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested is contained in the table.

  and (b) less than £200 per week in (i) west midlands region, (ii) west midlands metropolitan county, (iii) Hereford and Worcester, (iv) Shropshire, (v) Staffordshire and (vi) Warwickshire for 1992.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested is contained in the table.

  £190 per week and (b) £200 per week in (i) west midlands region, (ii) west midlands metropolitan county, (iii) Hereford and Worcester, (iv) Shropshire, (v) Staffordshire and (vi) Warwickshire for 1992.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested is contained in the table.

  region, (ii) west midlands metropolitan county, (iii) Hereford and Worcester, (iv) Shropshire, (v) Staffordshire and (vi) Warwickshire for 1992.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested is contained in the table.
  247

  Full-time employees on adult rates whose pay was unaffected by absence: proportion with average gross weekly earnings below the following amounts

  (Percentages) April 1992

  Manual

  Non-manual

  All

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  £190

  £200

  West midlands region

  31.7

  36.8

  26.3

  30.4

  28.5

  33.1

  West midlands MC

  28.8

  33.6

  23.9

  28.2

  25.9

  30.4

  Hereford/Worcester

  38.9

  46.9

  28.3

  32.1

  32.7

  38.3

  Shropshire

  34.3

  40.8

  30.2

  34.2

  32.1

  37.2

  Staffordshire

  35.3

  40.2

  30.6

  34.3

  32.7

  36.9

  Warwickshire

  28.6

  32.0

  27.2

  31.1

  27.8

  31.5

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what are the latest figures for average earnings for men and for women in age groups 16 and 17, 18 to 24, 25 years and over and for all ages.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested is contained in the table.

  Average gross weekly earnings of full time employees whose pay was not affected by absence

  April 1992

  Age group

  Men (£)

  Women (£)

  Under 18

  113.8

  108.8

  18 to 24

  217.3

  182.1

  25 and over

  354.5

  256.2

  All ages

  335.7

  238.8

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will publish a table giving proportions of full-time male manual workers, full-time male non-manual workers and all full-time male workers with earnings including overtime of less than £190 per week in(a) west midlands region, (b) west midlands metropolitan county, (c) Hereford and Worcester, (d) Shropshire, (e) Staffordshire and (f) Warwickshire for 1992.

  Part-time women on adult rates whose pay was unaffected by absence: proportion with average gross hourly earnings excluding overtime below the following amounts

  (Percentages) April 1992

  Manual

  Non-manual

  All

  £4.80

  £5.40

  £4.80

  £5.40

  £4.80

  £5.40

  West midlands region

  90.0

  95.4

  62.2

  72.0

  73.6

  81.6

  West midlands MC

  87.9

  95.9

  57.6

  69.8

  70.1

  80.6

  Hereford and Worcestershire

  96.5

  97.7

  65.5

  71.3

  75.8

  80.0

  Shropshire

  94.8

  96.6

  1—

  1—

  77.7

  82.4

  Staffordshire

  91.4

  95.2

  69.3

  76.2

  80.3

  85.6

  Warwickshire

  87.5

  89.1

  1—

  1—

  74.1

  81.1

  1 "—" denotes sample number too low or standard error too high for reliable estimate.

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will publish a table giving proportions of full-time female manual workers, full-time female non-manual workers and all full-time female workers with earnings including overtime of less than £190 per week in(a) west midlands region, (b) west midlands metropolitan county, (c) Hereford and Worcester, (d) Shropshire, (e) Staffordshire and (f) Warwickshire for 1992.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested is contained in the table.
  248
  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested is contained in the table.

  Full-time men on adult rates whose pay was unaffected by absence: Proportion with average gross weekly earnings below the following amounts

  Percentages—April 1992

  Manual £190

  Non-manual £190

  All £190

  West Midlands region

  22.5

  12.1

  17.5

  West Midlands MC

  20.0

  11.2

  15.6

  Hereford and Worcester

  30.0

  11.8

  21.6

  Shropshire

  24.7

  9.3

  18.2

  Staffordshire

  25.4

  15.5

  21.0

  Warwickshire

  19.7

  14.0

  16.8

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will give the proportions of part-time female manual workers, part-time female non-manual workers and all female part-time workers with earnings excluding overtime of less than £5.20 per hour and £5.30 per hour in (i) west midlands region, (ii) west midlands metropolitan county, (iii) Hereford and Worcester, (iv) Shropshire, (v) Staffordshire and (vi) Warwickshire for 1992.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The available information nearest to that requested is contained in the table.

  Full-time women on adult rates whose pay was unaffected by absence: proportion with average gross weekly earnings below the

  (Percentages)

  following amounts

  April 1992

  Manual £190

  Non-manual £190

  All £190

  West Midlands region

  74.7

  43.4

  50.1

  West Midlands metropolitan county

  72.3

  39.9

  46.4

  Hereford and Worcester

  76.5

  45.0

  51.8

  Shropshire

  87.7

  52.3

  59.8

  Staffordshire

  75.8

  48.1

  55.2

  Warwickshire

  72.7

  45.9

  51.8

  Source: New Earnings Survey.

  Construction Site Injuries
  Ms. Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many(a) successful and (b) unsuccessful prosecutions took place in each of the last five years as a result of investigations into deaths and major injuries on construction sites in the north-west.

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

  Ms. Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many investigations were undertaken into deaths and major injuries on construction sites in the north-west in each of the last five years by(a) the Health and Safety Executive and (b) the police.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The available information for the Health and Safety Executive's north-west region is provided in the following table.

  Injuries in the construction industry in the north west1 as reported to HSEs factory and agricultural inspectorate2 and local au thorities 1987–88–1991–925 3

  Year3

  Employees4

  Fatals Self employed

  Members of public

  Employees4

  Majors Self employed

  Members of public

  1987–88

  15

  3

  1

  308

  37

  15

  1988–89

  10

  5

  2

  364

  67

  18

  1989–90

  7

  7

  1

  399

  65

  13

  1990–91

  13

  3

  —

  373

  77

  12

  1991–925

  14

  1

  1

  287

  79

  15

  1 Injuries occurring HSE's administration areas covering Cumbria, Lancashire, Merseyside, Greater Manchester and Cheshire.

  2 Data for 1990–91 and 1991–92 includes injuries reported to HSE's Quarries Inspectorate.

  3 Years commencing 1st April.

  4 Including trainees.

  5 Provisional.

  Training
  Dr. Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make public the monthly reports of supply and demand of youth training places in each training and enterprise council area which she announced she was to receive in her press release of 7 July.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already announced the estimated numbers of young people seeking training at the national level ill a reply to my hon. Friend, the Member for Gedling (Mr. Mitchell) on 1 December 1992,Official Report, columns 127–28. Figures for the supply of places are not available. Estimates of demand for places at local level vary in precision and reliability. Changes are being introduced to improve the information we receive and my right hon. Friend will be considering what further information to make available in the light of advice on the reliability of disaggregated statistics.

  Mrs. Wise
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many 16 and 17-year-olds in Lancashire are currently awaiting a youth training place.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced the estimated numbers of young people seeking training at national level in a reply to my hon.
  250

  Number of accidents, incidents and dangerous occurrences on construction sites which were investigated by HSE inspectors in the north west region (a) 1987–88–1991–921 (b)

  Year (b)

  Total

  1987–88

  261

  1988–89

  284

  1989–90

  271

  1990–91

  229

  11991–92

  176

  (a) HSEs administration areas covering Cumbria, Lancashire, Merseyside, Greater Manchester and Cheshire.

  (b) Years commencing 1st April.

  1 Provisional.

  Questions about the work of police forces are for my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary.

  Ms. Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many deaths and major injuries have occurred on construction sites in the north-west in each of the last five years.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The relevant information is given in the table.

  Friend the Member of Gedling (Mr. Mitchell) on 1 December 1992, Official Report, columns 127–28. Estimates of demand for places at local level vary in precision and reliability. Changes are being introduced to improve the information my right hon. Friend receives. In November, TECs' planned provision for training exceeded the number of guarantee young people seeking training by about 7,000.

  Unemployment
  Mr. Rathlbone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list in rank order the travel-to-work areas in the south-east region which have consistently recorded an unemployment rate above the national average for the previous 12 months.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested can be obtained from the NOMIS database in the Library.

  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will list for each European Community country(a) the numbers of people unemployed for the latest month for which comparable figures are available and (b) the percentage of the work force which this represents.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Comparable estimates on the numbers of people unemployed in European Community countries are not available on a monthly basis.
  251
  The following table provides the extent of the readily available information on rates.

  Comparable seasonally adjusted unemployment rates in EC countries (OECD standardised rates)1

  Country

  Unemployment rate

  Month

  Spain

  17.5

  May

  Ireland

  16.6

  November

  France

  10.3

  September

  United Kingdom

  10.2

  October

  Italy

  9.9

  July

  Denmark1

  9.6

  October

  Belgium

  8.1

  October

  Greece3

  7.0

  1990

  Netherlands

  6.8

  September

  Germany2

  4.7

  September

  Portugal

  4.1

  August

  Luxembourg1

  2.0

  October

  1 For those countries for which no OECD standardised rates are available, similar harmonised rates compiled by the Statistical Office of the European Communities (EUROSTAT).

  2 There are no reliable figures available as yet for a unified Germany. The rate quoted is for what was formerly West Germany.

  3 There are no recent comparable monthly figures available for Greece. The figure quoted is for the spring of 1990.

  Enterprise Allowances
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what was the number of enterprise allowances(a) started, (b) completed, (c) carried through to start-up and (d) surviving more than 12 months after start-up in England and Wales in 1990–91 and 1991–92; and what is the equivalent information for the northern region and the Tyneside training and enterprise council.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The number of enterprise allowances —renamed business start-up allowances from 1991–92—started is set out in the table. The number of those carried through to start-up is not an applicable measure, as allowances are awarded on start-up. The number of completions and those surviving more than 12 months is not available.

  Enterprise/business start-up allowances awarded

  1990–91

  1991–92

  England and Wales

  54,400

  45,500

  Northern region

  3,600

  2,800

  Tyneside TEC

  1,215

  641

  Building Industry
  Mr. Mike OBrien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list the companies prosecuted since 1987 in the building and construction industry under health and safety legislation, where injuries or fatalities have resulted, by the size of the companies in terms of the number of employees employed in the building and construction industry.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information is not available in the form requested.

  Mr. Mike OBrien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what steps are being taken by the Government to reduce the number of deaths at the workplace in the building and construction industry.
  252
  Mr. McLoughlin
  Prime responsibility for health and safety at workplaces, including those in the building and construction industry, rests with employers and others on site.

  The Government and the Health and Safety Commission—HSC—recognise the need to promote long lasting changes in the construction industry. Indeed, the HSC was preparing proposals to improve the management of health and safety in the industry well before the European Commission began to develop its temporary or mobile construction sites directive. Following adoption of this directive in June of this year, the HSC published a major consultative document on proposed new Construction (Design and Management) Regulations and an approved code of practice, a copy of which is in the Library. The proposals affect everyone who can contribute to the improvement of health and safety standards on site and their coming into force at the end of next year should reduce significantly the numbers of deaths and injuries at the workplace in the industry.

  The Construction (Head Protection) Regulations 1990 which require the wearing of suitable head protection at construction activities came into force on 30 March 1990 and have already resulted in a significant reduction in head injuries.

  Health and Safety Executive inspectors continue to make visits to construction activities for a variety of purposes, including preventive inspection and the investigation of accidents, and take whatever action is necessary to ensure compliance with the relevant health and safety legislation. There is a programme of initiatives, most recently including the roofwork campaign.

  Mr. Mike OBrien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list the number of prosecutions undertaken for breaches of the health and safety legislation in the building and construction industry for each year since 1970.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The available information is provided in the following table. Analysis of prosecution action taken, by industrial sector, is not available for years prior to 1981.

  Prosecution action taken by HSEs factory and agricultural inspectorates for all breaches of health and safety legislation occurring in the construction industry, 1981 to 1991–924

  Year1

  3Number of informations laid

  Number of convictions

  Average fine per conviction £

  1981

  605

  531

  218

  1982

  856

  734

  219

  1983

  727

  651

  262

  1984

  669

  590

  345

  1985

  717

  577

  433

  January to March 1986

  158

  128

  436

  1986–87

  624

  461

  488

  1987–88

  759

  654

  471

  1988–89

  685

  599

  580

  1989–90

  781

  658

  762

  1990–912

  746

  600

  857

  1991–924 2

  738

  601

  1,042

  1 1981–85 calendar years. 1986–87 onwards years commencing 1 April.

  2 Figures for the years 1990–91 and 1991–924 include action taken by the quarries inspectorate.

  3 Informations laid relate to single breaches of Health and Safety legislation.

  4 Provisional.

  253
  Mr. Mike OBrien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many workers in the building and construction industry have died while in the workplace(a) in 1987–88 and (b) 1991–92.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The statistics requested are provided in the table.

  Number of-fatalities occurring within the construction industry1 during the years 1987–88 and 1991–923 as reported to enforcement authorities2

  1987–88

  1991–923

  Employees

  103

  82

  Self-employed

  40

  16

  All workers

  143

  98

  1 As defined by Standard Industrial Classifiction (SIC) division 5.

  2 Under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1985.

  3 Provisional.

  Health and Safety
  Mr. Mike OBrien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list the companies which have been prosecuted for breach of health and safety regulations since 1987 distinguishing those in which fatalities have resulted, and those in which injuries have occurred.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information is not available in the form requested. However, between 1987–88 and 1991–921 12,037 information were laid by the Health and Safety Executive for breaches of health and safety regulations, with a further 2,814 laid by local authorities between 1987–88 and 1990–91; figures for 1991–92 not yet available.

  1 Provisional.

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment which leaflets published by the Health and Safety Executive are available in languages other than English; and if she will list the languages in which they are available.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 places the responsibility for the provision of necessary information to employees upon employers. This reflects the need for information to relate to the work in hand and the practical difficulty of providing information about hazard in the numerous minority languages spoken in the workplace.

  The Health and Safety Executive has recently published a booklet "Health and Safety in Great Britain"; it is available free in all European Community Languages. A Welsh language version of the poster "Health and Safety Law—What you should know" is available in Welsh and three leaflets in the agricultural series have also been produced in Welsh. The HSE has undertaken to produce its booklet "HSE and you", which is addressed to the citizen, in a number of minority languages.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what representations she has received from British Sikhs concerning possible exemptions to headgear regulations under the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has received a number of representations from Sikh organisations and others on this issue, to which she and Ministers of this Department have responded individually.

  Postal Ballots (Funding)
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment when she consulted trades unions about her proposal to end funding of postal ballots and to drop funding of training through the Trades Union Congress.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Trade unions have been given as much notice as possible of the decision to end public subsidy of trade union ballots and training of officials, and the grants are being phased out gradually to allow the trade unions time to adjust and plan accordingly. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State wrote to the general secretary of the TUC to inform him of the decision on 10 December and met him and other representatives of the TUC on 14 December to listen to their views on this matter.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment when she decided to end funding for trade union ballots and training; and how much expenditure she expects to save.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The final decision to end public subsidy for trade union ballots and the training of officials was taken after this years Autumn Statement. Expenditure for the two schemes together will amount to some £5.6 million in 1992–93. Full savings will not be made immediately, as the schemes in question are being phased out over three years.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what the cost has been each year to public funds of trade union ballots and of trade union training.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The information requested is set out in the table.

  Cost to Public Funds of Trade Union ballots and of Trade Union Training

  Expenditure (£000s)

  Financial Year

  Trade Union Education and Training Grant (TUET)

  Trade Union Ballot Funding Scheme (TUBFS)

  1976–77

  400

  —

  1977–78

  641

  —

  1978–79

  627

  —

  1979–80

  1,871

  —

  1980–81

  1,701

  —

  1981–82

  1,872

  13

  1982–83

  1,633

  52

  1983–84

  1,586

  60

  1984–85

  1,583

  73

  1985–86

  1,753

  1,681

  1986–87

  1,774

  599

  1987–88

  457

  1,126

  1988–89

  1,064

  808

  1989–90

  1,825

  2,091

  1990–91

  1,927

  2,933

  1991–92

  2,022

  4,682

  11992–93

  1,978

  3,600

  1 (anticipated).

  Notes:

  1. All figures rounded to nearest £1,000.

  2. The Trade Union Education and Training grant was funded jointly by Department of Employment and Department of Education and Science (DES) until, and including, 1987–88. Figures quoted for the relevant years cover total Government expenditure.

  3. All details of Department of Employment payments were taken from the Departments Appropriation Account for the relevant year. Details of DES TUET expenditure were provided by the DES.

  4. TUET payments began in 1976–77, and TUBFS payments in 1981–82.

  Pit Closures
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is her estimate of the national multiplier effect on(a) industry related and (b) service sector jobs, per redundant miner, as a consequence of the pit closure programme.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Departments views on the effects of the possible pit closures on employment levels in other occupations are set out in a memorandum for the Employment Select Committee which has been placed in the Library.

  Home Workers
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) when she proposes to publish leaflets containing advice and guidance for home workers; and in what languages she intends to publish them;

  (2) when she intends to publish advice and guidance for employers of home workers.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Advice to home workers and their employers is given in the Department of Employment booklet "Be Flexible—A Guide to Flexible Working", which was published in March 1992. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has no plans to issue versions in other languages.

  Scottish Projects
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment, further to her answer of 8 December,Official Report, columns 619–20, if she will list the successful Scottish projects, including the one in Strathclyde which was awarded the sum of £142,336.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The projects which were successful in Scotland under the NOW initiative are as follows:

  COTHROM
  "COTHROM"

  Save the Children Fund
  "The Gate Programme"

  Stirling Womens Technology Centre
  "Telematics and Telecommunications"

  Central Regional Council
  "The Power Project"

  Telford College
  "Women in Construction"

  Jewel/Esk Valley College
  "National Certificate in Electronic Engineering for Women"

  Lothian Regional Council
  "Teleworking Mode Demonstration Project"

  Dunbartonshire Enterprise
  "European Women in Tourism"

  Scottish Enterprises Foundation
  "Stirling Enterprise Training Transfer"

  Stirling University
  "Action Learning for Business Growth"

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

  Debt Reduction
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will publish for 1989, 1990 and 1991 a breakdown of the write-offs and debt 256
  reduction instruments given in note 2 of "British Aid Statistics 1987–88 to 1991–92", identifying each element separately and including (a) debt write-off, (b) debt rescheduling and (c) bank reserves held as provision against bad debts.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The requested breakdown of the figures in note 2 of "British Aid Statistics" is:

  £ million

  1989

  1990

  1991

  Write-offs

  1,280

  2,650

  230

  Debt reduction instruments

  —

  2,930

  850

  Write-offs and debt reduction instruments

  1,280

  5,580

  1,080

  Debt rescheduling does not affect the net banking flows, as no net repayment is involved.

  Bank reserves held as provision against bad debts also do not affect the net banking flows, as loans are reported gross of such provisions.

  Somalia
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his assessment of the amount of food aid currently available to feed the people of Somalia.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The main problem in Somalia is not the amount of food aid potentially available for famine relief, but the difficulty of delivering this food to starving people in the midst of continuing war and civil conflict. It was in explicit recognition of this problem that the United Nations decided recently to dispatch troops to Somalia to help with the humanitarian relief operation. Food aid is now being released from Mogadishu for distribution under the protection of United States troops. Food aid commitments to Somalia since January 1992 total some 500,000 tonnes, of which nearly 60 per cent. has been already delivered. A further 20 per cent. is en route to Somalia to be delivered as soon as the right conditions for distribution prevail.

  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the effectiveness and efficiency of the European Community and British food aid effort in Somalia.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Continuing security problems have hampered the effectiveness and efficiency of all donor activities in Somalia. The recent deployment of United Nations troops in Somalia is accelerating delivery of humanitarian relief, hitherto blocked by the actions of local warring factions, including food aid funded under British and European Community programmes.

  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 9 December,Official Report, column 675, what representatives he has sent to regions other than the south and centre of Somalia in order to assess the current needs within the situation of relative stability and to prepare proposals for a specific British contribution to reconstruction.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  We have already made it clear that we are prepared to contribute, principally through British
  257
  non-governmental organisations, to reconstruction and rehabilitation work in the north of Somalia, through our humanitarian assistance programme and subject to being satisfied over the security situation. We also expect to be involved in such work in other parts of the country once conditions allow, as part of a comprehensive and integrated rehabilitation and construction plan that will need to be drawn up by the international community for a post-conflict Somalia.

  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 9 December,Official Report, column 675, what specific contribution Her Majesty's Government have offered to make towards the United Nations plan for rehabilitation and institution rebuilding in the north of Somalia (Republic of Somaliland).

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: The United Nations has not been able to develop its proposed strategy for rehabilitation and institution building in northern Somalia because of insecurity In the region and elsewhere in the country. We hope implementation of Security Council resolution 794 will enable it to do so. We have made it clear to United Nations agencies and NGOs operating in the north that we are ready to help.

  Bosnia
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make Mr. Tim Lankester's report on Bosnia, dated 30 November, available to voluntary organisations concerned with aid to Bosnia.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The report by Mr. Tim Lankester is available to any interested party from ODA's information department. It was also covered in The Independent newspaper of 11 December.

  Sudan
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what has been the amount of financial aid given to Sudan in each of the last three years; and for what assistance or projects this aid has been spent.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The table shows bilateral development and humanitarian aid to Sudan for financial years 1989–90, 1990–91 and 1991–92. In January 1991 British bilateral development assistance to Sudan was terminated for political and economic reasons including Sudan's record on human rights. There was, however, some residual expenditure in 1991–92.

  British aid to Sudan

  £ thousands

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  Bilateral development aid

  17,768

  15,962

  3,038

  Humanitarian assistance

  7,675

  8,281

  14,423

  Total

  25,443

  24,243

  17,461

  Development projects have been funded principally in renewable natural resources, energy, railways, and education.

  Forests
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he will take to ensure that there is a reduction of deforestation in third world countries; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  To help forestry in developing countries we have over 200 projects either under way or in preparation at a total cost to the aid programme of about £160 million. We are also working to improve the effectiveness of the International Tropical Timber Organisation and the tropical forestry action programme in promoting the sustainable use of tropical forests, and to ensure that the statement of principles on the sustainable management of the world's forests agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio last June is followed up with effective action and an international review process.

  Angola
  Mr. Parry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much Government aid has been given to Angola in each of the last five years; arid if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: Bilateral Government aid to Angola in each of the last five years was as follows:

  £ million

  1987–88

  0.471

  1988–89

  1.140

  1989–90

  0.731

  1990–91

  1.530

  1991–92

  1.278

  So far this financial year we have spent £.1.075 million. Our aid is mainly in the form of English language teaching, training awards, small projects, electoral assistance and emergency relief; £0.5 million has been pledged for the repatriation of Angolan refugees.

  The security situation is affecting our work. At present we have no long-term aid personnel in Angola and do not contemplate sending any, other than for relief work, until the security situation improves.

  Non-governmental Organisations
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the non-governmental organisations in receipt of grants from his Department for each year since 1990; and what was the size of each grant.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [pursuant to his reply, 16 November 1992, c. 60–62]: The details of all grants to non-governmental organisations for 1991–92 are set out in the table.

  1991–92 Direct grants to non-governmental organisations Amount of direct grant awarded in financial year 1991–92

  Voluntary organisation

  £

  Action Aid

  1,508,340

  Action Disability and Development

  192,919

  Action Health 2000

  5,000

  Afghan Aid

  1,500,000

  259

  Voluntary organisation

  £

  Africa Now

  41,245

  Aga Khan Foundation

  1,650,981

  Al-Ul-Bayt (Islamic Centre)

  170,000

  AHRTAG

  335,391

  Alternative for India Development

  74,405

  AMREF

  174,690

  ApT Design and Development

  91,375

  APTT Trust-UK

  3,007

  Association for Consumer Research

  59,362

  Association of Pioneer Rescue

  20,000

  British Executive Service

  643,584

  British Red Cross Society

  15,566,649

  British Refugee Council

  12,000

  Bureau for Overseas Medical

  7,114

  Business in the Community

  30,499

  Busoga Trust

  46,334

  Catholic Fund for Overseas Development

  6,438,956

  Cambodia Trust

  155,000

  CARE

  12,931,322

  Catholic Institute for International Relations

  1,521,320

  Charities Aid Foundation

  225,934

  Child to Child

  7,500

  Christian Aid

  10,095,546

  Christian Outreach

  482,654

  Christians Abroad

  22,056

  Co-operation For Development

  547,485

  CODA International Training

  32,390

  Commonwealth Foundation

  5,000

  Commonwealth Human Ecology

  5,423

  Commonwealth TUC

  108,856

  Concern

  3,096,207

  Concern Universal

  109,000

  Conservation Foundation

  46,172

  Consumer Research Laboratory

  5,799

  Cusichaca Project Trust

  50,000

  Duke of Edinburgh's Award

  42,665

  Durham-Lesotho Link

  30,954

  Educ in World Citizen Council

  4,000

  Euro Action Acord

  1,898,378

  FARM

  473,647

  Feed The Children

  437,527

  Feed The Minds

  7,677

  Find Your Feet

  2,322

  Food for Hungry International

  25,540

  Forum

  10,000

  Friends of Urambo and Mwanhala

  7,473

  Friends of Conservation

  58,300

  GOAL

  75,000

  Gurkha Welfare Trust

  133,539

  Halo Trust

  60,000

  Harold MacMillan Trust

  30,000

  Harvest Help

  22,846

  Health Aid Moyo

  50,000

  Health Unlimited

  329,469

  Hedley Roberts Trust

  16,340

  Help the Aged

  353,558

  Henry Doubleday Research Association

  16,608

  IUCN

  39,740

  IBT Productions Ltd

  40,000

  Impact Foundation

  4,837

  India Development Group

  33,332

  International Year of Shelter

  90,533

  International Council of Bird Preservation

  39,000

  Intercare

  38,723

  Intermediate Technology Development

  3,131,392

  International Agricultural Training Programme

  45,001

  International Christian Relief

  50,000

  International Trust for Nature

  2,658

  International Extension College

  528,570

  International Institute for Environment and Development

  484,366

  International Planned Parenthood Federation

  7,505,053

  Iraqui Civilian

  624,500

  Iraqui Human Relief Committee

  150,000

  Joint Mission Hospital Equipment Board

  92,038

  Joe Homan Trust

  14,853

  King Mahendra Trust

  14,750

  Kurdish Relief Organisation

  181,600

  260

  Voluntary organisation

  £

  Kurdistan Reconstruction Organisation

  100,000

  Leonard Cheshire Foundation

  11,950

  Living Earth

  79,550

  Marie Stopes International

  997,367

  Medical Aid for Iraq

  100,000

  Medical Aid for Palestinians

  39,915

  Methodist Church Overseas

  5,115

  Nairobi Hospice Charitable Trust

  78,348

  National Association of Womens Organisation

  24,525

  Natue Slim (UK)

  20,000

  New Age Access

  19,500

  Ockenden Venture

  244,037

  Operation Raleigh

  1,480

  Opportunities for Women

  1,208

  Order of St. John

  228,706

  Overseas Development Institute

  1,482,137

  OXFAM

  7,104,289

  Plan International

  409,665

  Plunkett International

  9,000

  Population Concern

  304,415

  Project Mala

  71,740

  Quaker Peace 7 Service

  4,699

  Queen Elizabeth House

  12,750

  Ranfurly Library Service

  51,203

  RNIB

  454

  Royal Botanic Gardens Kew

  17,737

  Royal Commonwealth Society

  190,195

  Royal Geographical Society

  12,040

  Royal Society for Prevention of Accidents

  505

  Ryder Cheshire Mission

  115,872

  Special Projects in Christian Missionary Areas

  21,892

  Semi Arid Lands Training Livestock Improvement Centres

  18,505

  Salvation Army

  100,000

  Samburu Aid in Africa

  10,600

  Save the Children Fund

  14,914,363

  Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund

  108,638

  Scripture Union

  37,111

  Send a Cow

  23,332

  Skillshare Africa

  1,262,295

  SOS Sahel International

  283,020

  St. John's Ambulance

  6,980

  Tanzania Development Trust

  50,506

  Teaching Aids at Low Cost

  309

  Tear Fund

  77,454

  Thompson Foundation

  7,800

  Tiverton Kabale

  6,000

  Toc H

  9,053

  Trade UN International Research and Education Group

  3,320

  Traidcraft Exchange

  122,977

  Trax Program Support

  11,287

  Uganda Society for Disabled Children

  157,500

  UK Foundation for the People in the South Pacific

  145,042

  UKJAID

  45,000

  UNA International Service

  760,319

  Urban Aid

  32,543

  Urban Foundation

  12,000

  Vetaid

  63,755

  Village Service Trust

  6,402

  Voluntary Christian Service

  5,677

  Voluntary Service Overseas

  12,874,139

  Water Aid

  770,310

  Womankind

  78,460

  World Conservation Monitoring

  91,500

  World University Service

  1,412,026

  World Vision of Britain

  1,294,959

  Worldwide Fund for Nature

  1,400,552

  Y-Care International

  252,136

  You and Me

  28,000

  Zimbabwe Trust

  267,465

  Zoological Society of London

  100,000

  TOTAL

  123,827,933

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Intergovernmental Agreements
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the proposal by Mr. Jacques Delors that the European Court could oversee intergovernmental agreements under the Maastricht treaty; what representations Her Majesty's Government have made to Mr. Delors on his proposal; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the relevant documents.

  Mr. Goodlad
  In a recent speech on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the European Court of Justice, the President of the Commission expressed the hope that extensive recourse would be had to the possibility of conferring on the court jurisdiction regarding the interpretation and application of international conventions in the field of justice and home affairs. Article K.3(2)(c) of the treaty on European union allows such jurisdiction to be conferred on the Court in relation to a convention concluded under title VI of the treaty if the convention so stipulates.

  This will, therefore, be a matter for member states to consider when negotiating any such convention. Unanimity would be needed to include such a provision. No representations have been made to the President of the Commission on this matter. A copy of the speech in question has been placed in the Library of the House.

  UNESCO
  Mr. Dowd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what was the sum total of UNESCO expenditure in the United Kingdom(a) during 1991 and (b) since 1985 to date.

  Mr. Goodlad
  According to UNESCO statistics, the total of the organisation's expenditure—to the nearest thousand pounds—in the United Kingdom in 1991 was £4,780,000, and from 1985 to 1991 inclusive was £30,626,000. No figures are available for 1992. They include UNESCO coupons redeemed in the United Kingdom, but not payments to United Kingdom nationals employed by UNESCO.

  Mr. Dowd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what account he has taken of the report by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, "An Agenda for Peace", in considering when to put forward the United Kingdom's application to rejoin UNESCO.

  Mr. Goodlad
  We do not believe there is any direct link between the Secretary-Generals report and our consideration of UNESCO membership. It has, therefore, not figured in our thinking on any resumption of United Kingdom membership.

  Mr. Dowd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which of the nine objections put forward in the United Kingdom's notice of withdrawal from UNESCO in 1984 by the then Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs are still held by the British Government.

  Mr. Goodlad
  We acknowledge progress made by UNESCO towards reform. However, we believe that scope 262
  remains for further programme concentration—point (i) of the then Secretary of State's letter of 5 December 1984 to the then director-general of UNESCO.

  We continue to be concerned at weaknesses in UNESCOs evaluation of programmes—point viii. Much remains to be achieved on decentralisation—point ix.

  Rape
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with Governments of the Western European Union to make rape a war crime in the conventions of international law; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Goodlad
  No such discussions have taken place within the WEU. Under the fourth Geneva convention, women are to be especially protected against any attack on their honour, particularly against rape, enforced prostitution and indecent assault. All parties to the Geneva conventions are already under an obligation to ensure that criminal sanctions are available against those who commit grave breaches of the conventions.

  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussion he has had with governments of member states of the Western European Union to provide financial funding to give counselling and assistance to women and girls who have been raped in the countries of the former Yugoslavia; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Goodlad
  There have been no discussions in the WEU. The European Council at Edinburgh strongly condemned the systematic detention and rape of Muslim women in the former Yugoslavia. The EC will send a mission of experts to the former Yugoslavia to investigate the allegations and to report urgently to Foreign Ministers.

  Turkey
  Mrs. Mahon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations Her Majesty's Government have made to Turkey about the rights of minorities and people of non-Turkish origin in Turkey and about the death penalty.

  Mr. Goodlad
  The Government have regular contact with the Turkish Government on the subject of human rights.

  The issue was most recently discussed during the visit of the Turkish Prime Minister in November. During the visit Mr. Demirel reiterated his Government's commitment to its programme of reforms which aims at improving human rights and increasing democratisation in the country.

  We welcome this commitment on the part of the Turks and look forward to the early implementation of the Government's programme.

  Kurdistan
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if Her Majesty's Government will make it their policy to recognise Kurdistan as an independent country.

  Mr. Goodlad
  No. The Kurdish population of the middle east is spread throughout a number of independent states whose territorial integrity we support.

  Hong Kong
  Mr. Duncan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the policy of Her Majesty's Government towards discussing the Governor of Hong Kong's proposal for the 1995 Legislative Council elections with the People's Republic of China.

  Mr. Goodlad
  The Government fully support the Governor's proposals. The Governor has said many times that these are proposals not firm decisions. We are ready to talk to the Chinese Government about them at any time and to discuss any alternative ideas they may have for the 1995 elections, which meet the criteria of fairness, openness and acceptability to the people of Hong Kong.

  The proposals will be put to the Hong Kong Legislative Council in the form of draft legislation early next year. The council passed a motion in support of the Government's proposals last month and they have been strongly supported within the community.

EDUCATION

  School Governors and Head Teachers
  Mr. Hendry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will set out the respective responsibilities of school governors and head teachers.

  Mr. Forth
  The roles of school governors and headteachers are set out in different pieces of legislation, and brought together in detail in the articles of government of individual schools. In general terms, the conduct of the school is under the direction of the governing body while the head teacher has responsibility for the internal organisation and management of the school.

  Science and Technology
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on the current standard of science and technology facilities in state secondary schools.

  Mr. Forth
  Evidence from visits by Her Majestys inspectorate shows that most schools have satisfactory

  Derbyshire Secondary Schools Comparison of budget share per pupil with the proportion of 15 year old pupils obtaining 5 or more grades A to C at GCSE

  School name

  1992–93 budget share

  1992–93 funding population

  Implied budget share per pupil

  Proportion of 15 year old pupils obtaining 5 or more grades A to C at GCSE

  Duffield Ecclesbourne (GM)

  2,183,979

  1,259

  1,734

  65

  Chesterfield St. Marys RC

  1,763,577

  1,052

  1,676

  60

  Bakewell Lady Manners

  2,478,787

  1,371

  1,807

  58

  Derby Woodlands Community

  1,624,893

  908

  1,790

  58

  Derby Chellaston Community

  1,525,927

  930

  1,641

  56

  Sandiacre Friesland

  1,476,448

  835

  1,769

  55

  Matlock Highfields

  2,642,975

  1,442

  1,833

  53

  Dronfield School

  3,486,755

  1,896

  1,839

  53

  Chesterfield Brookfield

  2,825,517

  1,470

  1,923

  53

  Ilkeston St. John Houghton RC

  922,263

  443

  2,081

  49

  Etwall John Port

  2,871,588

  1,675

  1,714

  49

  Derby Littleover Community

  1,938,327

  1,044

  1,857

  49

  Hope Valley College

  960,454

  444

  2,165

  48

  Ashbourne Queen Elizabeth

  2,108,253

  1,129

  1,868

  48

  Belper

  1,820,382

  950

  1,917

  46

  Ripley Mill Hill

  2,117,376

  1,248

  1,697

  45

  Wirksworth Anthony Gell

  1,251,432

  615

  2,036

  44

  264
  facilities for science and technology. Where there is room for improvement, schools are being helped by the programme of grants for education support and training, which this year supported £30 million of expenditure on books and equipment.

  Temporary Teachers
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will estimate the number of schools which rely on temporary appointments to maintain an adequate teaching staff.

  Mr. Forth
  The information requested is not available. In January 1992 19,700 full-time teachers in England were employed under temporary contracts compared with 334,300 on permanent contracts. Temporary contracts do not necessarily imply recruitment difficulties; they may be made for a variety of reasons.

  Parents Charter
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will publish the costs to his Department of(a) publication of the appropriate ring files and subsequent updating of the national curriculum folders and (b) publishing, producing and distributing the parents charter booklet.

  Mr. Forth
  The total cost to the Department since 1988 of publishing and distributing ring binders containing attainment targets and programmes of study for the national curriculum is estimated at £8.77 million.

  The cost of publishing, producing and distributing the parents charter—including advertising—was £1,957,500.

  Examination Results
  Mr. Hendry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will publish a list of secondary schools in Derbyshire in order of their examination results, together with the amount spent per pupil in each school.

  Mr. Forth
  The information requested is set out in the table.
  265

  School name

  1992–93 budget share

  1992–93 funding population

  Implied budget share per pupil

  Proportion of 15 year old pupils obtaining 5 or more grades A to C at GCSE

  Chapel-En-Le-Frith

  1,120,233

  556

  2,015

  43

  Glossopdale

  3,108,957

  1,613

  1,927

  42

  New Mills

  1,674,063

  862

  1,942

  41

  South Normanton Frederick GE

  1,252,169

  647

  1,934

  40

  Derby St. Benedict RC

  2,555,664

  1,421

  1,798

  40

  Clay Cross Tupton Hall

  2,911,572

  1,681

  1,732

  40

  Glossop St. Philip Howard RC

  960,235

  426

  2,255

  39

  Eckington

  2,730,915

  1,572

  1,737

  39

  Denby John Flamstead

  947,552

  494

  1,917

  39

  Derby Moor Community

  2,142,918

  1,099

  1,951

  38

  Buxton Community School

  2,229,515

  1,218

  1,830

  37

  Swadlincote William Allitt

  1,254,769

  644

  1,949

  35

  Derby Murray Park Community

  1,690,167

  904

  1,871

  35

  Tibshelf

  1,000,760

  532

  1,882

  34

  Swadlincote Pringle

  1,999,770

  1,174

  1,704

  34

  Long Eaton Wilsthorpe

  2,162,144

  1,167

  1,853

  34

  Chesterfield Hasland Hall

  1,489,844

  777

  1,917

  34

  Alfreton Mortimer Wilson

  2,096,801

  1,146

  1,830

  33

  Ilkeston Kirk Hallam

  1,359,510

  705

  1,927

  32

  Stavely Neverthorpe (GM)

  1,402,900

  729

  1,924

  31

  Heanor Gate

  1,618,586

  950

  1,705

  31

  Derby West Park Community

  2,581,838

  1,387

  1,861

  29

  Long Eaton

  2,187,839

  1,105

  1,981

  28

  Stavely Springwell

  1,667,000

  738

  2,259

  26

  Ilkeston

  2,176,501

  1,186

  1,835

  26

  Derby Bemrose Community

  1,650,749

  753

  2,192

  26

  Buxton St. Thomas More RC

  702,919

  288

  2,445

  26

  Swadlincote Granville

  1,192,345

  591

  2,017

  25

  Derby Sinfin School

  1,850,056

  947

  1,954

  25

  Derby The Merrill Community

  1,855,682

  769

  2,412

  24

  Alfreton Swanwick Hall

  1,836,112

  995

  1,846

  23

  Heanor Aldercar

  1,128,684

  496

  2,274

  22

  Chesterfield Newbold

  2,408,987

  1,205

  1,999

  21

  Clowne Heritage Community

  1,993,883

  1,006

  1,981

  20

  Derby Noel Baker Community

  2,310,779

  1,151

  2,007

  19

  Derby Lees Brook Community

  1,343,329

  621

  2,162

  19

  Chesterfield Meadows

  1,109,797

  497

  2,235

  19

  Bolsover Community

  1,962,679

  942

  2,083

  15

  North Wingfield Deincourt

  1,399,649

  617

  2,270

  14

  Chesterfield Parkside

  1,201,515

  499

  2,408

  14

  Ilkeston Bennerley

  1,177,357

  513

  2,295

  13

  Shirebrook Community

  1,531,343

  637

  2,406

  10

  Derby Village Community

  1,478,553

  622

  2,376

  8

  Derby High View Community

  1,614,143

  646

  2,499

  8

  Notes:

  1. Columns 2 and 3 are taken from Derbyshire's 1992–93 Section 42 statment.

  2. Column 5 is taken from data published under the Parents' Charter.

  Research Assessment
  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what has been the cost to public funds of the higher education research assessment exercise.

  Mr. Boswell
  The Universities Funding Council has asked participating universities and colleges for estimates of the costs incurred in the 1992 research assessment exercise, which has only just been completed and is due to be published very shortly. Information on the total costs of the exercise is likely to be available early next year.

  Grant-maintained Schools
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list the number of employees in his Department, and their total salary costs, who are engaged in(a) liaison with the Grant Maintained Schools Centre, (b) providing
  266
  information to prospective grant-maintained schools and (c) questions concerning ballots in schools seeking grant-maintained status.

  Mr. Forth
  Liaison with the Grant Maintained Schools Centre occupies in aggregate about one full-time equivalent—FTE—at a cost of some £20,000 this year; providing information to prospective grant-maintained schools about six FTE at a cost of some £105,000; arid questions concerning ballots about five FTE at a cost of some £102,000. In addition the staff concerned are able o draw when required on the services of the Department's professional staff—including lawyers and information officers.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list those schools which on achieving grant-maintained status or since have applied to him to change their admissions policy to allow some form of selection on the basis of ability or aptitude in any part of the curriculum.
  267
  Mr. Forth
  The following schools have applied for and had approved admission arrangements which involve the selection of 10 per cent. or less of pupils on the basis of their aptitude in music, sport, art or drama:

  King's School, Peterborough

  Westland High School, Kent

  Bishop's Stortford School, Hertfordshire

  Heathside School, Surrey

  Langley Park School for Boys, Bromley

  Beaverwood School, Bromley

  Dame Alice Owen School, Hertfordshire

  This list does not include those schools which have published statutory proposals for a significant change in character; none of the proposals involving selection have so far been approved.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education on how many occasions head teachers of grant-maintained schools have been paid by his Department to attend meetings at schools which were considering whether to have a ballot for grant-maintained status.

  Mr. Forth
  The Department does not pay head teachers of grant-maintained schools to attend meetings at prospective grant-maintained schools.

  Grants
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much in grant will be given by his Department in 1992–93 to(a) the Pre-school Playgroups Association, (b) the Church of England Board of Education, (c) the National Association of Governors and Managers, (d) the National Children's Bureau, (e) the Family Welfare Association, (f) the Girls' Brigade, (g) the National Association of Women's Institutes and (h) the Grant Maintained Schools Centre.

  Mr. Forth
  The grants to be given by the Department for Education in 1992–93 are as follows:—

  £ 000

  Pre-school Playgroups Association

  639.3

  Church of England Board of Education

  0.0

  National Association of Governors and Managers

  10.0

  National Children's Bureau

  55.0

  Family Welfare Association

  0.0

  Girls' Brigade

  30.0

  National Federation of Women's Institutes

  19.2

  Grant Maintained Schools Centre

  1760.0

  1 Up to.

  Maintained Schools
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on capital allocations for local education authority maintained schools for 1993–94.

  Mr. Forth
  Local education authorities have today been informed of their annual capital guidelines—ACGs—for schools which will total £443.5 million in 1993–94. They have also been informed of their allocations for capital spending by the governors of voluntary aided and special agreement schools in their areas—the overall grant to be made available in 1993–94 is £131.7 million. Provision for both sectors reflects the increasing rate of transfer of local authority schools to the grant-maintained sector; and the removal of sixth form colleges from local authority control.
  268
  Annual capital guidelines do not represent the full total of funds available to local education authorities for capital expenditure. Authorities are also able to spend additional sums from capital receipts and from their revenue budgets if they so choose.

  Local education authorities will be able to take advantage of the relaxation of the rules governing the permitted use of capital receipts announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor in his autumn statement. This removes for a period the requirement that 50 per cent. of such receipts should be used for debt redemption rather than capital spending.

  Local education authorities have received considerable resources in the last few years for building work at schools. The substantial sum available in 1993–94, together with the new flexibility on capital receipts, should enable local education authorities to continue to make significant progress in improving the school building stock.

  In distributing annual capital guidelines, I have again given priority to the second and third year expenditure on work covered by annual capital guidelines in earlier years, projects to provide new school places in areas of growing demand and cost-effective projects to remove surplus places.

  I have also been able to make a substantial contribution towards work to put right deficiencies in existing school buildings and for the effective delivery of the national curriculum.

  Of the total of £131.7 million grant for voluntary aided schools, £47.7 million has been set aside for repairs. The remainder—£84 million—is to be provided for capital work. Some £30 million of this will support new work to provide for new school places, cost-effective removal of surplus capacity as well as a range of improvement and replacement projects. Forty-nine major projects have been authorised to start and a further 24 to proceed to initial design work. My right hon. Friend and I look to local education authorities and school governors to ensure that this grant is fully and effectively utilised.

  A total of £21 million of the total will be allocated in the form of supplementary credit approvals— SCAs—to LEAs and of grant aid for governors of voluntary aided schools for successful bids under the technology schools initiative, the results of which were announced yesterday by the Baroness Blatch.

  Lists of ACGs and grant allocations to individual local authorities are as follows:

  ANNEX 1 Capital expenditure 1993–94: annual capital guidelines

  £ 000s

  Schools ACGS 1993–94

  Barking

  901

  Barnet

  3,077

  Bexley

  2,088

  Brent

  759

  Bromley

  2,281

  Croydon

  1,209

  Ealing

  5,432

  Enfield

  1,770

  Haringey

  2,168

  Harrow

  3,997

  Havering

  934

  Hillingdon

  1,190

  Hounslow

  3,709

  Kingston

  629

  Merton

  889

  Newham

  1,222

  269

  Schools ACGS 1993–94

  Redbridge

  1,179

  Richmond

  416

  Sutton

  980

  Waltham

  2,861

  City

  0

  Camden

  178

  Westminster

  572

  Greenwich

  1,050

  Hackney

  1,004

  Hammersmith

  769

  Islington

  523

  Kensington

  794

  Lambeth

  924

  Lewisham

  1,058

  Southwark

  2,123

  Wandsworth

  1,968

  Tower Hamlets

  10,554

  Birmingham

  6,252

  Coventry

  364

  Dudley

  993

  Sandwell

  2,662

  Solihull

  1,824

  Walsall

  802

  Wolverhampton

  1,993

  Knowsley

  839

  Liverpool

  2,822

  St. Helens

  683

  Sefton

  1,943

  Wirral

  1,466

  Bolton

  314

  Bury

  570

  Manchester

  8,356

  Oldham

  1,208

  Rochdale

  903

  Salford

  1,971

  Stockport

  973

  Tameside

  1,051

  Trafford

  1,334

  Wigan

  1,519

  Barnsley

  2.056

  Doncaster

  436

  Rotherham

  1,665

  Sheffield

  1,908

  Bradford

  6,670

  Calderdale

  1,256

  Kirklees

  5,758

  Leeds

  4,570

  Voluntary aided and special agreement schools—1993–94 capital allocations

  Allocation components

  New projects

  LEA name

  LEA Number

  Total allocation 1993–94 (000)

  Commitments (000)

  Minor works improvement (000)

  Major and minor projects (000)

  School number

  School name

  Category

  Major/named minor

  Ex DL">

  Approval statutory proposals

  Design list

  Start

  City of London

  201

  0

  0

  0

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Camden

  202

  237

  12

  204

  21

  4688

  William Ellis S

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  21

  —

  Greenwich

  203

  597

  469

  128

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Hackney

  204

  1,712

  450

  135

  1,127

  4697

  Hackney Free and Parochial CE S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  1,127

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  205

  1,064

  797

  119

  148

  4632

  Lady Margaret CE S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  148

  Islington

  206

  142

  20

  122

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Kensington and Chelsea

  207

  2,789

  2,692

  97

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Lambeth

  208

  769

  502

  147

  120

  3405

  Slreatham. St. Andrews RC P

  N

  Minor

  n/a

  120

  —

  —

  Lewisham

  209

  434

  0

  164

  270

  3301

  All Saints CE P

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  217

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4646

  Prendergast S

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  53

  —

  Southwark

  210

  1,561

  777

  207

  577

  3460

  East Dulwich, SS John and Clements CE P

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  558

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4680

  SS Saviour and Olaves CE S

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  19

  —

  Tower Hamlets

  211

  1,129

  866

  163

  100

  3346

  Guardian Angels RC P

  IR

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  100

  270

  Schools ACGS 1993–94

  Wakefield

  11,402

  Gateshead

  847

  Newcastle

  1,903

  North Tyneside

  3,906

  South Tyneside

  889

  Sunderland

  3,854

  Isles of Scilly

  40

  Avon

  4,780

  Bedfordshire

  2,827

  Berkshire

  4,421

  Buckinghamshire

  5,869

  Cambridgeshire

  7,638

  Cheshire

  9,676

  Cleveland

  3,657

  Cornwall

  2,864

  Cumbria

  8,298

  Derbyshire

  12,885

  Devon

  10,592

  Dorset

  5,196

  Durham

  5,306

  East Sussex

  11,020

  Essex

  11,643

  Gloucestershire

  8,598

  Hampshire

  9,605

  Hereford and Worcester

  2,396

  Hertfordshire

  4,009

  Humberside

  6,936

  Isle of Wight

  1,939

  Kent

  15,820

  Lancashire

  11,129

  Leicestershire

  6,859

  Lincolnshire

  10,471

  Norfolk

  3,987

  North Yorkshire

  5,296

  Northamptonshire

  4,558

  Northumberland

  2,199

  Nottinghamshire

  2,989

  Oxfordshire

  3,301

  Shropshire

  3,842

  Somerset

  4,207

  Staffordshire

  6,041

  Suffolk

  7,494

  Surrey

  10,167

  Warwick

  2,058

  West Sussex

  4,277

  Wiltshire

  2,518

  271

  Allocation components

  New projects

  LEA name

  LEA Number

  Tool allocation 1993–94 (000)

  Commitments (000)

  Minor works improvement (000)

  Major and minor projects (000)

  School number

  School name

  Category

  Major/named minor

  Ex DL?

  Approved statutory proposals

  Design list

  Start

  Wandsworth

  212

  239

  80

  122

  37

  3486

  St. Joseph's RC P

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  37

  Westminster

  213

  592

  409

  183

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Barking

  301

  48

  0

  48

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Barnet

  302

  837

  540

  267

  30

  4752

  Hampstead, Henrietta Barnet S

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  30

  —

  Bexley

  303

  230

  142

  88

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Brent

  304

  922

  771

  151

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Bromley

  305

  72

  0

  72

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Croydon

  306

  164

  9

  155

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Ealing

  307

  955

  0

  113

  842

  3302

  St. Saviours CE First

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  387

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3301

  Christchurch CE Junior

  SP

  Major-start

  No

  144

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4602

  Twyford CE High

  SP

  Major-start

  No

  252

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4603

  Greenford, Cardinal Wiseman RC S

  SP

  Major-design

  No

  —

  59

  —

  Enfield

  308

  1,169

  383

  170

  616

  4700

  Edmonton, Latymer

  EBN/IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  20

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4702

  Bishop Stopfords CE

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  596

  Haringey

  309

  776

  654

  122

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Harrow

  310

  81

  0

  81

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Havering

  311

  126

  0

  126

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Hillingdon

  312

  462

  0

  104

  358

  4600

  Bishop Ramsey CE School

  EBN

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  358

  Hounslow

  313

  1,030

  905

  125

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Kingston-upon-Thames

  314

  209

  0

  85

  124

  3305

  St. Johns CE

  N

  Minor

  n/a

  124

  —

  —

  Merton

  315

  101

  0

  101

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Newham

  316

  287

  205

  82

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Redbridge

  317

  1,611

  0

  93

  1,518

  4603

  Trinity RC High

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  338

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4604

  King Solomon High

  BN

  Major-start

  No

  1,180

  —

  —

  Richmond upon Thames

  318

  75

  0

  75

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Sutton

  319

  416

  344

  72

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Waltham Forest

  320

  51

  0

  51

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Birmingham

  330

  1,372

  585

  527

  260

  3339

  St. Josephs RC P

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  260

  Coventry

  331

  1,376

  1,215

  161

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Dudley

  332

  1,105

  16

  83

  1,006

  4612

  Castle High S

  SP

  Major-start

  Yes

  629

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4800

  Bishop Milner RC S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  353

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3354

  Pedmore CE P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  24

  —

  Sandwell

  333

  58

  2

  56

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Solihull

  334

  805

  302

  100

  403

  4650

  St. Peter's RC S

  BN

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  403

  Walsall

  335

  120

  0

  120

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Wolverhampton

  336

  1,660

  1,287

  88

  285

  3316

  St. Michaels CE P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  18

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4601

  St. Peters CE Collegiate S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  267

  Knowsley

  340

  334

  155

  179

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Liverpool

  341

  5,227

  4,462

  560

  205

  4782

  Notre Dame RC S

  SP

  Major-design

  No

  —

  75

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3553

  St Francis de Sales RC P

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  100

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3508

  Friary RC P

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  30

  St. Helens

  342

  279

  55

  185

  39

  3501

  Nutgrove Methodist P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  39

  —

  Sefton

  343

  997

  692

  284

  21

  3361

  Litherland, English Martyrs RC P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  21

  —

  Wirral

  344

  673

  467

  156

  50

  4611

  Wallasey, St Marys RC College

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  50

  Bolton

  350

  350

  77

  203

  70

  4612

  Thornleigh Salesian RC S

  BN

  Major-design

  No

  —

  28

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4605

  Bolton, Canon Slade CE S

  BN/IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  42

  —

  Bury

  351

  534

  400

  134

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Manchester

  352

  541

  117

  384

  40

  3467

  St Roberts RC P

  EBN/IR

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  40

  Oldham

  353

  1,146

  614

  184

  348

  4600

  Blue Coat CE S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  348

  Rochdale

  354

  151

  18

  133

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Salford

  355

  579

  25

  154

  400

  3801

  Broughton Jewish P

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  400

  Stockport

  356

  112

  0

  112

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  272 273

  Allocation components

  New projects

  LEA name

  LEA Number

  Total allocation 1993–94 (000)

  Commitments (000)

  Minor works improvement (000)

  Major and minor projects (000)

  School mumber

  School name

  Category

  Major/named minor

  Ex DL?

  Approved statutory proposals

  Design list

  Start

  Tameside

  357

  936

  581

  108

  247

  4603

  Demon, St Thomas More RC S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  247

  Trafford

  358

  369

  271

  98

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Wigan

  359

  988

  595

  393

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Barnsley

  370

  627

  575

  52

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Doncaster

  371

  85

  0

  85

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Rotherham

  372

  65

  0

  65

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Sheffield

  373

  438

  346

  92

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Bradford

  380

  561

  166

  213

  182

  3,313

  St. Stephens CE First

  N

  Minor

  n/a

  182

  —

  —

  Calderdale

  381

  123

  4

  100

  19

  3,327

  Elland, St. Patricks RC P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  19

  —

  Kirklees

  382

  991

  726

  113

  152

  3,320

  Batley Parish CE P

  BN

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  152

  Leeds

  383

  5,590

  5,267

  306

  17

  3,373

  St. Urbans RC P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  17

  —

  Wakefield

  384

  378

  129

  107

  142

  3,333

  Pontefract, St. Joseph's RC J & I

  IR

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  142

  Gateshead

  390

  396

  0

  87

  309

  4,603

  Wrekenton, St. Edmund Campion RC

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  309

  Newcastle-upon-Tyne

  391

  172

  20

  129

  23

  3,472

  St. Charles RC P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  23

  —

  North Tyneside

  392

  567

  504

  63

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  South Tyneside

  393

  69

  0

  69

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Sunderland

  394

  879

  756

  123

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Avon

  901

  1,058

  840

  218

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Bedfordshire

  902

  581

  16

  165

  400

  4,606

  Luton, Cardinal Newman RC High

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  400

  Berkshire

  903

  210

  0

  210

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Buckinghamshire

  904

  946

  737

  138

  71

  4803

  Waddesdon CE S

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  71

  Cambridgeshire

  905

  434

  215

  133

  86

  4702

  Peterborough St. John Fisher RC P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  50

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4602

  Cambridge, St. Bedes ECU S

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  36

  —

  Cheshire

  906

  2,660

  1,540

  486

  634

  4610

  Hartford, St. Nicholas RC S

  BN

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  176

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3645

  Northwich, Davenham CE P

  IR

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  180

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4623

  Chester, The Bishops (Bluecoat) CE High

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  20

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3616

  Widnes, St. Michaels RC P

  SP

  minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  60

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3802

  Widnes, St. Marie's RC P

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  198

  —

  100

  Cleveland

  907

  1,494

  999

  313

  182

  3384

  Middlesbrough, Corpus Christi RC P

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  100

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3390

  Middlesbrough, St. Pius X RC P

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  82

  Cornwall

  908

  205

  82

  106

  17

  3881

  Liskeard, Quethiock CE P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  17

  —

  Cumbria

  909

  1,799

  119

  288

  1,392

  4631

  Keswick S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  777

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4830

  Barrow in Furness, St. Bernards RC S

  SP/IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  575

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3520

  Whitehaven, St. Beghs RC P

  SP

  Major-design

  No

  —

  40

  —

  Derbyshire

  910

  261

  38

  223

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Devon

  911

  935

  429

  248

  258

  3768

  Plymouth, Bickleigh Down CE P

  BN

  Major-start

  No

  158

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3601

  Brixham, Margaret Clitheroe RC P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  100

  —

  —

  Dorset

  912

  3,543

  2,777

  261

  505

  4610

  Poole, St. Edwards RC/CE S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  425

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3359

  Stalbridge CE P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  30

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3696

  Lyme Regis, St. Michaels CE P

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  50

  Durham

  913

  865

  624

  214

  27

  3486

  Durham, St. Godries RC P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  27

  —

  East Sussex

  914

  305

  110

  195

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Essex

  915

  823

  400

  423

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Gloucestershire

  916

  1,381

  1,160

  156

  65

  3336

  Minsterworth CE P

  EBN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  53

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3335

  Brimscombe CE P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  12

  —

  Hampshire

  917

  466

  173

  293

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Hereford and Worcester

  918

  801

  246

  289

  266

  4600

  Bishop of Herefords Bluecoat CE S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  156

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3318

  Droitwich, St. Peter's CE First

  EBN/BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  50

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4800

  Hagtey RC High

  EBN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  60

  Hertfordshire

  919

  977

  2

  506

  469

  4619

  Hemel Hempstead, John F. Kennedy RC S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  469

  Humberside

  920

  390

  190

  145

  55

  4,622

  Kingston, Hull Trinity House S

  IR

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  55

  Isle of Wight

  921

  44

  4

  40

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  274 275

  Allocation components

  New projects

  LEA name

  LEA Number

  Total allocation 1993–94 (000)

  Commitments (000)

  Minor works improvement (000)

  Major and minor projects (000)

  School number

  School name

  Category

  Major/named minor

  Ex DL?

  Approved statutory proposals

  Design list

  Start

  Kent

  922

  2,324

  1,121

  512

  691

  4621

  Sheerness, St. Georges CE Middle

  BN/IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  670

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4617

  Dover, St. Edmunds RC S

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  21

  —

  Lancashire

  923

  5,642

  3,111

  1,311

  1,220

  4601

  Blackpool, St. Marys RC High

  SP

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  748

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3755

  Colne, Sacred Heart RC P

  SP

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  77

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4850

  Croston, Bishop Rawstorne CE High

  BN

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  25

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3709

  Fleetwood, St. Marys RC P

  EBN

  Major-Start

  No

  —

  —

  223

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3500

  Blackburn, Sacred Heart RC P

  IR

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  30

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3776

  Rawtenstall, St. James the Less RC P

  IR

  Major-design

  No

  —

  25

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3525

  Galgate, Ellel St. Johns CE P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  52

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3803

  Scarisbrick, St. Marys RC P

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  40

  Leicestershire

  924

  187

  0

  187

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Lincolnshire

  925

  1,145

  718

  145

  282

  3361

  Lea, Frances Olive Anderson CE P

  BN/IR

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  34

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3505

  Lincoln, Bishop King CE P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  75

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3322

  Pointon CE P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  75

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3364

  Nettleham CE Junior

  BN/IR

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  50

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4604

  Boston, St. Bedes Rc S

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  48

  Norfolk

  926

  544

  50

  128

  366

  4605

  Norwich, Notre Dame RC High

  SP

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  366

  North Yorkshire

  927

  949

  339

  225

  385

  4611

  Harrogate, St. Aidans CE High

  IR

  Major-start

  No

  —

  —

  385

  Northampton-shire

  928

  1,230

  431

  163

  636

  4601

  Kettering, Bishop Stopford CE S

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  636

  Northumber-land

  929

  302

  135

  119

  48

  3355

  Riding Mill, Broomhaugh CE First

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  48

  Nottinghamshire

  930

  280

  6

  274

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Oxfordshire

  931

  972

  598

  170

  204

  3505

  Bicester, St. Edburgs CE P

  SP/IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  204

  Shropshire

  932

  212

  0

  91

  121

  3329

  Whittington CE P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  89

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3312

  Clun St. Georges CE P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  32

  Somerset

  933

  1,079

  968

  111

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Staffordshire

  934

  2,054

  1,298

  336

  420

  4603

  Stoke-on-Trent, St. Peters CE High

  IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  —

  —

  420

  Suffolk

  935

  231

  17

  111

  103

  3330

  Framlingham, Sir Robert Hitchams CE P

  BN/IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  103

  —

  —

  Surrey

  936

  2,801

  1,166

  428

  1,207

  4611

  Leatherhead, St. Andrews RC S

  SP

  Major-start

  No

  107

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4619

  Guildford, St. Peters RC S

  SP/IR

  Major-start

  Yes

  620

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3475

  Guildford, St. Cuthbert Mayne RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  76

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3458

  West Byfleet, The Marist RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  58

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3470

  Ewell, St. Clements RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  80

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3488

  Woking, St. Hugh of Lincoln RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  62

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3441

  Addlestone, Holy Family RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  8

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3465

  East Moseley, St. Thomas More RC P

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  37

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3446

  Thames Dilton, St. Pauls RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  41

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3918

  Weybridge, St. Charles RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  60

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3462

  Godalming, St. Edmunds RC First

  SP

  Minor

  n/a

  58

  —

  —

  Warwickshire

  937

  458

  250

  208

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  West Sussex

  938

  448

  5

  277

  166

  3353

  Horsted Keynes, St. Giles CE P

  EBN

  Minor

  n/a

  —

  —

  79

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3313

  Findon, St. John the Baptist CE P

  BN

  Minor

  n/a

  87

  —

  —

  Wiltshire

  939

  234

  60

  174

  0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Total

  —

  92,810

  52,430

  19,998

  20,382

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  4,484

  706

  15,192

  VA schools statutory proposals approved since December 1991 Funds allocated as committed expenditure

  LEA

  School

  Avon

  Bradley Stoke CE, Bristol

  Cambridgeshire

  March, new primary

  Cheshire

  St. Werburgh's CE, Warrington

  Cornwall

  St. Dennis CE Infants, St. Austell

  Croydon

  St. James the Great RC Primary

  Dorset

  Portesham CE Primary

  East Sussex

  St. Thomas' CE Primary, Groombridge

  Essex

  Little Hallingbury CE Primary

  Gloucestershire

  St. Mary's CE Primary, Tetbury

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  St. Thomas' RC

  Kent

  St. James' CE Primary, Isle of Grain

  Lambeth

  St. Mary's RC Primary

  Lancashire

  St. Veronica's RC, Helmshore

  Lancashire

  St. Mary's RC, Haslingden

  Lancashire

  St. Anthony's RC, Blackburn

  Lancashire

  St. Cuthbert's RC, Blackburn

  Lancashire

  Lytham CE Primary, Lytham St. Anne's

  276

  LEA

  School

  Leicestershire

  Loughborough CE

  Merton

  Sacred Heart RC Primary, New Malden

  Northumberland

  Eglingham CE First, Alnwick

  Nottinghamshire

  St. Patrick's RC Primary, Nottingham

  Rochdale

  Sacred Heart RC Primary

  Rochdale

  All Saints CE Primary

  Sandwell

  Sacred Heart RC JMI, Tipton

  Surrey

  Bishop Wand CE Secondary, Sunbury

  Surrey

  Horsell CE Middle, Woking

  Surrey

  Queen Eleanor's CE Middle, Guildford

  Surrey

  Our Lady and St. Rose RC Primary Weoley Castle

  Trafford

  St. Michael's CE, Flixton

  Westminster

  St. Peter's CE

  Teacher Training
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many students were recruited to courses of initial teacher training in 1992.

  Mr. Patten
  Overall recruitment to initial teacher training courses has increased by more than 10 per cent. for the second year in succession. A survey undertaken by my Department shows that 31,980 students entered courses of initial teacher training in 1992, an increase of 3,188 over 1991.

  Intakes to secondary courses overall were 9 per cent. above the very high levels achieved last year, and recruitment in all the main shortage subjects was above the targets set by the Department. Recruitment to primary courses was 13 per cent. higher than last year and 41 per cent. above the Department's target.

  I am placing in the Library the principal results of the survey.

  National Curriculum Technology Order
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he will publish proposals for a new national curriculum technology order; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  My right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Education and for Wales are publishing tomorrow proposals for a revised technology curriculum tomorrow as the basis for extensive consultation. These are based on the recommendations for attainment targets and programmes of study incorporated in the accompanying report of the review group, led by Her Majesty's inspectorate.

  As required by the Education Reform Act 1988, the Secretary of State will ask the National Curriculum Council to conduct the consultation exercise in England. All schools, education authorities, professional organisations and others will have until 31 March 1993 to submit their views and make representations to the NCC. A parallel consultation will take place in Wales. Subject to advice from the NCC and the Curriculum Council for Wales, my right hon. Friends then intend to publish a draft Order for further consultation later in 1993.

  Copies of the report, the proposals and the Secretary of State's letter to the chairman of the National Curriculum Council will be placed in the Library of the House.

  Girls
  Sir Michael Neubert
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what action he intends to take on the HMI report on the preparation of girls for adult and working life.

  Mr. Forth
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: The main findings of the report are under consideration by my right hon. Friend. No action is planned at present.

NATIONAL HERITAGE

  Tourism
  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what measures are being taken to promote domestic tourism in England.
  278
  Mr. Key
  The promotion of domestic tourism in England is undertaken by the English tourist board, ETB, which is grant-aided by my Department, and by the regional tourist boards, which receive funding from the ETB. Grant in aid to the ETB totals £15.4 million during the current financial year. Details of the boards' promotional and other activities appear in the ETB's annual report for 1991–92, a copy of which is in the Library.

  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many tourists have visited Britain in each year since 1981.

  Mr. Key
  Information on overseas tourism in the United Kingdom is published regularly in the quarterly and annual "Business Monitors" MQ6 and MA6 "Overseas Travel and Tourism", which may be obtained from the Library of the House.

  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what are the 10 most popular English tourist resorts for domestic holidaymakers taking their annual holidays; and what is their average length of stay.

  Mr. Key
  Information is not currently available from the domestic travel surveys on the most popular tourist resorts. The United Kingdom tourism survey, sponsored by the statutory tourist boards, showed that in 1991, the average number of nights per trip in the United Kingdom was 4.2.

  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what five(a) European and (b) non-European countries are responsible for the highest number of tourists visiting England.

  Mr. Key
  The available information is shown in the table:

  Number of visits to England by overseas residents in 1991

  Country of residence

  Visits (thousands)

  (a) Top five European countries1

  Germany

  1,770

  France

  1,747

  Netherlands

  847

  Italy

  671

  Spain

  590

  (b) Top five non-European countries

  United States of America

  2,128

  Canada

  468

  Australia

  434

  Japan

  430

  Republic of South Africa

  167

  1 Figures for visits by residents of the Irish Republic to England are not available.

  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what is the average length of stay for overseas tourists visiting England.

  Mr. Key
  According to the international passenger survey, the average length of stay of those overseas residents who stayed at least one night in England in 1991 was 11.1 nights.

  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what are the 10 most popular day trip resorts in England; and how many people visited each of them in the year 1991.
  279
  Mr. Key
  The 10 most popular local authority districts in terms of day trips were:

  Local Authority visited

  Number of trips (millions)

  Birmingham

  11

  Manchester

  8

  Blackpool

  6

  Bristol

  5

  Chester

  5

  East Lindsey

  5

  Leeds

  5

  West Derbyshire

  5

  Bradford

  4

  Brighton

  4

  Source: Leisure Day Visits Survey (1988–89).

  Note: The table excludes Greater London, to which there were about 68 million trips.

  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will list the five overseas countries whose tourists spend the most money per individual when visiting England, with the amount listed.

  Mr. Key
  The information is shown in the table:

  Expenditure by overseas residents who visited England in 1991 Top five countries of residence

  Country of residence

  Average expenditure per visit £

  Kuwait

  1,685

  Nigeria

  1,285

  Saudi Arabia

  1,218

  Libya

  1,210

  Turkey

  1,209

  Source: International Passenger Survey.

  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what measures are being taken to promote England as a destination for overseas tourists.

  Mr. Key
  My Department funds the British Tourist Authority, which has responsibility for promoting Britain overseas. The authority undertakes, with tourist industry support, a wide range of marketing and promotional activities to attract overseas visitors to all parts of Britain. It works closely with the English regional tourist boards to encourage visitors to all parts of the country.

  Tourism
  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how much money overseas tourism has generated for the United Kingdom economy in each year since 1981, with the figures adjusted for inflation.

  Mr. Key
  The available information is shown in the table:

  Expenditure by overseas residents visiting the United Kingdom and estimated fares revenue from overseas visitors travelling on United Kingdom ships and aircraft, at constant 1985 prices.

  £ billion

  Year

  Expenditure1

  Fares2 revenue

  1981

  5.64

  1.0

  1982

  5.55

  0.9

  1983

  6.55

  1.0

  280

  Year

  Expenditure1

  Fares2 revenue

  1984

  7.07

  1.2

  1985

  7.77

  1.4

  1986

  7.41

  1.3

  1987

  7.86

  1.5

  1988

  7.19

  1.5

  1989

  7.53

  1.6

  1990

  7.79

  1.8

  1991

  6.61

  1.6

  Notes:

  1 Source: International Passenger Survey

  2 Source: 1981–83 Department of Transpor, 1984–91 British Tourist Authority estimates

  National Children's Play and Recreation Unit
  Mr. Tipping
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what was the cost of the grant through the Sports Council for its National Children's Play and Recreation Unit for the financial years 1991–92 and 1992–93.

  Mr. Brooke
  In 1991–92, the Sports Council provided funding to the National Children's Play and Recreation Unit totalling £1,134,747. The approved budget for 1992–93 is £830,000.

  Mr. Tipping
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what studies he has commissioned into the effectiveness of the National Children's Play and Recreation Unit.

  Mr. Brooke
  No such studies have been commissioned.

TRANSPORT

  Rail Freight
  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the value to British Rail of its freight operation in each year since 1981 with the figures adjusted for inflation.

  Mr. Freeman
  Information on the financial performance of British Rail's freight operation is published each year in its annual report and accounts. Copies are available from the Library.

  West Coast Main Line
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) if he will give priority to upgrading of the west coast main line in his consideration of future major investment by British Rail;

  (2) if he will make a statement on the criteria used for obtaining non-user benefit grants that may be available for the investment in infrastructure necessary for the upgrading of the west coast main line;

  (3) if he will discuss with British Rail the necessary investment in the west coast main line being financed in partnership with the private sector.

  Mr. Freeman
  It is for British Rail to determine its investment priorities within available resources. I understand that it intends to commence work soon on renewing infrastructure on the west coast main line. The precise timing will be decided in the spring, when British Rail has completed its next corporate plan. A project of this size will take a number of years to complete.
  281
  Under our privatisation proposals, responsibility for railway infrastructure will pass to Railtrack, a public sector track authority. Infrastructure investment will be financed largely from charges to operators, but, as stated in the White Paper "New Opportunities For The Railways", the Government may provide direct support for investment schemes not earning an adequate financial return but which have satisfactory cost-benefit returns when wider social and economic benefits are taken into account.

  Our proposals will also encourage greater private sector participation in financing railway investment, both in infrastructure and rolling stock. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the Chancellor of the Exchequer's autumn statement.

  A1
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will publish the most recent data on traffic volume and flows on sections of the Al road north of Morpeth which have been prepared by the AI steering group.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Traffic flows on the Al are being continuously monitored. The annual average daily flows during 1991 which are the most recently collected figures are listed in the table.

  Number

  Newcastle to Morpeth

  25,000

  Morpeth Bypass

  15,600

  Morpeth- Alnwick

  11,800

  Alnwick to Browniside

  7,300

  Browniside-Belford

  7,800

  Belford to Scremerston

  9,300

  Berwick Bypass

  6,600

  Berwick Bypass to National Boundary

  8,200

  Railway Accident (Walton-on-the-Naze)
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects publication of the full report of the inspector of railways into the railway accident at Walton-on-the-Naze which occurred on 12 August 1987.

  Mr. Freeman
  The Health and Safety Executive expects to publish the inspector's report on 21 December.

  Chelmsford Rail Services
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many people commuted to work by rail from Chelmsford to Liverpool Street in each calendar year from 1985 to the latest available date; and what was the percentage increase or decrease in each year.

  Mr. Freeman
  British Rail estimated that the figures are as in the table.

  Year

  Number of commuters from Chelmsford to Liverpool Street

  Percentage change from previous year

  1985

  4,534

  18.7

  1986

  5,153

  113.7

  1987

  6,062

  117.6

  282

  Year

  Number of commuters from Chelmsford to Liverpool Street

  Percentage change from previous year

  1988

  6,589

  18.7

  1989

  6,216

  25.7

  1990

  5,501

  211.5

  1991

  5,522

  10.4

  1992

  5,259

  24.8

  1 Increase.

  2 Decrease.

  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the current target for completion of the programme for resignalling on the Liverpool Street/ Bethnal Green/Chelmsford line; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  British Rail is currently reviewing the timetable for the Great Eastern resignalling programme. I will write to my hon. Friend when this exercise is completed.

  Rail Privatisation
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proposals he has for ensuring that consumers of rail services are adequately represented after privatisation.

  Mr. Freeman
  We believe that an effective voice for consumers is vital. The current system of consumer representation by the consultative committees works well and we are committed to ensuring that none of the benefits of this system are lost. We have today published a document called "Railway Privatisation: Providing a Voice for the Passenger" which describes the Government's proposals for achieving this in the privatised railway. I am placing copies in the Library.

  Street Works Regulations
  Mr. Dicks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to amend the Street Works (Sharing of Costs of Works) Regulations 1992.

  Mr. Freeman
  I have received representations from the National Joint Utilities Group that the regulations are unfair to the utilities in their treatment of major transport works, particularly with regard to tramways. It may be that the regulations are not satisfactory as they stand. I am arranging for the Department to undertake public consultations as soon as possible, as a basis for a further decision.

  Route Guidance Systems
  Mr. Jessel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has for licensing route guidance systems in the London area; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  We have received an application from GEC for a pilot licence to operate a system called TIGER—traffic information and guidance on European roads. TIGER will provide a route guidance system for London which responds to changing traffic conditions. I now
  283
  propose to hold discussions on this proposal with the London Boroughs Associations, the traffic director and the police.

  The pilot Autoguide system proposed in 1989, based on the use of roadside beacons, had similar objectives. However, the technology is developing very quickly. GEC now takes the view that cellular radio is more appropriate in this case. I have therefore decided to close the 1989 competition. It is accordingly open to other potential operators to come forward with proposals for other systems based on any technology they consider appropriate.

  During the Second Reading of the 1989 Road Traffic Act the then Minister for Roads and Traffic assured the House that representatives of interested parties such as the local authorities and the police would be involved in the monitoring of the Autoguide pilot. I shall arrange for the establishment of an assessment group to implement this undertaking for the TIGER project if a licence is granted.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Debt Interest Payments
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the level of debt interest payments and other remittances paid to the United Kingdom by(a) African countries, (b) all developing countries and (c) other countries in each of the last 10 years.

  Mr. Nelson
  Receipts are paid to the Overseas Development Administration, to the Commonwealth Development Corporation, and under bilateral debt rescheduling agreements to the Export Credits Guarantee Department. The following data relate to receipts received by each agency(a) in total and (b) from African countries. There is no definitive definition between developing and other countries. Figures for ECGD and ODA are for financial years, while those for CDC are for calendar years. For 1992–93, the data for ECGD are to the end of November 1992, while the ODA has supplied an estimate of the receipts it expects for the entire year. These are the most comparable latest figures available. Producing data for earlier years would entail a disproportionate cost.

  £ million

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  ECGD Total

  371

  406

  250

  of which African

  292

  279

  132

  ODA Total

  53

  61

  42

  of which African

  5

  5

  1

  1990

  1991

  CDC Total

  134

  158

  of which African

  72

  55

  Council Tax
  Mr. Ralph Howell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the rate of VAT needed in 1993–94 to raise an equivalent amount of money to the amount raised by the council tax after taking into account expenditure savings on the costs of introducing and administering the council tax.
  284
  Sir John Cope
  The amount to be raised in council tax for 1993–94 will depend on decisions, which local authorities have not yet taken, about council tax levels. Accordingly, the calculation requested is not yet possible.

  Tobacco
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the losses to the Exchequer arising from the introduction of the European single market(a) through the increased allowances on importation of EC-produced cigarettes and tobacco products and (b) through increased smuggling of cigarettes and tobacco products.

  Sir John Cope
  The "Financial Statement and Budget Report" published on 10 March 1992 estimated a full-year loss of £250 million from increased cross-border shopping. The bulk of this is expected to concern cigarettes and other tobacco products. It is very difficult to estimate the likely extent of smuggling.

  Nuclear Power Station Closures
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the effect of the closure of the seven Magnox nuclear power stations on the public sector borrowing requirement.

  Mr. Portillo
  It is not possible to provide reliable estimates of the net effects.

  Twyford Down
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what correspondence, conversations or meetings officials of his Department have held with representatives of Winchester college relating to the compulsory purchase of the college-owned area of Twyford Down; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Dorrell
  None.

  Overseas Life Companies
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make an announcement about the outcome of the consultations between the life assurance industry and his officials about the taxation of United Kingdom branches of overseas life companeis authorised in his 1991 Budget.

  Mr. Dorrell
  Insurance industry representatives and Inland Revenue officials have held a series of meetings and significant progress was made. I am grateful to the Association of British Insurers for its constructive approach in these discussions.

  Legislation in recent years has made major changes to the taxation of life insurance companies. Overseas life offices operating in the United Kingdom through branches need adaptations of the recent reforms to meet their special circumstances. But there are other equally important reasons for reforming the rules under which these United Kindom branch operations are taxed. First, many such branch operations presently have the major part of their taxable investment income determined by reference to apportionment rules which have changed little since the first world war. For a number of reasons, these have become increasingly inappropriate as a basis for measuring United Kingdom branch income. Second, in a

  285
  number of respects, the current rules under which they are taxed lead to disparities of treatment as against the United Kingdom resident life offices. Some of these presently work to the advantage of the United Kingdom branches; others do not. Our goal is to ensure that, as far as possible, United Kingdom life offices and the United Kingdom branch operations of foreign life offices are able to compete for United Kingdom business on terms which are not distorted by tax considerations.

  The main proposals are as follows:
  the present apportionment rules in section 445 of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 will be repealed. The branch income, gains and expenses will instead be ascertained as a matter of fact. The normal rules for measuring the taxable profits of a United Kingdom branch operation in section 11 of the ICTA 1988 will apply to all categories of life insurance business, but with two modifications to reflect the unique characteristics of life and other long term insurance business;
  —where the assets held by the branch to back the life insurance policies it administers are less than the assets which a United Kingdom resident company with the same portfolio of policies would be expected to hold, income from, and gains on, assets which are held outside the branch will enter into the computation of branch profits. For the purposes of this comparison the United Kingdom branch will be treated as though it were a distinct and separate enterprise dealing at arm's length with the other parts of the company. The assets to be attributed will be those which have a particular connection with the United Kingdom branch activities. If the value of any such assets is insufficient to support a fair comparison between the United Kingdom branch and a United Kingdom life office writing the same business, a proportion of the worldwide income and gains of the overseas company will also be brought into charge to United Kingdom tax;
  —the scope of Section 11 of the ICTA 1988 will be extended so that gains on assets situated outside the United Kingdom and used or held for United Kingdom branch purposes will become chargeable gains;
  —distributions from shareholdings in United Kingdom companies which are held as part of the branch activities will carry an entitlemenbt to tax credit. The overseas company will be able to treat distributions as though they were profits chargeable to corporation tax, against which management expenses and various other deductions can be set;
  —new rules will enable the necessary figures to be established direct from the company's records where a regulatory return of the United Kingdom branch activities does not provide the information required;
  —double tax relief will be available for foreign tax paid on the United Kingdom branch income of the company's long term business fund assets.

  The new rules will apply for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 1993. I am today depositing a copy of the draft clauses in the House of Commons Library. Copies are also being sent to each of the companies known to be affected by the new proposals, and to the Association of British Insurers. Further copies are available on request from the Inland Revenue to whom representations on the clauses should be sent by 28 February 1993.

  Civil Servants (Travel Expenses)
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes have been made in the rules on travel expenses for civil servants.

  Mr. Dorrell
  As part of our ongoing programme for delegating to departments and agencies greater responsibility for managing personnel management policies, Departments and agencies have been given the freedom to 286
  determine the conditions on which advances of salary to assist civil servants in the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel are made.

  European Community
  Mr. Marlow
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what is his estimate of the increase in the United Kingdom's net contribution if the EC budget is increased under the Delors proposals by each multiple of £1,000 million up to £25,000 million;

  (2) what is his estimate of the net cost to the United Kingdom of the cohesion fund as proposed by the Commission for each of the years 1993 to 1997; and if he will make a statement on the expected benefits to the United Kingdom of agreeing to such a proposal.

  Sir John Cope
  [holding answer 11 December 1992]: The European Council at Edinburgh on 11 and 12 December agreed a financing package for the Community for the next seven years, including the cohesion fund: this would allow an EC budget at a level of £62 billion in 1999, at 1992 prices. A copy of the conclusions of the European Council, including the details of the package, has been placed in the Library. The forecast annual addition to the United Kingdom's net public sector contribution arising from this package would be some £200 million, in 1999, above the underlying cost of Community spending given the present ceiling on own resources, estimated at £2,800 million in 1999, all at 1992 prices. The agreement on the Community's finances at Edinburgh made possible agreements on other important issues such as subsidiarity, openness, resolution of Danish difficulties with the Maastricht treaty, a package of measures to promote European economic growth, and the enlargement of the Community.

  Coin Sizes
  Mr. David Porter
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received recently about the size of coins now in circulation; what weight he gives to the views of pensioners and disabled groups who may be concerned about small coins; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nelson
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: A small number of representations have been received. The new, smaller 5p and 10p coins were introduced in response to public demand for a lighter coinage and followed extensive research and consultation. The views of pensioners and disabled groups were taken fully into account. The coins were given a coarse milled edge specifically to help the visually handicapped.

  Inward Investment
  Mr. Peter Shore
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the official estimate of United States and Japanese direct investment in the United Kingdom as a percentage of direct investment in all EC countries in each year from 1979 to the latest available date.

  Mr. Lamont
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: Fully comparable information on direct inward investment in the European Community from outside the EC is not available. However, the following estimates for the years 1985 to 1991 have been prepared based on the most readily available sources.
  287

  Value of stock of direct investment in United Kingdom as a percentage of that in all EC countries

  United States

  Japan

  1985

  39.4

  31.7

  1986

  35.9

  31.2

  1987

  35.9

  33.9

  1988

  37.7

  38.0

  1989

  41.0

  37.7

  1990

  38.4

  40.5

  1991

  36.2

  40.9

  Sources:

  1. United States Department of Commerce: "Survey of Current Business".

  2. Japanese Ministry of Finance: "MITI News".

  High Street Banks
  Mr. French
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what action he intends to take as a result of his meeting with representatives of the high street banks, on 11 December; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nelson
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: My right hon. Friend the Chancellor did not meet with the representatives of the high street banks on 11 December, but he plans to do so over the next few days.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Recycling
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Chairman of the Administration Committee what progress is being made towards ensuring that all stationery of the House is produced on recycled paper.

  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  In June 1991, the Services Committee agreed that, in addition to stationery or archival quality, items of stationery made from recycled material should be made available to Members on a permanent basis. Since then the Serjeant at Arms has made arrangements to ensure Members are aware of the availability of this recycled range. For large orders it may be obtained from the Serjeant at Arms' stores, but where a particular local demand has been identified, it is also available from stationery cupboards. Although, for the forseeable future, there will continue to be a need for stationery of archival quality, recycled stationery is becoming increasingly popular with Members.

  The Serjeant at Arms and HMSO have a continuing responsibility to monitor the development of this range of stationery and to report any significant change to the Administration Committee.

  Select Committees (Travel Costs)
  Mr. Hutton
  To ask the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, what was the total expenditure for travel by members of Select Committees, divided into fares and subsistence, for each parliamentary Session since 1987–88 in(a) cash and (b) 1991–92 prices.

  Mr. Beith
  The information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, for the year 1991–92, the expenditure for travel and subsistence by members of Select Committees was £462,883.68. Costs for visits by individual Committees are set out in the appropriate Sessional Returns.

  Library Research Staff
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, how many research staff have been employed by the Library in each of the last 10 years; and what plans he has to increase the numbers of Library research staff.

  Mr. Beith
  Numbers of research staff on the establishment of the Library in each of the last 10 years —that is, deputy assistant librarians and library clerks, including the international affairs and defence section, are set out in the table in full-time equivalents.

  Number

  1983

  22

  1984

  22

  1985

  22

  1986

  23

  1987

  23

  1988

  26

  1989

  27

  1990

  28

  1991

  29

  1992

  32

  These figures exclude support staff. I understand that proposals for an increase in the establishment of the research division are in preparation, and will be considered by the House of Commons Commission in accordance with its usual practice.

  Advisory Committee on Works of Art
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, if he will set out the membership and terms of reference of the Advisory Committee on Works of Art.

  Mr. Beith
  I understand that Madam Speaker has appointed the following Members to the Advisory Committee on Works of Art: the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks), the right hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Channon) and the hon. Members for Stockton, North (Mr. Cook), for Staffordshire, South (Mr. Cormack), for Warley, East (Mr. Faulds), for Twickenham (Mr. Jessel), for Caithness and Sutherland (Mr. Maclennan) and for Windsor and Maidenhead (Mr. Trend).

  The terms of reference of the committee, which have been approved by the House of Commons Commission, are:
  to advise the Speaker generally on matters relating to works of art, including acquisitions; and to advise the Accommodation and Works Committee on the policy on, conservation of, and curatorial management of the collections of pictures, statues, murals, historic furniture and furnishings and decorative interior of the Palace; and advise on the decorative interiors of other buildings in the Parliamentary Estate when requested by that Committee.

  Early-day Motions
  Mrs. Lait
  To ask the Lord President of the Council what estimate he has made of the cost within Government Departments of preparing briefing on early-day motions for Session 1991–92 and for Session 1992–93 up to the summer adjournment.
  289
  Mr. Newton
  No estimate has been made of the costs involved to Government Departments in preparing briefing on early-day motions.

  Statutory Instruments
  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will set out, for each Session since 1987–88(a) the number of motions to annul statutory instruments tabled each year, (b) the number considered in Standing

  Prayers 1987–88 to Summer Adjournment 1992

  1987–88

  1988–89

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  11992–93

  All

  195

  151

  185

  99

  46

  7

  Leader of Labour Party

  Total

  150

  143

  154

  92

  40

  5

  Floor of the House2

  24

  47

  17

  13

  4

  —

  Committee

  20

  17

  17

  13

  9

  —

  Not Considered

  106

  79

  120

  66

  27

  5

  Leader of Liberal Democrats and predecessors

  Total

  18

  2

  15

  —

  —

  1

  Floor of the House2

  2

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Committee

  2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Not Considered

  14

  2

  14

  —

  —

  1

  Conservative Members

  Total

  21

  3

  5

  4

  3

  1

  Floor of the House2

  —

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  Committee

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Not Considered

  21

  3

  4

  4

  3

  1

  Other Labour Members

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Total

  6

  3

  7

  1

  2

  —

  Floor of the House2

  2

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Committee

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Not Considered

  4

  2

  7

  1

  2

  —

  Other Members

  Total

  —

  —

  4

  2

  1

  —

  Floor of the House2

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Committee

  —

  —

  2

  —

  —

  —

  Not Considered

  —

  —

  2

  2

  1

  —

  1 Until Summer Adjournment.

  2 The number considered on the floor of the House includes those statutory instruments prayed against and considered on the floor concerning which no Question was ever put.

  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Lord President of the Council when was the last occasion on which a motion to approve a statutory instrument was defeated on a Division in the House; and when a prayer to annul a statutory instrument was last carried on a Division in the House.

  Mr. Newton
  The last occasion on which a motion to approve a statutory instrument was defeated on a Division in the House was 24 July 1978. The last occasion on which a prayer to annul a statutory instrument was carried on a Division in the House was 24 October 1979.

SCOTLAND

  Water Privatisation
  Mr. Norman Hogg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many representations he has received in support of privatising the water industry in Scotland; how many he has received opposing water privatisation: and if he will make a statement.
  290
  Committee, (c) the number considered on the Floor of the House and (d) the number which were not considered, broken down in each case into those standing in the name of (i) the leader of the Labour party, (ii) the leader of the Liberal Democrats or predecessor parties, (iii) Conservative Members, (iv) other Labour Members and (v) other hon. Members.

  Mr. Newton
  The information is set out in the table.

  Mr. McKelvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many submissions he has received so far in the consultation on the future of Scottish water and sewerage.

  Mrs. Adams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received on the current consultation on water and sewerage in Scotland.

  Sir Hector Monro
  To date, we have received 66 responses to the consultation paper, 3,702 pre-printed postcards and 977 other representations, many of which arrived before the consultation paper was published. Detailed analysis of the responses will be completed only after the end of the consultation paper.

  Agricultural Marketing Boards
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries in Scotland has received about the agricultural industry marketing boards; and what steps he intends taking to ensure the future economic prospects of the sectors of the agricultural industry involved.
  291
  Sir Hector Monro
  My Department received a number of comments both on the Scottish milk marketing boards' proposals for conversion to voluntary co-operatives and about the Potato Marketing Board.

  The Government's policy is to ensure that these sectors can flourish within an open and competitive structure, while retaining the best features of the existing marketing schemes where appropriate.

  Transport Infrastucture (Lanarkshire)
  Dr. Reid
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to upgrade the transport infrastructure in Lanarkshire; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  Lanarkshire is a focal point in the central Scotland motorway network and is well served by the M8, M80 and M74. A £40 million extension of the M74 to Cambuslang is under construction and the M80 Stepps bypass opened to traffic earlier this year. My right hon. Friend was able to include in his recent plans major improvements to upgrade the A8/M8 route to serve new development in north Lanarkshire including the Mossend rail freight depot.

  Homelessness
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will estimate how many people in Scotland will be homeless on 25 December.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  A forecast of the number of homeless would be very difficult to assess at any given time. The Government are devoting very substantial resources to local authorities whose responsibility it is to deal with this problem.

  Mr. Wray
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has for rehousing the homeless.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The Government provide resources to local authorities so that they can carry out their statutory duty of providing accommodation, or advice and help in finding accommodation, for those assessed as homeless. These resources have included extra allocations of nearly £23 million in 1991–93.

  The Government also provide funding for Scottish Homes, which issued a policy statement on homelessness on 12 November. Scottish Homes' target for 1992–93 is to secure the provision of accommodation for 1,750 households assessed as homeless by local authorities.

  Hospital Treatments
  Mr. Knox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many(a) in-patients and (b) out-patients were treated in national health service hospitals in Scotland in the most recent year for which figures are available; and what the figures were in 1979.

  Mr. Stewart
  A total of 920,144 patients were treated as in-patients in national health service hospitals in Scotland in the year ending 31 March 1992 compared with 737,816 in 1979—a 25 per cent. increase. Out-patient numbers rose to 6,005,131 in 1992 from 5,206,078 in 1979.

  Rent-to-Mortgage
  Mr. Kynoch
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many applications are in the pipeline under the rent-to-mortgage scheme.
  292
  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  At 30 November 1992, a total of 618 rent-to-mortgage sales had been completed in Scotland. A further 513 applications were being processed at that date.

  Governance
  Mr. McAllion
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many public speeches he has made on the future government of Scotland since 9 April.

  Mr. Lang
  My concern that the future government of Scotland should reflect Scotlands needs has been a prominent theme in many speeches I have made since the general election.

  Mr. Canavan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to complete his stocktaking exercise on the governance of Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  Our review of arrangements for the government of Scotland is progressing well and we will announce the outcome in the early part of next year.

  Local Authorities (Competitive Tendering)
  Mr. Gallie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received following publication of the Scottish Office evaluation of compulsory competitive tendering for Scottish local authority services.

  Mr. Stewart
  My right hon. Friend has received no representations since the publication, on 19 November 1992, of the Scottish Office central research unit report "Evaluation of Compulsory Competitive Tendering for Scottish Local Authority Services".

  Scottish Enterprise
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about Scottish Enterprise's budget.

  Mr. Stewart
  Details of the 1992–93 budget for Scottish Enterprise are published in the supply estimates. Last month my right hon. Friend announced an additional £6 million for Scottish Enterprise for 1992–93 as part of the Government's measures to help boost the economy. Details of the 1993–94 budget will be published later. My right hon. Friend announced on 2 December planned gross provision for Scottish Enterprise for 1993–94 of £441 million. In addition to that figure, local enterprise companies are expected to secure receipts from the European regional development fund next year of towards £20 million. Overall planned resources from public sources therefore exceed this year's plans.

  Road Building
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what criteria he uses for deciding priorities in the road building programme.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  My right hon. Friend's primary duty as roads authority for trunk roads is to cater for the needs of through traffic. Priorities are therefore to support economic activity with good, quick and reliable inter-urban road links and to provide good accessibility to all parts of Scotland.

  Cancer Clusters
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, pursuant to his answer of 24 June,Official Report, column 258, what information he has on cancer clusters within the west of Scotland.

  Mr. Stewart
  At present, there are several studies being carried out to investigate whether cancer clusters might exist in the west of Scotland, but data are not yet complete.

  Water Industry
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what further representations he has received on his consultation on water; and if he will place copies of all representations received on the water industry consultation document in the Library.

  Sir Hector Monro
  To date, 66 responses have been received to the consultation paper on water. Copies of responses will be placed in the Library following the end of the consultation period, unless respondents have specifically requested confidentiality.

  Subsidiarity
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he had on the question of subsidiarity as it applies to Scotland with the representatives of member states during the EC summit in Edinburgh.

  Mr. Lang
  None. The principle of subsidiarity, as defined in article 3b of the new EC treaty agreed at Maastricht, and as discussed at the Edinburgh European Council, refers specifically to the relations between the Community as a whole and individual member states. It is up to individual member states to order their own constitutional affairs at the national and sub-national level.

  Sir Russell Johnston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make it his policy to apply to Scotland the principle of subsidiarity set out in the Maastricht treaty.

  Mr. Lang
  Article 3b of the new EC treaty agreed at Maastricht, which sets out the principle of subsidiarity, refers specifically to the relations between the Community as a whole and individual member states. It is up to individual member states to order their own constitutional affairs at the national and sub-national level.

  Rural Economy
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what measures he is taking to revive the Scottish rural economy by creating new employment opportunities.

  Mr. Stewart
  The main instruments for promoting the full range of the Government's training, employment and economic development initiatives in rural areas as elsewhere in Scotland are Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise and their associated networks of local enterprise companies. The Government have provided the Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise networks with a combined budget this 294
  year of some £540 million. A broadly similar level of resources is planned for 1993–94. In addition, the networks have at their disposal their own resources and European Community funding. All of this is available to encourage economic development, to help create new employment opportunities and to help people secure jobs.

  All areas of Scotland benefit from having local enterprise companies which are able to tailor their activities to the needs of the local economy; and local enterprise companies are also able to plan better than in the past for the distinctive needs of rural communities, even where the area for which they are responsible is not predominantly rural.

  Whisky Distillers
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many whisky distilleries are currently in operation in Scotand; and what was the number in operation in 1987 and in 1982.

  Mr. Stewart
  There are currently 103 distilleries operating in Scotland. The figures for 1982 and 1987 were 124 and 90 respectively.

  Alcoholism
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met the Scottish Council on Alcohol to discuss problems relating to alcoholism in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  My right hon. Friend has had no recent meeting with the Scottish Council on Alcohol. Scottish Office officials regularly meet Council representatives to discuss matters relating to the work of the organisation and to the Government's response to alcohol misuse more generally. Our determination to tackle this serious problem is reflected in our policy statement "Scotland's Health: A Challenge To Us All", which was published in July and describes the initiatives we are taking on a broad front to make progress towards our target for the year 2000 of reducing by 20 per cent. the number of men and women whose alcohol consumption exceeds recommended sensible levels.

  New Town Housing
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what sums have been allocated for anticipated capital consents to be allocated to local authorities for the transfer of new town housing stocks.

  Mr. Stewart
  The additional capital consents required by the local authorities will be allocated when the extent of their successful bids for new towns housing stocks is known.

  Health Spending
  Mr. Oppenheim
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on levels of health spending in Scotland.

  Mr. Stewart
  Net expenditure on the health service in Scotland in 1993–94 is planned to be £3,766 million, up by £150.7 million—4.2 per cent. over the 1992–93 plans. The 1993–94 figure represents a real-terms increase of 1.4 per cent. above original 1992–93 plans. In 1993–94 the overall increase in health spending since 1979–80 will be 47 per cent. in real terms.

  Scottish Charities (Eastern Europe)
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received about the work of Scottish charities in eastern Europe; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  My right hon. Friend has received no specific representations on this matter, but he is aware of the work undertaken by Scottish charities, including Scottish European Aid which recently announced plans to develop a refugee camp and field hospital in Bosnia.

  Skye Bridge
  Mr. Charles Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on progress towards the construction of the bridge to Skye.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  Severe weather conditions have caused some delay to the construction programme although in spite of this the contractor has made steady progress. Subject to a suitable weather and tidal window being available, it is now planned to float both caissons out from the Kishorn dry dock and attempt the positioning of the caisson for the north pier prior to the Christmas and new year holiday period.

  Scottish Economy
  Mr. Salmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next expects to meet the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) to discuss the state of the Scottish economy; and if he will make a statement.

  Local authority

  Population

  Number of employees

  Number of employees per thousand population

  Political party in control

  Borders

  104,100

  4,320

  41.5

  Ind

  Berwickshire

  19,120

  112

  5.9

  Con

  Ettrick and Lauderdale

  34,350

  259

  7.5

  Ind

  Roxburgh

  35,350

  319

  9.0

  NOC1

  Tweeddale

  15,280

  128

  8.4

  Ind

  Central

  272,800

  12,524

  45.9

  Lab

  Clackmannan

  48,430

  794

  16.4

  Lab

  Falkirk

  143,090

  1,686

  11.8

  NOC1

  Stirling

  81,280

  1,230

  15.1

  Con

  Dumfries and Galloway

  147,800

  6,976

  47.2

  Ind

  Annandale and Eskdale

  37,140

  312

  8.4

  Lib Dem

  Nithsdale

  57,140

  485

  8.5

  NOC1

  Stewartry

  23,550

  192

  8.2

  Ind

  Wigtown

  29,970

  299

  10.0

  Ind

  Fife

  346,500

  17,309

  50.0

  Lab

  Dunfermline

  128,330

  1,534

  12.0

  Lab

  Kirkcaldy

  148,240

  1,724

  11.6

  Lab

  North East Fife

  69,930

  682

  9.8

  Lib Dem

  Grampian

  514,400

  23,159

  45.0

  NOC1

  City of Aberdeen

  213,910

  2,924

  13.7

  Lab

  Banff and Buchan

  85,640

  1,021

  11.9

  Ind

  Gordon

  77,130

  442

  5.7

  Ind

  Kincardine and Deeside

  53,710

  322

  6.0

  NOC1

  Moray

  84,010

  879

  10.5

  NOC1

  Highland

  204,200

  10,980

  53.8

  Ind

  Badenoch and Strathspey

  10,990

  75

  6.8

  Ind

  Caithness

  26,710

  230

  8.6

  Ind

  Inverness

  62,490

  577

  9.2

  NOC1

  Lochaber

  19,320

  194

  10.0

  Ind

  Nairn

  10,630

  94

  8.8

  Ind

  Ross and Cromarty

  49,140

  477

  9.7

  Ind

  296
  Mr. Lang
  I have regular contacts with the Scottish Council on matters concerning the Scottish economy and I look forward to a continuing exchange of views.

  Training
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what budget for training he has made available in(a) 1991–92 and (b) 1992–93.

  Mr. Stewart
  Training provision for 1991–92 and 1992–93 for Scotland forms part of the budgets of Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprises, details of which are published in the main supply estimates for 1992–93.

  Local Authorities
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list for each Scottish local authority(a) its population, (b) its number of employees, (c) the number of employees per thousand population and (d) the political party in control.

  Mr. Lang
  The table lists for each Scottish local authority(a) its population, (b) its number of employees and (c) the number of employees per thousand population as at June 1991. These are the most up-to-date population figures available. The information concerning the political party in control of each local authority is at May 1992.
  297

  Local authority

  Population

  Number of employees

  Number of employees per thousand population

  Political party in control

  Skye and Lochalsh

  11,750

  103

  8.8

  Ind

  Sutherland

  13,170

  133

  10.1

  Ind

  Lothian

  750,500

  34,644

  46.2

  Lab

  East Lothian

  85,300

  1,010

  11.8

  Lab

  City of Edinburgh

  438,780

  5,427

  12.4

  NOC1

  Midlothian

  79,990

  801

  10.0

  Lab

  West Lothian

  146,430

  1,539

  10.5

  NOC1

  Strathclyde

  2,296,300

  105,119

  45.8

  Lab

  Argyll and Bute

  65,090

  812

  12.5

  Ind

  Bearsden and Milngavie

  41,040

  362

  8.8

  NOC1

  Clydebank

  46,380

  634

  13.7

  Lab

  Clydesdale

  58,110

  668

  11.5

  NOC1

  Cumbernauld and Kilsyth

  63,470

  570

  9.0

  Lab

  Cumnock and Doon Valley

  42,950

  616

  14.3

  Lab

  Cunninghame

  139,100

  1,668

  12.0

  Lab

  Dumbarton

  78,580

  1,220

  15.5

  NOC1

  East Kilbride

  84,200

  745

  8.8

  Lab

  Eastwood

  60,580

  343

  5.7

  Con

  City of Glasgow

  687,590

  12,998

  18.9

  Lab

  Hamilton

  106,780

  1,198

  11.2

  Lab

  Inverclyde

  91,600

  1,329

  14.5

  Lab

  Kilmarnock and Loudoun

  81,350

  1,045

  12.8

  NOC1

  Kyle and Carrick

  113,400

  1,762

  15.5

  Con

  Monklands

  103,990

  1,580

  15.2

  Lab

  Motherwell

  144,750

  1,813

  12.5

  Lab

  Renfrew

  200,930

  2,572

  12.8

  Lab

  Strathkelvin

  86,410

  904

  10.5

  Lab

  Tayside

  391,900

  18,123

  46.2

  NOC1

  Angus

  94,820

  890

  9.4

  SNP

  City of Dundee

  172,120

  3,064

  17.8

  Lab

  Perth and Kinross

  124,960

  1,047

  8.4

  Con

  Orkney Islands Area

  19,580

  1,654

  84.5

  Ind

  Shetland Islands Area

  22,500

  2,519

  112.0

  Ind

  Western Isles Islands Area

  29,420

  2,277

  77.4

  Ind

  1 No party in overall control.

  Schools Inspectors
  Mr. Raymond S. Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the role of Her Majesty's inspectors of schools in Scotland.

  Mr. Lang
  The parents charter in Scotland underlined the central role of independent inspection in assuring the quality of school education.

  In carrying forward the principles of the charter, therefore, it is appropriate to affirm the important role of Her Majesty's inspectors, which was last described in a policy statement issued in 1983 by the then Secretary of State.

  Reports by Her Majesty's inspectors have been published in recent years on more than half the schools and colleges in Scotland and on most colleges of education. Reports have also been published on educational matters of national significance in all sectors of education, such as aspects of the curriculum and school management. These reports have provided a basis for assessing standards, identifying needs and formulating guidance to the system. Also, in response to public concern to raise educational standards in a highly competitive world and to increase accountability, the Government
  298
  have promoted a number of measures to improve and strengthen the education system in Scotland, and have pursued new policies and new programmes to this end.

  It is important that we have an inspection system that is independent of the providers of the education service. Education provision in Scotland is the responsibility of local education authorities or, in the case of independent and other schools, boards of governors, who also have responsibility for the allocation of resources. Her Majesty's inspectors will remain directly accountable to me. These arrangements will allow the inspectorate to continue to make and to publish independent and objective assessments of the standards and quality of education provision in Scotland. The effectiveness of their contribution rests firmly on their ability to offer such impartial judgments. Their appointment by royal warrant underscores their independent status.

  The parents charter in Scotland undertakes that parents and the public will be kept fully informed of the state of the education service, the performance of individual schools and the progress of pupils. It commits the Government to ensuring that those responsible for providing education report regularly on their performance and on their standards. The approach to quality assurance in the charter envisages regular planning, internal review and public reporting every two years by each school to its school board. The inspectorate has recently published

  299
  guidance on how it assesses the quality of education in a school so as to assist authorities, teachers and parents to interpret how well a school is performing. Each school will be required to set out in a school development plan its educational achievements, including examination results, over the previous two years and its plans for a two year period ahead. This plan will be available to the parents of all existing and prospective pupils. It is an important objective that all those involved in education should be part of the total effort to maintain and improve quality.

  I look to Her Majesty's inspectorate in Scotland to monitor and report on the implementation of these commitments, in the first instance through its inspection and audit of the school system. I look to its reports to provide frank and clear assessments of the strengths and weaknesses in schools and colleges, in teaching and learning, in attainment, in aspects of the curriculum and in management. The first priority of its reports will be to assess the standards being achieved and the arrangements made to monitor and improve these standards. They will identify good performance, and where performance is not good enough they will say what has been done; and they will assess value for money, in collaboration with the Accounts Commission as appropriate.

  To further the aims of the charter the conduct and outcome of inspection will be made more public and more open. Henceforth, there will be discussion with the school board early in each inspection so that the views and concerns of parents are ascertained and can be taken fully into account in the inspection. Also, arrangements will be made to let local business men and women know through their local enterprise company and chamber of commerce of the intention to inspect a secondary school in their area and to give them an opportunity to offer the inspectors their views in advance; they will also receive copies of the relevant report. The practice of publishing a full report on each school inspection will be retained, but, in addition, a short summary of the report will be published for the convenience of parents. The action those responsible for provision intend to take in response to inspection recommendations and a report on the subsequent follow-up inspection visit will also be made available to parents and school board members. Steps are being taken to recruit as Her Majesty's inspectors people who have substantive, relevant experience gained beyond education and to involve lay people in inspections, with the objective of having lay participation in all inspection teams from school session 1994–95.

  It will be a function of Her Majesty's inspectorate—through its newly formed audit unit—to monitor the performance of all schools and colleges through scrutiny of school and college development plans, examination results, attendance and truancy figures, the destination of leavers, costs and the findings of its inspections. I will expect it to identify elements requiring attention and improvement in individual institutions and in the system as a whole. These findings, which will be published, will also be used in structuring future inspection programmes. The first audit unit report "Examination Results in Scottish Schools 1990–92" was published on 16 November 1992.

  Comprehensive revision and extension of evaluation and reporting arrangements in this way will improve the capacity of the inspectorate to observe performance and progress and to discern and publicise good practice and report weaknesses and omissions which need to be put
  300
  right. I look for improvements of this type in monitoring and reporting generally to provide a better basis and sharper focus for institutional inspections, and thus a more efficient and effective use of Her Majesty's inspectors in the field. I will fix a target number of inspections of schools and colleges to be completed each year. In 1993–94 I expect to see reports published on around 150 full inspections and the same number of follow-up inspections.

  The inspectorate will play a central role in ensuring that the Government's aim of strengthening and improving the education system in Scotland is realised. The senior chief inspector will have direct access to me enabling him to provide frank and objective advice independent of the Scottish Office Education Department. I will expect to receive his professional views about how the Government might best achieve their objectives for education in a sound, coherent and practicable manner, and I will look to the inspectorate to ensure that new initiatives are imple-mented effectively.

  It will be important for the inspectorate to maintain close contact with those concerned with the products of the education system, for example, employers and parents, to ensure that their views are known and taken fully into account in the work of the inspectorate, and with those in the wider community who should contribute towards improvements.

  The distinctive and central role of HM inspectorate in Scottish education and the value of its work to the education system in the past has been widely recognised. I endorse its role as primarily responsible for independent and objective evaluation of the standards of the education system.

  Fishing Vessels
  Mr. Salmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what provision he will make for the Government's proposals for limitation of fishing effort for fishing vessels which have already cut capacity through licence aggregation.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 1 December 1992]: A vessel whose licence entitlement stems from an aggregation entered into since 1991, and does not therefore have a track record of days at sea for that year, will have its days at sea entitlement calculated from the entitlements of the donor vessels.

  Cleaning Contracts, Strathclyde
  Mr. Nicholls
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) if he will use his powers under the Local Government Act 1988 to intervene in respect of the procedures adopted by Strathclyde regional council in awarding cleaning contracts to its own direct labour organisation;

  (2) what representations he has received from Initial Cleaning concerning the competitive tendering process operated by Strathclyde regional council.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: It is not the Scottish Office Development Department's practice to reveal the identity of either individuals or companies who put forward complaints about the operation by local authorities of the compulsory competitive tendering process. However, my officials have received a complaint about the award by Strathclyde regional council of contracts for building cleaning to Cleaning Direct, the councils direct services organisation

  301
  and have written to the council seeking their comments on it. Once the council's response is received, my right hon. Friend will consider whether it would be appropriate to exercise his sanction powers under the Local Government Act 1988.

  KS Properties Ltd
  Mr. Bill Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what investigations he has made into grants and assistance given by the Scottish Development Agency to K S Properties Ltd.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 11 December 1992]: This involves what was an operational matter for the former Scottish Development Agency. I shall therefore ask the chairman of Scottish Enterprise, as the SDA's successor body, to write to my hon. Friend setting out the details.

  Sites of Special Scientific Interest
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many sites of special scientific interest were(a) damaged and (b) destroyed in Scotland in each of the last five years to date.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 11 December 1992]: Figures are not yet available for the present year. The information for the five years to 1991–92 is as follows:

  Sites damaged

  1987–88

  25

  1988–89

  19

  1989–90

  23

  1990–91

  30

  1991–92

  20

  No sites of special scientific interest were destroyed in Scotland during this period.

  In 1991–92, the area damaged was 2,852 hectares which represents 0.35 per cent. of the total area of sites of special scientific interest in Scotland in that year.

  Water Quality
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the estimated level of capital investment required to meet the water supply quality regulations for(a) each of the next 15 years and (b) the next 15 years in total; and if he will provide a breakdown by each water authority.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: The capital expenditure to meet the requirements of the Water Supply (Water Quality) (Scotland) Regulations 1990 is estimated at over £1.5 billion. A breakdown in the form requested is not available. However, estimated capital expenditure by authority to meet the requirements of the regulations is given in the table. On top of this, it is estimated that additional works of renewal and refurbishment of cast-iron mains will add some £247 million and that a further £55 million capital expenditure will be incurred by the Central Scotland Water Development Board in connection with the regulations.

  Authority

  £ million

  Borders

  27.7

  Central

  77.2

  Dumfries and Galloway

  74.6

  302

  Authority

  £ million

  Fife

  156.6

  Grampian

  48.4

  Highland

  39.6

  Lothian

  51.4

  Strathclyde

  719.0

  Tayside

  71.3

  Orkney

  8.0

  Shetland

  4.7

  Western Isles

  13.1

  Total

  1,291.6

  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the estimated level of capital investment required to refurbish, repair and maintain the infrastructure of(a) water supply, (b) sewerage and sewage treatment and (c) total water and sewerage in (i) each of the next 15 years and (ii) the next 15 years in total; and if he will provide a breakdown by water authority.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: Details of capital expenditure requirements are not available in the form requested. However, for 1992–93, renewal, renovation and replacement of water mains, sewers and treatment works and plant accounts for about 19 per cent. of authorities' planned expenditure on water supply; and for about 27 per cent. of planned expenditure on sewerage and sewage treatment.

  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the estimated level of capital investment required to meet the water supply quality regulations for the years 1989–90 to 1992–93 inclusive at(a) current prices and (b) constant 1991–92 prices, using gross domestic product deflator; and if he will provide a breakdown by each water authority.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: The Water Supply (Water Quality) (Scotland) Regulations 1990 came into force on 1 May 1990. The estimated capital expenditure requirements in the period from 1990–91 to 1992–93 to meet the regulations are given in the table.

  Estimated capital expenditure needs arising from Water Supply (Water Quality) (Scotland) Regulations 1990

  £ million

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  Borders

  Cash prices

  0.9

  1.3

  2.5

  1991–921 prices

  1.0

  1.3

  2.4

  Central

  Cash prices

  0.6

  1.4

  1.6

  1991–92 prices

  0.6

  1.4

  1.5

  Dumfries and Galloway

  Cash prices

  2.1

  1.0

  1.6

  1991–92 prices

  2.2

  1.0

  1.5

  Fife

  Cash prices

  0.0

  0.7

  1.5

  1991–92 prices

  0.0

  0.7

  1.4

  Grampian

  Cash prices

  1.8

  3.4

  10.1

  1991–92 prices

  1.9

  3.4

  9.6

  Highland

  Cash prices

  2.3

  4.3

  3.3

  1991–92 prices

  2.5

  4.3

  3.2

  Lothian

  Cash prices

  1.1

  2.1

  4.0

  1991–92 prices

  1.2

  2.1

  3.8

  Strathclyde

  Cash prices

  20.0

  31.3

  40.4

  303

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  1991–92 prices

  21.4

  31.3

  38.6

  Tayside

  Cash prices

  0.5

  0.4

  1.8

  1991–92 prices

  0.5

  0.4

  1.7

  Orkney

  Cash prices

  0.4

  1.1

  0.9

  1991–92 prices

  0.4

  1.1

  0.9

  Shetland

  Cash prices

  0.8

  0.8

  0.6

  1991–92 prices

  0.9

  0.8

  0.6

  Western Isles

  Cash prices

  0.6

  1.5

  1.8

  1991–92 prices

  0.6

  1.5

  1.7

  Scotland2

  Cash prices

  31.1

  49.5

  71.4

  1991–92 prices

  33.3

  49.5

  68.3

  1 1991–92 prices based on the GDP deflator at market prices.

  2 Includes expenditure by Central Scotland Water Development Board.

  Estimated capital expenditure needs arising from EC urban waste water treatment directive

  1999–00 £ thousand

  2000–01 £ thousand

  2001–02 £ thousand

  2002–03 £ thousand

  2003–04 £ thousand

  2004–05 £ thousand

  Total £ thousand

  Borders

  4,850

  2,750

  1,400

  1,150

  1,150

  714

  31,410

  Central

  850

  550

  350

  300

  300

  205

  13,299

  Dumfries and Galloway

  3,650

  4,600

  3,100

  2,500

  2,000

  1,400

  52,140

  Fife

  9,100

  5,200

  2,600

  2,200

  2,200

  1,350

  102,872

  Grampian

  28,000

  12,000

  5,000

  6,000

  9,000

  14,500

  219,330

  Highland

  2,379

  1,795

  1,750

  2,475

  1,775

  605

  81,053

  Lothian

  16,250

  16,950

  9,197

  5,400

  5,000

  400

  153,748

  Strathclyde

  59,745

  35,500

  17,000

  15,550

  16,550

  15,300

  421,704

  Tayside

  30,727

  17,200

  6,230

  2,710

  2,000

  500

  211,566

  Orkney

  1,530

  900

  450

  360

  360

  270

  17,550

  Shetland

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  7,771

  Western Isles

  4,600

  2,500

  550

  —

  —

  —

  12,000

  Total

  161,681

  99,945

  47,627

  38,645

  40,335

  35,244

  1,324,443

  Estimated capital expenditure needs arising from EC urban waste water treatment directive

  1992–93 £ thousand

  1993–94 £ thousand

  1994–95 £ thousand

  1995–96 £ thousand

  1996–97 £ thousand

  1997–98 £ thousand

  1998–99 £ thousand

  Borders

  1,318

  1,833

  1,492

  1,528

  2,175

  5,300

  5,750

  Central

  3,647

  1,753

  614

  923

  2,117

  840

  850

  Dumfries and Galloway

  920

  3,215

  4,265

  4,165

  7,285

  7,940

  7,100

  Fife

  5,045

  9,190

  12,962

  16,475

  15,700

  10,000

  10,850

  Grampian

  6,263

  12,787

  16,960

  19,190

  26,250

  32,380

  31,000

  Highland

  3,320

  9,737

  13,775

  15,188

  14,190

  7,955

  6,109

  Lothian

  5,436

  6,973

  14,877

  19,084

  19,031

  17,650

  17,500

  Strathclyde

  3,653

  7,460

  18,315

  42,789

  53,652

  67,240

  68,950

  Tayside

  4,438

  7,623

  7,618

  26,420

  25,500

  33,500

  47,100

  Orkney

  2,250

  3,950

  1,150

  1,200

  1,530

  1,710

  1,890

  Shetland

  1,545

  5,695

  520

  11

  —

  —

  —

  Western Isles

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  50

  4,300

  Total

  37,835

  70,216

  92,548

  146,973

  167,430

  184,565

  201,399

WALES

  Earnings
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what were the average male earnings in Wales in each year since 1979 adjusted for inflation.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The information requested is given in the table. Earnings are expressed in real terms at April 1992 prices using the retail prices index.
  304
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the estimated level of capital investment required which would allow(a) water supply, (b) sewerage and sewage treatment and (c) total water and sewerage to comply with EC directives in (i) each of the next 15 years and (ii) the next 15 years in total; and if he will provide a breakdown by water authority.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: Breakdowns of capital expenditure requirements are not available in the form requested. However, estimated capital expenditure needs to meet the requirements of the EC urban waste water treatment directive by the end of 2005 are given in the table. Information on investment in water supply is given in my answer to the hon. Member's earlier question.

  Average weekly earnings—Full-time males1

  April

  £

  21979

  246.6

  21980

  247.2

  21981

  245.7

  21982

  248.8

  1983

  254.4

  1984

  259.7

  1985

  262.2

  1986

  270.6

  1987

  278.6

  1988

  285.7

  1989

  289.7

  1990

  286.9

  305

  April

  £

  1991

  292.1

  1992

  299.2

  Source: New Earnings Surveys.

  1 Whose pay for the survey period was not affected by absence.

  2 Since 1983, earnings are for all those on adult rates. Figures from earlier surveys were for over-18s only and have been converted to be comparable with current definitions.

  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what has been the increase in average adult earnings in Wales(a) between April 1990 and April 1991, and (b) between April 1991 and April 1992.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The average earnings of all full-time employees on adult rates increased by 8.7 per cent. between April 1990 and April 1991. For the period from April 1991 to April 1992 the increase was 7.4 per cent. (Source: New Earnings Survey)

  Breast Cancer
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the recorded number of breast cancer cases in Wales for each year since 1981.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The latest information on the recorded number of new breast cancer cases for Welsh residents is given in the following table:

  Year

  Female

  Male

  Total

  1981

  1,354

  15

  1,369

  1982

  1,483

  11

  1,494

  1983

  1,505

  14

  1,519

  1984

  1,572

  21

  1,593

  1985

  1,728

  27

  1,755

  1986

  1,595

  17

  1,612

  1987

  1,674

  40

  1,714

  1988

  1,856

  12

  1,868

  Source: Welsh Cancer Registry.

  AIDS
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what measures are being taken to inform teenagers in Wales of the dangers posed by AIDS.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  At national level the Health Education Authority's UK HIV/AIDS mass media campaign, comprising TV and cinema productions together with radio advertising, continues to target amongst others, young people.

  In Wales a wide range of health promotion literature about HIV/AIDS is made available by the Health Promotion Authority for Wales, which also specifically targets young people, through education projects undertaken from within its healthy sexuality programme.

  The Welsh Office has made additional funds available to district health authorities for the appointment of health promotion officers dealing with the prevention of HIV/AIDS. These officers undertake a range of activities aimed specifically at young people, including the development of young persons clinics, visiting youth organisations, schools and higher education centres.

  In schools, the national curriculum programme of study for science contains a requirement to teach
  306
  secondary age pupils about HIV/AIDS. The Welsh Office makes grant available to fund teacher training and the appointment of county advisers in health education, including education and HIV/AIDS.

  A guide for the education service on HIV and AIDS has been issued to all schools in Wales.

  Foyer Hostel Schemes
  Mr. Hendry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assistance his Department is giving directly or through Housing for Wales to the development of foyer hostel schemes in Wales.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The principal focus of attention as regards foyer-type schemes relates to the network project in Cardiff for which the Department is providing funding of £800,000 over a three-year period to support young single vulnerable homeless people with special or severe difficulties.

  Document Costs
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish the costs to his Department of (1) publication of the appropriate ring files and subsequent updating of the national curriculum folders (2) publishing, producing and distributing the parents charter booklet (3) reproducing the Welsh version of the national curriculum mathematics document, of correcting mistakes in the original version (4) producing and distributing the document to explain about schools opting out of local education authority control and (5) publishing information on the work of school governors to encourage parents to take up school governing duties.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The information requested is not readily available. I shall write to the hon. Gentleman and place a copy of my reply in the Library of the House.

  Sheep Premium
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what response he has received from the European Commission to his representations concerning delays involving mistakes on claim forms for sheep annual premium payments.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The European Commission has agreed that errors can be corrected without penalty (i) where component figures on a claim form are correct but are added incorrectly (ii) when farmers themselves contact the Department to point'out an error before the beginning of the relevant retention period, or during the retention period where the correct figures can be verified from a hill livestock compensatory allowance claim form and a flock count.

  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, pursuant to his answer of 2 November,Official Report, column 9, whether he will publish a table by county of the disallowed claims for sheep annual premium for each of the years (a) 1989, (b) 1990, (c) 1991 and (d) 1992 to 30 October.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I will write to my hon. Friend and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

  Higher Education
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what measures are being taken to promote higher education among secondary school pupils.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  Programmes of careers education and guidance in schools and the local education authority careers service offer pupils advice and opportunities to discuss options for school leavers, including higher education. In addition, there are a number of specific initiatives to encourage young people to consider careers in engineering, science and technology which may involve higher education. The teaching as a career—TASC—unit promotes and publicises teaching and teacher training to potential recruits. This year TASC has been specifically targeting sixth formers.

  River Dee Crossing
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will allocate extra moneys to Clwyd county council's transport supplementary grant to enable the third River Dee crossing project to start in 1993–94.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The transport grant settlement will allow the authority to spend over £2 million on preparation work in 1993–94. A main works start will be made in 1994–95.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement concerning his Department's policy on the proposed third River Dee crossing.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  My right hon. Friend announced on 14 December that funds would be made availalble to start the Dee crossing in 1994–95.

  Vehicle Pollution
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will bring forward proposals for a new framework for vehicle nuisance control in Wales to include noise, smoke and gaseous pollution detection.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  No. Regulations made under the Road Traffic Act 1988 on these matters are periodically updated in line with technical developments and usually in concert with our European Community partners.

  Transport Supplementary Grant
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he proposes to announce transport supplementary grant for each of the counties of Wales.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  My right hon. Friend announced the 1993–94 transport grant settlement on 14 December.

  Garden Festival
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what estimate he has made of the prospective revenue, relative to budget, of sales of land for(a) housing and (b) commercial development arising from the ending of Garden Festival Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The joint venture partners of Blaenau Gwent borough council, Gwent county council and Welsh 308
  Development Agency estimate revenue from sales of land to be £5 million and £2 million for housing and commercial development respectively over the next six years.

  Agricultural Training Board
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what are his plans for the future status of the Agricultural Training Board in Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  My ministerial colleagues and I will be considering the role and status of the Agricultural Training Board in the light of the numerous responses we have received to our consultation paper.

  Development Area Status
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what percentage of farm land in Wales has the status of development area or special development area.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Approximately 81 per cent. of agricultural land in Wales lies within the less favoured area —LFA. Approximately 57 per cent. is classed as LFA (severely disadvantaged) and 24 per cent. as LFA (disadvantaged).

  Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowance
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the total cost of hill livestock compensatory allowance payments in Wales in the last financial year; what is his estimate for the current financial year; and what financial provision he has made for the forthcoming financial year.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The information is as follows:

  £ million

  1991–92

  42.130

  1992–93

  134.0

  1993–94

  132.380

  1 estimate

  Notes

  1. Expenditure in 1991–92 was higher than normal because of a larger than usual carry over of claims from the previous year.

  2. The 1992–93 forecast takes into account the changes in the 1993 HLCA payment rates announced on 10 December as far as the Department is able. Actual 1992–93 expenditure will be published in the 1992 Appropriation Accounts.

  3. The 1993–94 provision will be published in the 1993–94 Main Supply Estimate Class XV, Vote 1. The actual amounts paid in 1993–94 will depend on the HLCA payment rates that will apply in that year. The HLCA payment rates and other scheme arrangements to apply from 1 January 1994 will be considered in the context of the 1993 autumn review of the economic conditions and prospects for LFA farmers.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he proposes to announce the new rates of hill livestock compensatory allowance payments which will apply in Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply given to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) on 10 December 1992,Official Report, column 757, by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his estimate of the number of farm stock in Wales
  309
  which qualify for hill livestock compensatory allowance payments in development areas and special development areas.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The total numbers of animals which attracted hill livestock compensatory allowance in 1991 were as follows:

  Cows

  Sheep

  Less favoured area (severely disadvantaged)

  126,344

  3,372,804

  Less favoured area (disadvantaged)

  43,902

  764,156

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to maintain the real value of hill livestock compensatory allowance payments in development areas and special development areas in Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  HLCA payment rates and other scheme arrangements are determined following the annual autumn review of the economic conditions and prospects for farmers in the less favoured areas. The outcome of this year's review and the HLCA payment rates to apply from I Janaury 1993 were announced on 10 December 1992.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list for the last financial year(a) the total amount of hill livestock compensatory allowance payments, (b) the total number of claimants and (c) the proportion of these payments which were paid to farmers farming land with the status of special development area.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The information is as follows:

  1991–92

  (a) £42.130 million

  (b) 16,254

  (c) 92 per cent.

  Conservation Grant Scheme
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, pursuant to his answer of 2 November,Official Report, column 9, whether he will publish a table by county of the disallowed claims under the farm and conservation grant scheme for each of the years (a) 1989, (b) 1990, (c) 1991 and (d) 1992 to 30 September.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I will write to my hon. Friend and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

  Rural Initiative
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has under his rural initiative for 1993–94.

  Mr. David Hunt
  A total of £6.6 million has been allocated for the 1993–94 round of the rural initiative capital grants scheme, an increase of 10 per cent. on the current year. Applications have already been invited from local authorities and must be received by Friday 18 December 1992. These will be considered and assessed and an announcement of successful projects made in due course.

  Provision has also been made which will enable the Department, its agencies and other organisations to continue to enhance the development of the economic, social and environmental fabric of rural Wales.

  Tenant Participation
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what funding his Department has provided for the Tenant Participation Advisory Service (Wales) in each year since its creation.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Funding provided each year by the Welsh Office for the Tenant Participation Advisory Service (Wales) since its inception is as follows:

  £

  1992–93

  157,878

  1991–92

  127,597

  1990–91

  83,282

  1989–90

  59,549

  1988–89

  47,375

  Solvent Abuse
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if his Department will set up an inquiry into solvent abuse, its implications on vandalism and its criminalisation.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  I receive advice from a number of individuals and bodies in relation to drug misuse. No evidence has been presented which would justify holding a separate inquiry into solvent abuse.

  Radiotherapy
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his estimate of the number of women domiciled in Wales treated for(a) breast cancer a nd (b) cervical cancer who have suffered serious long-term side effects as a consequence of radiotherapy treatment undergone; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  This information is not held centrally.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will meet members of the Radiotherapy Action Group Exposure to discuss the consequences to women of long-term side effects of radiotherapy treatment; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  My right hon. Friend has no plans to meet this group. The treatment of cancers by radiotherapy is governed by clinical practice within a legislative framework. All patients discuss the implications of radiotherapy with the responsible consultant before the course of treatment begins.

  GP Fund Holding
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the impact of general practitioner fund holding on district health authorities.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  There are 24 fund-holding practices —seven first wave, 17 second wave—and two smaller practices in the second wave are fund holding on a trial basis.

  Only the first wave practices have completed a full year of fund holding and it is too early to quantify the impact of fund holding on district health authorities.
  311
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) if he will itemise how general practitioner fund holders have spent the money saved on hospital budgets;

  (2) what is his estimate of the financial consequences of general practitioner fund-holding savings upon (a) non-fund-holding general practitioner practices budgets and (b) the budgets of district health authorities; and if he will make a statement;

  (3) which general practitioner fund holders in Wales have voluntarily returned savings made on hospital budgets to district health authorities.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Only the seven practices in the first wave in Wales have completed a full year of fund holding. Savings can only be identified when the accounts have been audited and the audit reports have not yet been received.

  Until such time as savings are identified it is impossible to consider their disposition or estimate the financial consequences, if any, on non-fund-holding general practitioner services or district health authorities.

  Drink Driving
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what proposals he has to combat drunken driving in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The Government's strategy is both to change people's attitudes so that drinking and driving is increasingly seen as socially unacceptable and to encourage tougher enforcement. To that end I plan to continue Iń Wales with the annual summer and Christmas/new year publicity campaigns. Carefully targeted publicity campaigns and enforcement have helped to reduce the numbers killed in drink-drive incidents over the last decade by more than half.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many fatalities resulting from drink-related driving accidents were recorded in Wales in 1992; what were the comparable figures for 1990 and 1991; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The numbers of fatalities in accidents where at least one driver gave a positive breath test are given in the table.

  Information is available only where the driver was breath-tested within 12 hours of the accident occurrence. Figures exclude cases where breath test results were not available for medical or other reasons and provide no more than an indication of changes in drinking and driving patterns.

  Number

  1990

  7

  1991

  4

  11992

  3

  1 Available data for 1992: data to end of July for Dyfed-Powys and south Wales, to end of August for north Wales and to end of October for Gwent.

  Free-range Turkeys
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what free-range turkey farms are licensed to operate in Wales.
  312
  Mr. David Hunt
  There is no legal requirement for free-range turkey farms to be licensed.

  Flood Damage
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what additional resources have been made available by his Department to assist those affected by the recent flooding in Wales to restore their homes.

  Mr. David Hunt
  It is the responsibility of householders to ensure that they have adequate insurance for their homes and contents. I have already met the chief executive of the Association of British Insurers who has assured me that all claims submitted to members of the association will be dealt with expeditiously.

  In addition, any homes so badly damaged that they now fail to meet the statutory fitness standard may qualify for mandatory home renovation grants. Discretionary assistance may also be available for certain works over and above that standard.

  National Rivers Authority
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what issues his Advisory Committee for Wales on National Rivers Authority Functions has considered since the publication of its first annual report.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The committee's second annual report has been published today and I will arrange for copies to be placed in the Library of the House as soon as possible.

  Valuation Tribunal Offices
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what decisions he has made on the future structure of valuation tribunal offices in Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I have considered carefully the responses to my consultation paper, "Review of Valuation Tribunal Offices" and the representations made by the Valuation Tribunals Consultative Committee for Wales when my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State met the committee on 11 December. I have concluded that the valuation tribunal service in Wales must improve its efficiency and that this is best achieved by reorganising the present offices so that one office serves two county valuation tribunals. I propose that:

  (a) the Mid and South Glamorgan valuation tribunals should continue to operate from their joint office in Cardiff;

  (b) the Powys and Gwent valuation tribunals should be administered from a joint office in Newport;

  (c) the West Glamorgan and Dyfed valuation tribunals should be administered from a joint office in Carmarthen;

  (d) the Gwynedd and Clwyd valuation tribunal should be administered from a joint office in Prestatyn or another agreed location in north Wales.

  I propose to set an overall staffing complement of 20 compared with the present complement of 24.6 staff. These arrangements are estimated to yield savings of £250,000 in a full year. The offices will provide a service in the Welsh language where required and tribunal hearings will continue to be held at locations convenient to appellants.

  I am setting out my decisions in a letter to representatives of the valuation tribunal service. This letter and a list of those who responded to the consultation will be placed in the Library of the House.
  313
  I intend that the detailed timetable for establishing the new joint offices, arrangements for staff, and the office location in north Wales, should be settled through consultation with the valuation tribunals concerned.

  My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State will shortly meet the presidents of the tribunals affected to discuss implementation.

  National Health Service Funding
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what funding he proposes to make available to the national health service in Wales in 1993–94.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Subject to parliamentary approval, planned provision for the NHS in Wales will increase to £1,974 million net next year. Of this sum £1,465 million is earmarked for hospital and community health services—HCHS. This includes an increase in HCHS revenue expenditure of 3.9 per cent. compared to this year—well in excess of forecast inflation.

  The new money that the Government are making available will provide the NHS in Wales with a increase of 5.2 per cent. on comparable expenditure plans for last year. In addition health authorities will keep an extra £17 million generated by cash-releasing cost improvements programmes and through income generation.

  Over the lifetime of this Government, the resources made available for the NHS in Wales have grown by a staggering 71 per cent. over and above general inflation. Next year NHS net expenditure will increase to £684 per year for every man, woman and child in Wales—over £2,730 for an average family of four. That is a tremendous achievement.

  Council Housing
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has to extend competitive tendering to the management of council housing in the light of the representations received following the publication of the "Competing for Quality in Housing" consultation paper.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I have given very careful consideration to all the representations received. Two key issues emerged: timing relative to the proposed local government reorganisation in Wales and the apprenhension that the consultation rights of tenants were not being improved.

  With regard to local government reorganisation, I recognise the arguments that have been put forward for delaying the introduction of competitive tendering in housing management until reorganisation has taken place. I have therefore decided that the first contracts will be let from 1 April 1997. Nevertheless, it is my intention to charge the "shadow" unitary authorities in Wales with the task of preparing for the introduction of competitive tendering when they are established. I propose to issue further advice on timetabling, core housing management functions, contract size and the question of banding in due course.

  As regards tenants' rights, over the last few years the Government have strongly promoted tenant consultation and participation. Provisions included in the Housing and Urban Development Bill would give tenants enhanced powers to influence the ways in which their homes are managed practically and continuously. The introduction of contractual and tendering arrangements will also dramatically increase the scope for tenant consultation
  314
  and involvement. I look forward to responses on these issues in the light of the further consultation paper, "Tenant Involvement and the Right to Manage", shortly to be in circulation.

  The issue of the client and contractor roles is a very important one. In resolving it, we shall in effect define what for many years to come may be the "core" housing functions of local authorities in respect of the homes they own. In due course, I shall publish a guidance note defining the core functions of local authority housing management not suitable for competitive tendering.

  Car Leasing
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many non-departmental public bodies had fully expensed executive car-leasing schemes in the year 1991–92; how many have revised them since; if he will issue updated guidelines on such schemes to all such bodies in Wales; if he will list which bodies had schemes which involve(a) free petrol and oil to executives benefiting, (b) no contribution to the leasing costs and (c) contributions of less than two sevenths of the total lease costs to the executives in the scheme; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  [pursuant to his answer, 15 December 1992, c. 116]: I regret that the answer contained an error, the correct answer is as follows: One non-departmental public body, the Welsh Development Agency, had an executive car leasing scheme which in 1991–92 did not require repayments for personal mileage. Repayments for petrol and oil commenced from 1 April 1992. The Development Board for Rural Wales had a scheme which required no contribution to leasing costs for some executives, including the chief executive, and less than two sevenths from others. Details are given in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the DBRW's 1991–92 accounts, and this matter is being pursued by the Welsh Office. Guidance produced by the Treasury's central unit on purchasing on car contract hire or lease schemes was passed to Welsh non-departmental public bodies earlier this year.

ENVIRONMENT

  Building Research Establishment
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 17 November,Official Report, column 119, what was the cost to the Exchequer of the visits of the chief executive of the Building Research Establishment to (a) the USA and (b) Finland during the last 12 months.

  Mr. Baldry
  Responsibility for the subject of the question has been delegated to Mr. Roger Courtney as chief executive of the Building Research Establishment.

  Letter from R. Courtney to Mr. Martin Redmond, dated 14 December 1992:

  COSTS OF OVERSEAS VISITS
  The Secretary of State has asked me to respond to your further question asking the costs to the Exchequer of two recent fact-finding visits abroad.
  The visit to the National Institute for Standards and Technology took place on the return journey from a Board meeting in Mexico City of the International Council for

  315
  Building Research Studies and Documentation (CIB). The two days that I spent in Washington entailed no extra air fare but cost £206.54 in subsistence and minor expenses.
  The visit to the Technical Research Institute, Finland (VTT) was combined with attendance by invitation at a meeting of heads of national research institutes. The three day meeting cost a total of £881.09 in fares and other expenses.

  Customs House, Dundee
  Mr. McAllion
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the contractors employed by the Government to carry out the recent refurbishment of the Customs house building in Dundee and the cost of each contract entered into.

  Mr. Baldry
  One contractor, Stewart McGlashen Ltd., was employed by the Property Services Agency in my Department. The total cost of the works, excluding fees and VAT, was £1.1 million.

  Construction Subcontractors
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he intends to take to ensure that main contractors in the construction industry follow the Government's prompt payment policy with respect to payment to subcontractors.

  Mr. Baldry
  Contractual arrangements in the construction industry are particularly complex. The Government have announced their proposal for a general review of contracting and are seeking the co-operation of the industry. We are also seeking to develop improved provisions for Government contracts and already require companies, wishing to be added to the list of approved contractors for Government work, to give general undertakings on prompt payment.

  Housing and Urban Development Bill
  Mr. George Howarth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list each consultation exercise which his Department is currently engaged in, in respect of the Housing and Urban Development Bill; and if he will in each case state the purpose of that consultation, the relevant clause of the Bill to which it relates, the bodies being consulted and the deadline for submissions to him.

  Mr. Baldry
  The various provisions in the Bill have been subject to extensive consultation. In addition, my Department is consulting now on the detailed operation of the proposed new right, contained in clause 109 of the Bill, for local authority tenants to receive compensation for improvements they carry out to their homes. The consultation paper, "Compensation for Tenants' Improvements", was issued jointly by the Department of the Environment and the Welsh Office on 4 December 1992. Responses are due by 22 January 1993.

  My right hon. Friends the Secretary of State and the Secretary of State for Wales have today announced the publication of a further consultation paper entitled, "Tenant Involvement and the Right to Manage". This seeks views on arrangements for the proposed greater involvement of local authority tenants in housing management delegations—clause 114—and the proposed new right to manage for tenants who wish to assume direct responsibility for the management of their estates—clause 115. Responses are due by 26 February 1993. We also
  316
  intend issuing consultation papers on the implementation of the proposed right to repair—clause 108—and powers relating to the provision of welfare services for tenants in local authority accommodation—clauses 110 to 112.

  In addition, we are consulting on proposals for changes in the arrangements for voluntary transfers of local authority owned housing to housing associations. Should my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State decide to proceed with these proposals, legislation would be required. One option would be to provide for the latter by means of amendment to the Housing and Urban Development Bill. A consultation paper on the proposals entitled, "Local Authority Housing in England: Voluntary Transfers", was issued on 18 November 1992. Responses are due by 8 January 1993.

  Lists of the bodies being consulted for each of the three current consultation exercises mentioned above have been placed in the library.

  Mr. Gale
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he proposes to publish a consultation paper on the new framework for tenant involvement and the right to manage in the Housing and Urban Development Bill.

  Sir George Young
  I have today, together with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales, published a consultation paper entitled "Tenant Involvement and the Right to Manage". The consultation paper seeks views from interested parties on the Government's proposals to increase tenant involvement as part of the process of delegation of housing management to other organisations—including delegations made as a result of extending CCT to housing management—and on the new right to manage. Both proposals are fully in line with the citizens charter and represent one of the most significant enhancements of tenants' rights seen in recent times.

  The Government's proposal will for the first time establish a framework—first, by good practice, but later, if need be, through regulations—for the most extensive package of consultation rights ever put before Parliament. Tenants will now be involved, through the process of housing management CCT, in drawing up the specification for the management of their estate, helping to select the managing organisation and monitoring its performance. The cornerstone of these measures is a new statutory right for council tenants to manage their own estates, which removes at a stroke, the obstacles which some reluctant authorities continue to put in the path of tenants who wish to manage things themselves.

  These proposals will be seen as a watershed in the history of tenant participation in this country, and will I am sure be widely welcomed by all who read and reflect on the consultation paper.

  The powers which will give effect to these proposals are contained in clauses 114 and 115 of the Housing and Urban Development Bill.

  Copies of the consultation paper will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

  Private Rented Housing
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what initiatives he has taken during the last five years to revive the privately rented housing sector; what progress has been made as a result of these initiatives; and if he will make a statement.
  317
  Mr. Baldry
  A number of initiatives have been taken during the past five years to revive the private rented sector.

  Deregulation measures in the Housing Act 1988 were brought forward to stem the decline in the quality and supply of private rented accommodation. Landlords are now able to let property under new assured and assured shorthold tenancies at market rents. The 1990 private renters survey show that the number of new tenancies let increased by 50,000–4 per cent.—between 1988 and 1990.

  The extension of the business expansion scheme to companies letting properties on assured tenancies has been very successful. It is estimated that over £1,200 million has been raised so far, providing about 20,000 additional homes to rent.

  Under our housing associations as managing agents scheme—HAMA—funding over three years is being made available through the Housing Corporation's promotional and advisory grant regime, for at least 30 HAMA teams to be set up and running throughout England beginning early next year. This follows a successful pilot scheme with five associations during this year. Under HAMA a housing association provides a full management service for the property, encouraging landlords into the market by removing much of the hassle involved with lettings, and assisting local authorities in providing a good-quality, cost-effective means of executing their responsibilities to the statutory homeless. Selected housing associations were invited to put forward proposals in October. The successful housing associations will be informed in January 1993.

  Our flats over shops scheme attracted bids from 210 local authorities in England applying for resources totalling £41 million in the year 1992–93, of which 57 received supplementary credit approvals totalling £5,047,500. Monitoring is now underway and the invitations to bid for a share of the £10 million available for 1993–94 have recently been issued. The Housing Corporation also provides resources in this area through its social housing over shops programme.

  The "rent a room" scheme will encourage people to take in lodgers. The scheme applies to both owner occupiers and tenants who let rooms in their only or main house. Under the scheme, gross rental income or up to £3,250 a year from 1 April will be exempt from income tax.

  Interim Development Orders
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information his Department has on the number of applications for registration of interim development order permissions that have been received by each mineral planning authority in England and Wales; how many relate to sites in designated areas; what is the land area involved; and whether the permissions are active or dormant.

  Mr. Baldry
  This information is not held centrally. However, according to information supplied to my Department on 2 October 1992 by the County Planning Officers Society—CPOS—the national position in England and Wales is as follows.

  Total applications, England

  508

  Total applications, Wales

  86

  Number of permissions dormant, England

  198

  318

  Number of permissions dormant, Wales

  43

  Applications in designated areas, England

  126

  Applications in designated areas, Wales

  39

  Land area involved, England

  118,042

  Land area involved, Wales

  12,651

  1Hectares.

  I have placed in the library of the House copies of tables supplied to my Department by the CPOS showing the above information in more detail and broken down by mineral planning authority.

  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information his Department has on the number of applications for registration of interim development order permissions received by each mineral planning authority in England and Wales that have been accompanied by(a) an original, or certified true copy, certificate of interim development order permission, (b) an original, or certified true copy, plan of interim development order permission and (c) evidence of winning and working; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  This information is not held centrally.

  Urban Development Corporations
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the value of land presently held by each urban development corporation.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave him on Wednesday 8 July 1992,Official Report, column 253.

  European Regional Development Fund
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he will take to ensure that local authorities are able to access ERDF money available within the United Kingdom structural fund programmes.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  On 30 June 1992 my Department issued to local authorities details of the 1992–93 arrangements for the treatment of ERDF grants through the "other services" block, which covers the generality of ERDF grants for which this Department is responsible. These arrangements ensure that local authorities will receive up to 100 per cent. of supplementary credit capital approvals to provide public expenditure cover for ERDF receipts. From 1993–94 onwards public expenditure cover will be provided for all forecast ERDF receipts.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will release details of how town and parish councils may benefit from new grant cover arrangements for ERDF-eligible projects under the RECHAR programmes.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  This matter is being discussed with other Departments and it is hoped that advice will be issued in the new year.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will publish revised guidance for private sector contributions to ERDF eligible projects.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  My Department is advising applicants that contributions from private bodies to the
  319
  costs of schemes undertaken by public or semi-public sponsors may form part of the expenditure eligible for ERDF support to those schemes.

  Coal Mining Areas
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how RECHAR 2 is expected to affect the level of central Government funding to those local authorities accountable to coal mining areas.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  No firm proposals have been received from the European Commission for a second series of RECHAR programmes.

  Refugees
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what financial assistance will be given to local authorities who provide accommodation and other facilities to refugees from the former Yugoslavia.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  As announced by my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning on 16 November 1992,Official Report, column 54, we propose to make available a special grant to assist the small number of local authorities worst affected by the recent influx of displaced persons from the former Yugoslav republic. My Department will be writing to local authorities shortly in order to obtain information on which to base the grant.

  Charities
  Mr. Duncan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his conclusions on his guidance to local authorities on discretionary rate relief to charities and non-profit making bodies following his survey of local authorities' practices in 1989–90 and 1990–91.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  My hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key) announced some of the results of our numerical analysis of the results of the survey on 5 November 1991,Official Report, column 17, and 16 December 1991, Official Report, column 69. They show that more relief was given to more recreational clubs in 1990–91 than in 1989–90. Although fewer other non-profit making bodies received relief, the class of property has reduced in size: in 1989–90 it included residential care, educational and welfare institutions which, on introduction of the community charge, lost eligibility for relief. For those still eligible, relief remained about the same level as in 1989–90.

  We have no evidence from the survey that authorities are misusing, or indeed failing to use, their discretion. The objective is to give local authorities the chance to tailor the rates bills of a wide range of deserving ratepayers to the local services those organisations provide. These are matters that cannot be prescribed fairly at a national level and which are wholly suited to local decision.

  Our guidance on discretionary rate relief appears to have been widely accepted and we have not been alerted to major flaws in it. We therefore do not feel that it needs to be amended. However, we are writing to all local authorities reminding them of the Department's guidance to treat each case on its merits.

  Inner Cities
  Mr. Duncan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish the results of the recent external evaluation of the inner cities task forces programme.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The evaluation of the task forces in Spitalfields, London, Chapeltown and Harehills, Leeds, and Hartlepool was undertaken by PA Cambridge Economic Consultants. Its report is published today. A copy has been placed in the Library of the House.

  I am very pleased to see that this independent evaluation concludes
  "In tackling severe people-related problems and deep-seated market failure in the worst part of our inner city areas, the task force programme has demonstrated imagination, flair and flexibility."

  Edinburgh Summit
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he will be making concerning the siting of the European Environment Agency following the agreements made at the Edinburgh summit in relation to locations of other EC institutions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  I have placed this subject on the agenda of the meeting of the Environment Council which is taking place in Brussels on 15 and 16 December. I will report on the outcome of that Council immediately thereafter.

  Planning and Compensation Act 1991
  Mr. Trend
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to implement proposals for extending environmental assessment to additional projects under the powers enacted in section 15 of the Planning and Compensation Act 1991.

  Sir George Young
  We received 142 responses to the consultation paper issued on 30 June 1992. A list of the responses has been sent to the Libraries of both Houses and copies of the responses have been placed in the Department of the Environment library at 2 Marsham street.

  The proposals have been generally welcomed. There were no overall objections, and only seven objections to individual proposals. In the light of these responses my right hon. and learned Friend and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales propose to amend the Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 to incorporate the seven new categories of project proposed in the consultation paper. Amending regulations, which will place minimal demands upon local planning authorities, will be laid in the new year and an explanatory circular will be issued.

  Under the new arrangements, the following categories of project will be added to those in schedule 2 to the regulations, the effect of which will be to require environmental assessment—EA—where a particular proposal is likely to have significant environmental effects:

  —Trout farming

  —Water treatment plant

  —Wind generators

  —Motorway service areas; and service areas on other roads providing fuelling and restaurant facilities

  —Coast protection works

  —Golf courses

  321
  It is also proposed to amend schedule I to the regulations to include privately financed toll roads; the effect of this will be to require environmental assessment for all projects of this kind.

  A number of comments were received on the indicative criteria to be included in accompanying guidance, to help authorities in determining whether to require EA for a particular schedule 2 project. These comments will be taken into account in preparing guidance to accompany the amending regulations. The guidance will stress, however, that the test of whether a schedule 2 project requires EA is, in all cases, whether the proposed development would be likely to have significant effects on the environment.

  In addition to extending the scope of environmental assessment, we intend to make some technical amendments to clarify the application of the existing requirements of directive 85/337/EEC on environmental impact assessment, EIA. First, as proposed in the consultation paper, the developer will be required to deposit additional copies of the environmental statement with the Secretary of State; and a provision will require information supplementary to the environmental statement provided by the developer, in response to a formal request from the decision-making authority, to be advertised and forwarded to statutory consultees. Other changes will make clear the precise requirements of article 2(3) of the directive apply concerning exemptions; and require the competent authority to confirm in writing when notifying its decision that it has taken the environmental information into consideration.

  Similar amendments are planned by other Government Departments in their regulations implementing directive 85/337, together with amendments to clarify the extent of the competent authority's discretion to require EIA for annex II projects. My right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and for Northern Ireland will bring forward their own proposals in due course.

  Inland Revenue Rents
  Mr. McAllion
  To ask the Secretary of State far the Environment if he will publish the annual rents paid by the Inland Revenue to Property Holdings in respect of(a) Overgate house, Marketgait, Dundee, for Dundee 3 tax district, (b) 2 Court House square, Dundee for Dundee 1 tax district, (c) Overgate house, Marketgait, Dundee, for Dundee collection offices and (d) 2 Court House square, Dundee, for the Dundee tax inquiry centre and the total annual loss incurred by Property Holdings following the surrender of these properties by the Inland Revenue; to which new tenants the properties have been relet; and at what annual rents.

  Mr. Baldry
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: The rent charges made by Property Holdings on Inland Revenue are as follows:

  Magee

  Jordanstown

  Coleraine

  Belfast

  Total

  A. New build1

  Number of projects

  3

  4

  —

  1

  8

  Total value (£ million)

  6.14

  5.71

  —

  2.33

  14.18

  B. Restructuring2

  Number of projects

  —

  2

  1

  1

  4

  322
  Overgate house, Dundee

  Dundee 3 tax district—£54,936 per annum

  Dundee collection—£41,952 per annum

  3 Court House square, Dundee

  Dundee tax district—£62,088 per annum

  Dundee tax enquiry—£21,072 per annum

  Negotiations are at an advanced stage on the reallocation of some 418m2 of the space to be vacated at Court House square to the Benefits Agency, which will pay the same rent.

  Consideration is still being given to the most cost effective options for disposal of the remaining space.

  British Nuclear Fuels plc
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish all changes to the contracts between British Nuclear Fuels plc and overseas countries made since the original signing in relation to withdrawal from the thermal oxide reprocessing plant programme.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 11 December 1992]: I have been asked to reply.

  Details of reprocessing contracts are a matter for the parties concerned. I understand from British Nuclear Fuels plc that none of its overseas customers has sought a change in its contracts to enable it to withdraw from reprocessing in the thermal oxide reprocessing plant.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  University of Ulster
  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what has been Government expenditure on buildings at each campus of the university of Ulster since 1984; and what is the number and value of the university capital projects projected from each campus between now and 1995–96.

  Mr. Hanley
  Government capital expenditure on buildings at each campus of the university of Ulster since 1984 is as follows:

  £ million

  Magee

  9.96

  Jordanstown

  0.15

  Coleraine

  —

  Belfast

  1.25

  In addition, work has recently started on a £6 million extension at the Jordanstown campus, of which the Government, with EC assistance, are funding £5.34 million.

  University estimates of capital requirements for each campus between now and 1995–96 are as follows:
  323

  Magee

  Jordanstown

  Coleraine

  Belfast

  Total

  Total value (£ million)

  —

  2.69

  0.87

  2.67

  6.23

  1Additional accommodation.

  2 Space adaptation.

  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he wil list for each of the four campuses of the university of Ulster the increment of student number increase betwen 1984–85 and 1990–91 and the projected increment of student number increase between 1990–91 and 1995–96.

  Mr. Hanley
  The information requested is as follows:

  Campus

  Increase in full time equivalent student numbers 1984–85 to 1990–91

  Projected1 increase in full time equivalent student numbers 1990–91 to 1995–96

  Belfast

  207

  106

  Coleraine

  761

  1,189

  Jordanstown

  34

  1,571

  Magee

  842

  661

  1 University of Ulster planning figures.

  Mr. Hume
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland show many faculty, department and administrative department headquarters are currently located on each of the four campuses of the university of Ulster.

  Mr. Hanley
  The university is administered as a unitary institution with its administrative headquarters on the Coleraine campus. Departments and faculties do not have specified campus headquarters. There is one exception, the faculty of art and design, which has a campus base in Belfast.

  Privatisations
  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make it his policy to undertake public share flotation when privatising water and sewerage services in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Atkins
  It is too early to say how the sale of water and sewerage services in Northern Ireland will take place. Following my announcement on 15 July of the Government's privatisation plans, the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland has commissioned a feasibility study to consider a number of major issues in relation to privatisation, including the options for the method of sale.

  Housing Grants
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how long it takes to process, at the Newry and Lisburn Housing Executive grant offices, an application under the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1992, for(a) an improvement grant, (b) a replacement grant and (c) a repair grant.

  Mr. Atkins
  This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, but the chief executive has advised me that, because the scheme is in its infancy, processing times 324
  have only been identified for two stages of the procedures. The time taken from the date a preliminary inquiry form is received until the applicant is told of his possible contribution to the work is about two weeks in both the Newry and Lisburn grant offices. If an applicant decides to proceed, the time taken for the inspection of his property to determine what work needs to be done and what work qualifies for grant aid is about four weeks in each office. A further four weeks is likely to be required to issue a schedule of works and a formal application form at which stage further progress rests with the applicant to complete the necessary documentation and return the application.

  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people made application for improvement, replacement and repair grant since 1 October under the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1992 at the Newry and Lisburn grant offices; and of these how many were refused and what were the reasons for refusals.

  Mr. Atkins
  This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Executive, but the chief executive has advised me that 495 and 426 preliminary inquiry forms have been received in the Newry and Lisburn grant offices respectively. He has also advised me that it is not possible at this time to establish which grants have been claimed, as categories of grant can only be established after a property had been inspected. Precise numbers of cases refused are not yet available, but a refusal would only be issued at the preliminary inquiry stage where a property meets the statutory fitness standard.

  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people were refused application forms for improvement grant and repair under the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1983 from 28 February to 30 September at the Newry and Lisburn grant offices.

  Mr. Atkins
  This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Executive, but the chief executive has advised me that during the period 28 February to 30 September 1992 preliminary inquiries were refused by the executive in all offices throughout Northern Ireland. A record of inquiries refused was not kept.

  RUC Road Crashes
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many RUC officers died in road crashes in each year since 1980, on duty and off duty; and how many were wearing seat belts.

  Mr. Mates
  The information for 1980 to 1985 is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Information for the years 1986 onwards is as follows:

  Seatbelt usage

  Year

  Killed

  On duty

  Off duty

  Not in use

  In use

  Not duty

  1986

  7

  —

  7

  7

  —

  —

  1987

  3

  —

  3

  3

  —

  —

  1988

  8

  —

  8

  7

  1

  —

  325

  Seatbelt usage

  Year

  Killed

  On duty

  Off duty

  Not in use

  In use

  Not Known

  1989

  6

  2

  4

  4

  —

  2

  1990

  4

  1

  3

  2

  1

  1

  1991

  5

  —

  5

  5

  —

  —

  19921

  2

  —

  2

  1

  —

  1

  1 To 10 December.

  Holding Centres
  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he expects to announce the appointment of an independent commissioner for the holding centres.

  Sir Patrick Mayhew
  I am pleased to announce. that I have today appointed Sir Louis Blom-Cooper QC as independent commissioner for the holding centres. Sir Louis is a highly respected legal figure who will bring considerable experience to the post. The principal role of the commissioner will be to provide further reassurance that persons suspected of involvement in terrorism who are detained in the holding centres are fairly treated and that the wide-ranging statutory and administrative safeguards already in place are being properly applied. A copy of the commissioner's terms of reference will be placed in the Library. Sir Louis' appointment as commissioner will be for three years in the first instance. He will take up his duties early in the new year.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Benefits
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the cumulative amount of extra spending over and above ordinary uprating on(a) supplementary benefit and income support child rates, (b) the family premium and (c) family credit in gross and net terms since 1979.

  Mr. Burt
  The information requested could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, the sum total of extra help given to low-income families since the 1988 reforms will, from next April, be worth around £1 billion a year.

  Personal Pensions
  Mr. Dewar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what are the average annual earnings of those who have contracted out of the state earnings-related pension scheme to take out personal pensions.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The mean annual earnings of United Kingdom personal pension holders in the tax year 1990–91, the latest year for which figures are available, was about £10,500.

  Note: The estimate is based on a sample of Inland Revenue end of year returns.

  Mothers
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his policy towards encouraging mothers to stay at home.
  326
  Mr. Burt
  The Governments policy is that mothers should generally be treated equally, whether they decide to stay at home or not.

  Retirement Incomes
  Mr. Knox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Bowden) of 6 November,Official Report, columns 462–65, if he will break down the figures in order to distinguish between the retirement incomes of husbands and wives, single men and single women respectively.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The information is in the table:

  Receipt of occupational pensions

  Group

  Percentage with an occupational pension

  Mean amount of occupational pension for those in receipt (£ per week)

  Median amount of occupational pension for those in receipt (£ per week)

  Single men aged 65+

  63

  44.80

  26.40

  Single women aged 60+

  46

  38.00

  21.00

  Men in pensioner couples

  67

  65.00

  31.60

  Women in pensioner couples

  15

  28.20

  16.20

  Notes:

  1. Estimates are based on data from "Occupational Pension Schemes 1987", a survey by the Government Actuary (HMSO) and the 1988 Family Expenditure Survey.

  2. Pension amounts at 1988 levels.

  3. Pensioner couples are defined as couples in which the husband is over state pension age. The figures will therefore include some women aged under 60 and exclude some women who have reached state pension age.

  Family Credit
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the latest take-up figure for family credit in(a) Strathclyde, (b) Scotland, (c) England and Wales and (d) the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Burt
  Recent research by the Policy Studies Institute, commissioned by the Department, has estimated family credit take-up in Great Britain 1991 as 70 per cent. by expenditure and 64 per cent. by caseload. Figures broken down by region are not available.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what estimate he has made of the number of families claiming family credit in(a) Strathclyde and (b) Scotland as a whole which are (i) one-parent families and (ii) two-parent families; what is the number of children in each category of families; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Burt
  The number of families claiming family credit, as at the end of April 1992, the latest date for which information is available, is as follows:

  Two-parent families

  One-parent families

  Total

  Strathclyde

  With 1 child

  2,500

  6,600

  9,100

  With 2 children

  3,680

  3,640

  7,320

  327

  Two-parent families

  One-parent families

  Total

  With 3 children

  2,500

  1,200

  3,700

  With 4 children

  1,060

  180

  1,240

  Total

  9,740

  11,620

  21,360

  Scotland

  With 1 child

  5,220

  13,940

  19,160

  With 2 children

  8,500

  7,340

  15,840

  With 3 children

  5,280

  2,460

  7,740

  With 4 children

  2,700

  500

  3,200

  Total

  21,700

  24,240

  45,940

  Note:

  Source: 5 per cent sample of family credit recipients on 30 April 1992. Some values may be based on a small number of observations.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list the number of families claiming family credit in(a) 1990, (b) 1991 and (c) the most recent date for the current year in (i) Strathclyde and (ii) Scotland.

  Mr. Burt
  The number of families receiving family credit at the end of April 1990, April 1991 and April 1992, the latest date for which information is available, is as follows:

  April 1990

  April 1991

  April 1992

  Strathclyde

  16,840

  18,900

  21,360

  Scotland

  37,160

  41,060

  45,940

  Note:

  Source: 5 per cent sample of family credit recipients. Some values may be based on a small number of observations.

  Family Support
  Mr. Wicks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many two-parent families are in receipt of(a) income support, (b) family credit and (c) disability working allowance; and for each benefit how many two-parent families are estimated to include a qualifying child for the purposes of the Child Support Act 1991.

  Mr. Burt
  The number of two-parent families in receipt of the specified benefits is contained in the table.

  Number

  Income support

  403,000

  Family credit

  215,000

  Disability working allowance

  478

  On the best information available, the number of two-parent families in receipt of the specified benefits who are estimated to include a qualifying child for the purposes of the Child Support Act 1991 are contained in the table.

  Number

  Income support

  34,000

  Family credit

  17,000

  Disability working allowance

  38

  Notes:

  1. The figures for the numbers of two-parent families in receipt of income support and family credit are taken from the income support statistics annual inquiry 1991.

  2. Figures are rounded to the nearest thousand.
  328
  Mr. Wicks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate(a) the savings in income support expenditure which will be achieved as a result of increased payments of child support maintenance and (b) the savings if a disregard were to be introduced into income support for child maintenance at the rate of (i) £5 and (ii) £15, in the first year of implementation and the following three years.

  Mr. Burt
  Best available estimates are for the long run. As stated in my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) on 30 November at columns 4–5, we expect that as a result of the child support initiative absent parents will, in the long run, contribute around £600 million to the maintenance of their children in families on income supprt. Latest estimates of the long-run costs of a maintenance disregard in income support are £115 million for a £5 disregard and £335 million for a £15 disregard.

  Severe Hardship Payments
  Mrs. Wise
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many 16 and 17-year-olds awaiting a youth training place are in receipt of severe hardship payments.

  Mr. Burt
  The information is not available in the form requested.

  The average length of award of severe hardship provision is eight weeks, but it is possible for more than one claim to be made in this period. The total number of claims in any eight week period may therefore be greater than the total number of people claiming.

  During the eight-week period ending 4 December 1992, 13,000 successful claims have been made.

  Disability Allowances
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when Miss Ayesha Weeks of 11 Champernowne, Modbury, Ivybridge, South Devon, will know the result of her application for disability living allowance.

  Mr. Scott
  The administration of disability living allowance is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to my hon. Friend and a copy will be placed in the Library.

  Letter from Michael Bichard to Mr. Anthony Steen, dated 15 December 1992:
  As Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency, it is my responsibility to answer questions about relevant operational matters. I am therefore replying to the points raised in your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security asking when Miss Ayesha Weeks will know the result of her application for Disability Living Allowance (DLA).
  A decision has been made on Miss Weeks' latest claim for DLA. I have replied separately, and in greater detail, about the case.
  I hope you find this reply helpful. A copy will appear in the Official Report. A copy is also being placed in the Library.

  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he expects to start paying disability living allowance and personal carer's allowance to Mrs. Patricia Allen awarded to her from 8 August and 6 April, respectively; and if he will make a statement.
  329
  Mr. Scott
  The administration of disability living allowance is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write shortly to the hon. Member and a copy will be placed in the Library.

  Letter from Michael Bichard to Mr. Bob Cryer, dated 15 December 1992:
  As Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency, it is my responsibility to answer questions about relevant operational matters. I am therefore replying to the points raised in your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security asking when Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and personal carer's allowance will be paid to Mrs. Patricia Allen.
  I can confirm that action has now been completed on Mrs. Allen's case. I have replied to you separately, and in greater detail, about the case.
  Clearly Mrs. Allen's claim has not been handled with the efficiency I would expect and I offer my sincere apologies to her for the inconvenience this must have caused. My letter of 19 October 1992 to all MPs explained the problems the Agency has faced since the successful launch of DLA and the positive steps taken to improve the situation.
  I hope you find this reply helpful. A copy will appear in the Official Report. A copy will also be placed in the Library.

DEFENCE

  Adriatic Sea
  Mr. Jim Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the co-operation between the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the Western European Union naval forces in the Adriatic.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  NATO and WEU naval forces are operating in the Adriatic to monitor and enforce compliance with the arms embargo against the whole of the former Yugoslavia and the trade sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro. There is full-co-operation and co-ordination between the two forces, including communication links between the two commanders at sea and daily contact between the staffs of the two organisations ashore.

  Research and Technology Development
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what examination his Department has made of the implications of articles 130f to 130p, proposed to be added to the treaty of Rome under the treaty on European union, on research and technology development in the military sector.

  Mr. Aitken
  The Ministry of Defence has made a thorough examination of articles 130f to 130p and is fully aware of their implications on military research and technology development.

  Radioactive Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what outstanding debts his Department has with British Nuclear Fuels in regard to the storage and treatment of radioactive waste, and decommissioning of nuclear plant, as a result of contracts carried out for his Department by British Nuclear Fuels Ltd.

  Mr. Aitken
  My Department has no such debts.

  Historic Buildings
  Sir Nicholas Fairbairn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the historic buildings in England, Wales and Scotland in armed forces use.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  There are 1,020 buildings listed as of historical or architectural interest on the Defence estate, or which are occupied by the Ministry of Defence through arrangements with Department of Environment, property holdings.

  Information about which are occupied and by whom is not held centrally, and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Prisoners-of-War
  Mr. Stevenson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what documents his Department holds regarding experiments conducted upon prisoners-of-war of the Japanese of a biological and chemical nature.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  After a number of thorough searches during the last seven years, no documents which include evidence of Japanese biological or chemical experiments on British prisoners-of-war have been found within the Ministry of Defence archives.

  Hong Kong
  Mr. Hall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to increase the number of service personnel in Hong Kong.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Force levels in Hong Kong, and contingency plans for the reinforcement of the garrison, are kept under regular review.

  Maintenance Work, Harrogate
  Mr. Robert Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the cost of maintenance and improvement works to his Department's establishment at St. George's road, Harrogate, in each of the last three years; what current expenditure is to be undertaken; and for what purpose.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The cost of maintenance and improvement works to the Ministry of Defence establishment at St. George's road, Harrogate, over the years 1989–90, 1990–91 and 1991–92 was £1.076 million, £2.227 million and £1.140 million respectively. For 1992–93 the cost of maintenance is expected to be £0.741 million.

  War Widows
  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has instituted a study into the practicality of allowing war widows who remarry to have an automatic right to the restoration of war widow's pension if they are widowed a second time; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  War widow's pensions are a matter for the Department of Social Security. In addition, the occupational pension scheme for the armed forces includes corresponding provision for those widows who are eligible to be awarded a pension which, if the husband's death is accepted as being attributable to his
  331
  service, is known as an attributable forces family pension. The widow's entitlement to that pension, or any other type of widow's pension payable under the scheme, ceases in the event of remarriage except to the extent that there is any residual entitlement to a guaranteed minimum pension.

  The scheme rules do, however, permit a widow's pension to be restored to payment, as a matter of discretion, if the subsequent marriage comes to an end. Normal practice is that restoration would be agreed if a widow is considered to be worse off on second widowhood, without her previous pension, than when she was originally widowed and received that pension.

  These arrangements have reecently been reviewed, to consider whether it would be approprite to make restoration of payment automatic upon second widowhood or other termination of the further marriage. It has, however, been concluded that the existing discretionary arrangements, under which service widows can have a reasonable degree of assurance that their pension will be restored if there is a need, but which do not commit the Department to payments from public funds where there is no demonstrable need, should continue to apply.

  Bosnia
  Mr. Macdonald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether ZB298 mortar locating radar and artillery sound ranging equipment has been made available to the British forces in Bosnia; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The ZB298 was a ground surveillance radar and did not have a mortar locating capability; it is no longer in service with the British Army. Mortar locating radars and artillery sound ranging equipment have not been deployed to Bosnia. Given the terrain and mobile nature of the tasks undertaken by UNPROFOR troops, such equipment would be of negligible utility.

  Special Safety Organisation
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the role and function of his Department's special safety organisation.

  Mr. Aitken
  The title "Special Safety Organisation" was formerly used to refer to elements of what is now the Ministry of Defence's Nuclear Accident Response Organisation, the role and function of which were detailed in the answer given to the hon. Gentleman on 6 November at column 534.

  Heavy Duty Vehicles
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the truck cargo heavy duty vehicles recently delivered to his Department have fulfilled the requirements of their design specification.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The vehicles have met the specification in all essential respects and have been accepted into service.

  Waste Materials (Burning)
  Mr. Jopling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 10 December,Official Report, column 798, if he will give details of the strictly controlled
  332
  conditions under which fire fighting training is carried out, under the exemptions granted to his Department from the statutory nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  Mr. Aitken
  The defence fire services (Def FS) are required under the terms of the Health and Safety at Work etc., Act to provide MOD's firefighters with realistic training on real fires in a controlled environment. In line with MOD's policy on the protection of the environment, the Def FS have issued strict policy guidelines to limit the numbers of fires conducted for training purposes as well as stating that only uncontaminated fuels should be used in such exercises. The level of pollutants released by such fires, both at the central training establishment and at unit level is minimal, and is covered under MOD's exemptions to the Environmental Protection Act 1990. New practices, such as fuel efficient training aids, and fuel separators are further improving the situation. Nevertheless, it remains essential that actual aircraft carcass fires are tackled in training, since there is no acceptable substitute for this practice.

  Low Flying
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many complaints he has received concerning low-flying military aircraft in the county of Powys in each of the last three years.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The numbers of inquiries or complaints about low flying training which my Department received in each of the last three years from addresses in the county of Powys are as follows:

  Year

  Number

  1990

  223

  1991

  108

  11992

  195

  1 Up to 30 November 1992.

  Devonport Management Ltd
  Mr. Streeter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence why he has instructed Devonport Management Ltd to provide a copy of its detailed development plans to his Department for onward transmission to Mott MacDonald Ltd.

  Mr. Aitken
  Plans for the proposed development of nuclear support facilities at both royal dockyards have been made available to Mott MacDonald in its capacity as the Ministry of Defence's independent civil engineering consultants on this matter.

  Mr. Streeter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the detailed plans of Devonport Management Ltd for the redevelopment of docks at Devonport to refit Trident submarines have been passed by his Department to the management of Babcock Thorn Ltd or their agents.

  Mr. Aitken
  No.

  Rosyth and Devonport Dockyards
  Mr. Streeter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what work is being carried out by Mott MacDonald for his Department in relation to submarine refitting at the Rosyth and Devonport dockyards.
  333
  Mr. Aitken
  The Ministry of Defence has engaged Mott MacDonald, a firm of civil engineering consultants, to provide independent professional advice in relation to the design and build stages of Babcock Thorn Ltd's proposal for a modification of the nuclear submarine refitting facility at Rosyth, and Devonport Management Ltd's proposal for the redevelopment of existing docks at Devonport.

  Nuclear Submarines
  Mr. Streeter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions his Department has requested Devonport and Rosyth to submit best and final offers for the refit of Britain's nuclear submarines.

  Mr. Aitken
  Both dockyard management companies have, at their own initiative, made revisions to the proposals which they originally submitted to the Ministry of Defence in November last year. They have both been given equal treatment including a recent and final opportunity to revise their respective proposals if they so wish.

  Gleneagles Nuclear Planning Meeting
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will list the items discussed at the Gleneagles nuclear planning meeting on 20 and 21 October;

  (2) whether he discussed (a) the first use of nuclear weapons and (b) ballistic missile defences at the Gleneagles nuclear planning group meeting on 20 and 21 October.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I refer the hon. Member to the final communiqué of the NATO nuclear planning group meeting, a copy of which is in the Library of the House.

  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what were the total costs incurred by hosting the NATO nuclear planning group meetings at Gleneagles on 20 and 21 October; and which Department are meeting this cost.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Although it is too early to provide a precise final figure, we estimate the cost to Ministry of Defence votes of hosting the NATO nuclear planning group meeting at Gleneagles at some £.1.5 million.

  Helicopters
  Mr. Trotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 30 November,Official Report, column 61, which aircraft carrier will receive the Merlin EH101 helicopter first and when; which helicopters will be deployed on the aircraft carrier not due to receive the Merlin EH 101 helicopter from the batch ordered last year; and what assessment he has made of the operational consequences.

  Mr. Aitken
  Plans are not yet finalised as to which aircraft carrier will be the first to receive the Merlin EH101 helicopter. Sea King helicopters will continue to be deployed on aircraft carriers until they are replaced by the Merlins. The operational consequences of the sequential introduction of the Merlin EH101 were taken into account in deciding how to introduce Merlin into Royal Navy service.

  Refit and Repair Contracts
  Mr. Trotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 30 November,Official Report, column 59, if he will set out the measurements used by his Department of total naval production load; what proportion of this load and of total Royal Navy refit, repair and maintenance of expenditure was accounted for in 1991–92 by nuclear refit, repair and maintenance; and what proportion of load and of expenditure arose from contracts awarded overseas.

  Mr. Aitken
  The total naval production load comprises the estimated industrial work required to complete each project in the planned refit and docking programme expressed as man weeks. In 1991–92, the proportions of the total naval production load and of total expenditure attributed to nuclear refit, repair and maintenance work were 17.1 and 26.1 per cent., respectively. The programme attributed to contracts awarded overseas were 0.8 and 0.28 per cent., respectively. The overseas expenditure arose from work carried out on vessels deployed overseas, for which it would have been operationally impossible or uneconomic to bring the vessels to the United Kingdom.

  Indonesian Nationals
  Mr. Hain
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Indonesian nationals are or have been training in British military establishments(a) currently and (b) in the last three years.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Indonesian nationals are attending, and have attended, a range of developmental and technical training courses in British military establishments. Details of the training, including numbers involved, are confidential between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Indonesia.

  Christmas Parties
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what authorisation he has given for expenditure on Christmas party festivities in his Department and in other parts of the armed services based in Great Britain.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The Department has clear guidelines covering the use of official funds on hospitality which is required to be in the direct defence interest. These rules are not relaxed at Christmas time or at any other time of the year.

  Bill Payments
  Dr. Spink
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to improve his Ministry's bill payment service for defence contractors; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Aitken
  I am pleased to report that last month the Ministry of Defence accounts office in Liverpool introduced an improved bill payment service for defence contractors. This marks the achievement of one of the targets which was set when the Directorate General of Defence Accounts was launched as a defence support agency in April last year.

  Under the new system, defence contractors have the opportunity to present their claims to the Liverpool office

  335
  every fortnight and payment is made directly to their bank accounts. Previously contractors were paid by cheque every four weeks.

  Fortnightly billing started on 2 November, and already a total of almost 10,000 payments worth £750 million have been paid to 5,000 companies under the new arrangements. Next year the Ministry of Defence expects to pay over £12 billion to nearly 20,000 contractors.

  The Government recognise the importance of healthy cash flow and have declared their intention to improve payment standards. I am sure that the new payment arrangements will be welcomed by the many thousands of contractors, including all those small businesses, who provide services to the Ministry of Defence, and who will no longer suffer the risk of delays in payment by cheque through the post.

  Army Training
  Dr. Goodson-Wickes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what further progress has been made in restructuring the Army's training base in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Plans for the rationalisation of the Army training organisation were outlined in Cmnd 1595. I announced on 10 March at column 500 our proposals to improve basic training for adults and young soldiers, juniors and apprentices at a reduced number of larger, more efficient establishments. Consultation with the trades unions is now complete and I can confirm that all adult and young soldier training will be undertaken in five new Army training regiments to be formed at Glencorse, Lichfield, Bassingbourn, Pirbright and Winchester.

  To enable these changes, specialist infantry training will move to interim locations at Ouston, Strensall and Catterick. It is also our intention that Royal Signals training should in due course be concentrated at Blandford and this will permit specialist infantry training to be concentrated at Catterick in the long term. As a result of the reorganisation of infantry training, we shall not now need to use Crickhowell for this purpose in the interim, but it will continue to provide training facilities for the TA as at present. Infantry training at Brecon will also be increased with the formation of a new tactics and skill at arms wing. This will result in an increase of one third in student numbers; some additional civilian staff will also be required. This will require substantial new investment on student accommodation over the next few years.

  Having examined further a pilot scheme for the training of juniors, we have concluded that in the light of the introduction of the single school-leaving point in 1995, the
  336
  junior entry no longer justifies the very substantial investment involved. The Army must, however, retain access to the school-leaver market and we therefore now propose to introduce a single entry for the Army, subsuming all those who would previously have been recruited as juniors, young soldiers and adults. They will undertake their basic training at one of the five Army training regiments. As a result, the establishments at Bramcote and Harrogate need not now be converted to Army junior leader regiments. We will be examining the potential for alternative defence uses for these establishments although none has yet been found. It is not therefore possible to say what might be the detailed implications for civilian staff. There will be smaller changes at Winchester, although that establishment will continue with its main role as an Army training regiment.

  The introduction of the single school-leaving point also has implications for the concept of a single Army technical college, which I announced on 5 June at column 672. We now propose that apprentices will undertake their military leadership and technical training at their respective arm and service centres. It will, therefore, not now be necessary to establish the Army technical college at Arborfield and Aldershot, but REME and Army catering corps apprentices will continue to be trained at these sites. I am pleased to say that since announcing the end of apprentice training at Chepstow, further study has identified the barracks there as a suitable location for an infantry battalion returning to the United Kingdom. With some 650 men, up to half of whom will have families, the positive economic impact will be considerable. The necessary building work will begin on the cessation of apprentice training in 1994, allowing occupation in 1996.

  Full consultation with the trades unions on these proposals will take place in the normal way before final decisions are taken.

  We have also laid down the principles for further restructuring the training organisation and improving special provision to arm and service and career training. Where possible, such training will be concentrated in single centres with any further training done at the minimum number of wings. We shall also examine the content of specialist and career training to identify the potential for market testing and contractorisation; areas of commonality; and the scope for savings between arms and services, as well as between the Army and other services. Until detailed plans are brought forward, it will not be possible to say what will be the precise implications for either civilian staff or training establishments. We shall invite the trades unions to contribute to specific areas of study and shall, of course, undertake formal consultation in the normal way when appropriate.

Preamble
The House met at half-past two of the clock (Prayers having been read earlier at the Judicial Sitting by the Lord Bishop of Guildford.): The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.

Invalidity Benefit
Lord Clifford of Chudleigh Lord Clifford of Chudleigh asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they intend to tax invalidity benefits and whether they consider it justified to withdraw their undertaking to increase invalidity benefits in line with the retail prices index.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Strathclyde): My Lords, it remains the Government's intention to bring invalidity benefit into taxation at a suitable opportunity. As for uprating, invalidity benefit is statutorily uprated each year in line with prices and we have no plans to change that.
Lord Clifford of Chudleigh: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. However, is he aware that rumours, reports and leaks are as abstract as the source from which they emanate? That is a thought. Even though it may be described as long-term, Tory thought is commitment to the taxation of invalidity benefits. Does the Minister deny that Mr. Peter Lilley, from the other place, stated that it would be difficult to rule out the principle of taxing disabled people? Is the Minister aware of the Disabilities Act passed in 1990 in the United States and similar regulations introduced in Sweden? Will the Government remove this extraordinary, prejudicial barricade of exclusion from the 6.5 million disabled people in this country and discriminate fairly in their favour when thinking of their livelihood benefits?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I entirely concur with my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Social Security in not ruling out taxation. With regard to the other points concerning people who are disabled, the benefit is for incapacity and is not necessarily a benefit for those who are disabled. People with disabilities can continue to work and lead fulfilling lives.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, the Minister seems confident of the case for taxing invalidity benefit. I presume therefore that he can repudiate the following figures: that in the past 10 years average earnings have increased by 20 per cent. in real terms but in the same period invalidity benefit has increased by only 1 per cent. If he cannot repudiate those figures, does he agree that to tax invalidity benefit now would be like kicking a person when he has already been knocked down?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I certainly do not wish to repudiate those figures. They demonstrate that we have maintained our commitment to uprate invalidity
552
benefit in line with inflation. As I said in my original Answer, we have no plans to change that. We do not want to make life increasingly difficult for people who claim invalidity benefit. We want people to continue claiming but believe that, as with people who claim sick pay, unemployment benefit, retirement pension or maternity benefit, it should be taxed.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, does the Minister accept that the benefit was introduced in order to offset the accepted additional expenses incurred by disabled people? Has the Minister some reason to believe that disabled people do not now have those additional expenses imposed upon them? Would it not be grossly unfair to an underprivileged section of our society to pick on them in that way?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I wish to differentiate between people with disabilities who can continue to work and do so most ably throughout all sections of our society, and those who claim invalidity benefit. That is quite different and is often a top-up to other income. In the long term there is no reason that tax should not be introduced on that benefit.
Lord Richard: My Lords, will the Minister confirm that it is not a question of not ruling out the taxation of invalidity benefit; it is a question of actively wishing to bring in the policy? Will he also agree that in his letter Mr. Lilley said,
"The taxation of invalidity benefit has been a longstanding policy objective"?
Does the Minister agree that if that is the Government's long-term aim, it is inconsistent with the previous statements made by government Ministers that they want to reduce the overall burden of taxation, especially on lower income groups?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, none of that is incompatible. Of course we want to reduce taxation. That still remains our long-term aim. We have already reduced taxation for those on lowest pay and indeed reduced the lowest band of taxation to 20 per cent.
Lord Richard: My Lords, if that is the Government's aim, can the Minister say when they are going to try and do it?
Lord Strathclyde: No, my Lords. It has been an outstanding commitment since 1980. It has yet to be introduced and I can give neither the noble Lord nor the House guidance as to when that might be.
Lord Clifford of Chudleigh: My Lords, I am interested in the last reply. Is the Minister aware that there is still a rumour, which again is a thought which must have passed through the Government's mind, that the possibility of introducing such fiscal legislation will come into effect in 1994? Whether one is fully fit or mentally or physically enfeebled from birth or as a result of an accident, or suffering from any other kind of disease, the Minister must be aware that we must all budget.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I cannot confirm the date of 1994.

Organo-phosphate Sheep Dip: Safety
2.37 p.m.
The Countess of Mar The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they are satisfied that the instructions for the use of organo-phosphate sheep dips and for the wearing of protective clothing during and after dipping have been adequate since their introduction in 1962.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Earl Howe): My Lords, the instructions on product labels for the use of organo-phosphate sheep dips are controlled through the licences issued under the Medicines Act. The independent Veterinary Products Committee has since 1972 periodically reviewed the question of sheep dip labels. Whenever necessary, it has recommended revisions in the light of scientific knowledge. At its November meeting the Veterinary Products Committee recommended that a check be carried out to ensure that a consistent approach was being taken by manufacturers on labelling. That recommendation is now being followed up by the licensing authority.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Earl for that helpful Answer. But can he explain why sheep dip, which comes with two containers, one with disinfectant and one with sheep dip itself, has on the disinfectant label a skull and crossbones and a warning that it is poisonous and corrosive, whereas on the sheep dip label, although the manufacturers acknowledge that it is harmful and poisonous to humans, there is no skull and crossbones? Also, the instructions are written in uniform print, with no clear outstanding warning to users.
Earl Howe: My Lords, disinfectants are subject to different labelling arrangements from veterinary medicines. However, hazard warnings are shown on some licensed sheep dip products. The check on labelling requested by the independent Veterinary Products Committee in November covers the inclusion of hazard warnings on all sheep dip products.
Baroness Strange: My Lords, can the Minister say what kind of sheep dips were employed before 1962 and what kind were employed on the sheep in Bethlehem over 2,000 years ago?
Earl Howe: My Lords, I am not aware of the precise chemical formulation in either of the periods mentioned by my noble friend.
Noble Lords: Disgraceful. Incompetent.
Earl Howe: My Lords, I understand that sheep dips containing organo-chloride compounds were quite common some years ago. Those have been phased out and organo-phosphates are now predominant in the formulation.
Lord Winstanley: My Lords, irrespective of the wearing of protective clothing, is the Minister aware
554
that there have already been sufficient cases of dermatitis and related conditions arising from contact with sheep dip to justify those conditions being registered as an industrial disease?
Earl Howe: My Lords, the noble Lord is quite right in what he says. Sheep dip flu is a recognised condition arising from contact with organo-phosphate compounds. Advice on the protective clothing to be worn is given on the product label and the associated data sheet. General information is also available in a free leaflet from the Health and Safety Executive on protecting one's health. The key point is that the leaflet distinguishes the concentrated formula from the diluted liquid. It is very important to follow the instructions distinguishing the two.
Lord Carter: My Lords, is the Minister aware that in January of this year the Veterinary Products Committee stated that there was no clear evidence that sheep dips caused an unacceptable level of health risk when used properly? Can he explain why now, less than 12 months after that statement, sheep dips which contain phenols are to be withdrawn? Does that withdrawal apply to all dips which contain phenols or are there some still to be left on the market?
Earl Howe: My Lords, as part of the review of licensed products, companies have been asked to provide additional data on product formulations, including solvents and other chemicals present, as well as on the active ingredients. In the case of phenols, the companies concerned concluded that the cost of generating the required data is uneconomic. They therefore decided either to withdraw the products or to remove phenols from the formulation. I understand that that is a decision across the full spectrum of products.
Lord Carter: My Lords, is the Minister saying that the withdrawal is not because of a health risk but due only to the inconvenience of collecting the data?
Earl Howe: Yes, my Lords, the decision to withdraw phenols is an entirely commercial one taken by the companies involved. Details of the implementation of those commercial strategies are of course a matter for the companies concerned.
Lord Zuckerman: My Lords, before regulations were brought in in 1962 for the wearing of protective clothing when organo-phosphorous compounds were used in dips and for other purposes, is the Minister aware that there had been several fatalities? I was in fact chairman of a committee of inquiry set up to look into the matter before any regulations were introduced. Can he tell us whether there have been any other fatalities since regulations were introduced dealing with the use of organo-phosphorous compounds?
Earl Howe: My Lords, I am not aware of any fatalities. But the Government take these issues extremely seriously. It is important that anyone who suspects an adverse reaction to sheep dip should report it immediately to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate. We can only make decisions that are

555
based on hard scientific evidence. The Government are trying to establish the scientific facts. If ultimately we find that the products are unsafe licences will be withdrawn.
Earl Baldwin of Bewdley: My Lords, does the Minister agree that it would be a good thing if the attention of GPs was drawn once again to the dangers of organo-phosphate in sheep dip? Does he further agree that in their initial training doctors should receive proper instruction in environmental medicine?
Earl Howe: My Lords, I said in an answer that I gave to the noble Countess the other day that steps have been taken to advise GPs of the issues involved and of the symptoms which occur with organophosphate poisoning. I take note of the noble Earl's comments.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, does the noble Earl agree that there is a connection between the action of phenols on rubber and the porousness which they create? The particular data sheet which I have states that manufacturers recommend that rubber clothing is worn throughout. Can the Minister make sure that manufacturers recommend something other than rubber as protective clothing?
Earl Howe: My Lords, the type of clothing to be worn when handling these products is a matter for the manufacturers. Phenols are effective solvents and on their own they are capable of attacking rubber. However, when diluted with water they behave very differently and that action does not occur. There is no evidence that protective clothing is damaged by phenols in sheep dips when used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
Lord Barnett: My Lords, can the Minister tell us whether the protective clothing in question is subject to the new subsidiarity ruling or whether we can decide for ourselves?
Earl Howe: My Lords, it is subject to the subsidiarity rule to this extent: it is up to every farmer to judge the conditions that pertain when dipping his or her sheep and to take measures accordingly.
Noble Lords: Good answer.

Homelessness
2.45 p.m.
Lord Stallard: My Lords, in the absence of my noble friend Lord Dean of Beswick and with his full permission, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in his name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what are the latest figures for the number of people registered as homeless, and what is the estimate of those sleeping rough who are not registered.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the latest figures show that in the third quarter of 1992, 35,520 households were accepted for permanent rehousing by local authorities in England. This is a fall of 2 per cent. On
556
the figures for the same quarter last year. The 1991 census found that on the night of 21st/22nd April 1991, 2,703 people were sleeping rough in England and Wales, of whom 1,275 were in London. The latest count of rough sleepers in November this year found 419 people sleeping rough in central London.
Lord Stallard: My Lords, we must all be concerned —not just at Christmas time, but throughout the year —about the ever-increasing problem of homelessness. Will the Minister accept that I am particularly concerned about the initiative announced by the Government in the Autumn Statement, which has carried on since, because of the limited period of time? I believe that it is limited to a period of three years and to London. Is the Minister aware that the problem outside London is increasing faster than in London? Does he not agree that it is time that we looked at the position nationally and that we adopted a strategy for housing generally to combat the situation which has now arisen where thousands of people are literally trapped in hostel accommodation because of the unavailability of "move-on" permanent accommodation? Is the Minister further aware that because they are trapped in hostel accommodation, that prevents homeless people being taken off the streets? Would the Minister care to comment on some of those immediate problems?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the noble Lord is right in saying that it is a substantial problem. It is by no means unique to this country. All over the western world and in America we see similar problems in major conurbations of people becoming homeless. It is caused largely by the breakdown of family relationships, marriages and so on. In this country it is largely a problem in London. As the noble Lord recognised, we have introduced a new scheme specifically for London and the South East. But that is not to lose sight of the fact that there are problems in other parts of the country.
Lord Gisborough: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that Westminster Council provides a large number of free beds every night? Can he say to what extent that availability is publicised among those sleeping rough? Has he any idea why those beds are not taken up?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, a substantial amount of work is done in central London, particularly in Westminster, through the Government's rough sleeping initiative, which has been hugely successful. It has reduced by a substantial number those who sleep rough in London. Why people do not take up available places is not for me to say.
Lord Mellish: My Lords, is the Minister aware that in London—because it is primarily a London problem —there are hundreds of empty flats owned by local authorities and private enterprise? Can the Minister say why they are not made available?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, my honourable friend the Minister for Housing, Sir George Young, is well aware of the problem so neatly enunciated by the noble Lord, Lord Mellish. He has a programme of

557
working with the private sector, with other government departments and with local authorities to see what can be done to bring empty homes into use and to allow people to move into them.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, is it not a fact that the relationship postulated in the Question between homelessness and people sleeping rough is, to a certain extent, misleading? The first is a housing problem—and very important. The other, which is also important, is a social problem. They are not necessarily identical.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, my noble and learned friend is absolutely right in his analysis of the problem. Sometimes there are difficulties of linguistics and in deciding who is a "homeless" person and who is a "rough sleeper".
Lord Ross of Newport: My Lords, may I please say to the Government that I recognise that they have—
Noble Lords: Question!
Lord Ross of Newport: My Lords, in recognising that the Government have done something in London towards increasing hostel accommodation—quite substantial sums have been provided—is it not time that the Government did something for places such as Bristol and Leeds, and for the North West and the North East, where, as has been illustrated on television and elsewhere, increasing numbers of people are now sleeping rough? When will the Government allocate adequate funds to deal with the situation in the provinces, and not just in London?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I hope that I answered that point in my Answer to the noble Lord, Lord Stallard. We regard London as being the primary problem, but that does not mean that we ignore the needs of other parts of the country, particularly the cities which the noble Lord mentioned.
Lady Kinloss: My Lords, in the light of the report No Way Back by Centrepoint-Soho, the charity for young homeless, which shows that there has been an increase of 35 per cent. in the number of young homeless people-16 and 17 year-olds—that the centre has seen since 1987, may I ask the Minister what the Government intend to do about these young people?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the noble Lady will be aware that the Government give substantial financial support to the Centrepoint organisation. However, we do not entirely agree with its figures. Of the 419 people sleeping rough in London in November—the figure I gave in my original Answer—only 20 were aged 18 or under.
Lord Murray of Epping Forest: My Lords, while the steps that have been taken by the Government to resolve these difficulties are very limited, they are nevertheless very welcome. However, does the Minister agree that much much more needs to be done to obviate what has become nothing less than a
558
national scandal? Will he accept an invitation from the Open Christmas scheme in Caledonian Road to visit that scheme over Christmas and discuss the matter with those who are guests of the scheme? I do not suggest this in any attempt to attack the Government, but in the hope that by discussing things together we might find a solution to an appalling problem.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I understand the noble Lord's sincerity, but I hope that he realises that we are not complacent. Nor do we underestimate the problem. An enormous amount has been achieved during the past three years. New initiatives and new programmes have been put into place. We are working with other departments to look at some of the problems that create homelessness in the first place so that perhaps in the long term we can eradicate what is clearly a difficult problem.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, is the Minister aware that last year 1 million people—that is, a population the size of that of Birmingham—presented themselves to local authorities as homeless? Do the Government accept that only homes can house the homeless? Do the Government therefore accept the advice of the National Audit Office that it costs twice as much to keep a family in bed-and-breakfast accommodation per year as to build them a new home? In the light of that will the Minister urge his colleagues in the other place to permit local authorities to spend all their capital receipts—not just the capital receipts incurred from November this year to December next, as announced in the Autumn Statement—to build the homes that this country needs?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, as I have already said, we are doing a great deal to help those who find themselves homeless. We have been very successful in reducing the number of people who are housed in bed-and-breakfast accommodation. That figure fell by 23 per cent. in the 12 months to 30th September. As for capital receipts, over the course of the next 13 months we believe that £1.75 billion will fall into the hands of local authorities—it is money they can spend on their capital operations—100 per cent. of which they can keep.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, is the noble Lord aware of a recent report which indicates that homelessness in rural areas is accelerating at more than twice the speed of homelessness in urban areas? What is being done about that?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I hope that I have indicated during the course of my answers that we are not complacent that this is just a London problem. We accept that there is a problem in other urban areas and in rural areas. Therefore, our policies are aimed at defeating homelessness wherever it may be found.

The Citizen's Charter and Disabled People
2.55 p.m.
Lord Ashley of Stoke Lord Ashley of Stoke asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they propose to amend the Citizen's Charter to include provisions dealing with discrimination against disabled people.
Earl Howe: My Lords, public services should be available equally to everyone who uses them. The Citizen's Charter calls on public sector organisations to take account of the needs of all their customers —including those with disabilities—when setting service standards. Singling out particular groups would undermine this important principle.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that that is not the case? The Citizen's Charter is largely irrelevant to severely disabled people because they are excluded from many of its provisions. They cannot benefit from the improved interiors of agency offices if there is no access for their wheelchairs. Nor, if they are blind, can they benefit from improved concise communications if those communications are not in braille. Will the noble Earl consider asking the Government to scrutinise the Citizen's Charter line by line in company with the disability organisations to identify those areas where disabled people are excluded and to see what can be done to help them?
Earl Howe: My Lords, the Citizen's Charter already commits the providers of services to consult their users and potential users, and to take their views into account in setting service standards and in determining how best to meet their customers' needs. Individual organisations are responsible for ensuring that the needs of all their customers, including people with disabilities, are properly met.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the statement in the Question that there is discrimination against disabled people is not borne out by the facts? Will he make it clear that the Government have every intention of taking care of the needs of disabled people to the fullest extent possible?
Earl Howe: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. Our view is that the best way to tackle such discrimination as does exist is to take practical measures to encourage the integration of disabled people into everyday life. Our record is a good one. It is practical measures that are likely to be effective in improving people's awareness of the issues and in promoting positive attitudes towards people with disabilities.
Lord Allen of Abbeydale: My Lords, is the Minister aware that not very far from this building there is a large block of flats where it is a condition of the tenancy that no one who is mentally disabled should be permitted to reside there? The Government have set their face against establishing a disablement commission on the lines of the commissions for sex
560
and race discrimination to which complaints of discrimination can be made. According to what we have heard so far, the Citizen's Charter does not really seem to meet a situation of this kind. What remedy is there for the individual who is discriminated against —it is only one example among many—in the manner I have described?
Earl Howe: My Lords, it is the aim of all public sector organisations to cater for the needs of disabled people so far as is reasonable and practicable. The important thing to understand about the Citizen's Charter is that it is not a charter for specific groups; nor is it an anti-discrimination charter. The intention behind it is that high quality public services should be available to everyone.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, is the Minister aware that part of the concern is that there are certain groups, such as disabled people, who are positively discriminated against and who are not covered by the Citizen's Charter? Does the Minister recall the Bill that was sponsored by my noble friend Lady Lockwood which passed through all its stages in this House? What action has been taken following the passing of that Bill by your Lordships' House?
Earl Howe: My Lords, I cannot agree with the noble Lord's first statement. As I made clear, disabled people are included in the Citizen's Charter as much as any other private citizen. I believe that generalised anti-discrimination legislation would give rise to particular difficulties in its implementation, but we have introduced a number of measures in the fields of education, transport, access and benefits which, taken together, have enabled many more disabled people to get out and about, to become employed and to enjoy leisure activities.
Lord Renton: My Lords, while I fully appreciate all that my noble friend has said, is he aware that the greatest help that the Government could give to disabled people with regard to non-discrimination would be to commend to Members of another place a Bill dealing with the matter which recently passed through your Lordships' House?
Earl Howe: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend because I did not pick up that point from the noble Lord, Lord Ennals. The Bill which has passed through your Lordships' House deserves the most careful scrutiny, and of course the Government take full note of its provisions.
Lord Molloy: My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that many local authority buildings and national buildings run by the Government are designed to assist the disabled but that some are designed with little imagination? Some progressive local authorities and government departments do a great deal. Others should be made to follow their example on behalf of the disabled.
Earl Howe: My Lords, it may interest the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, to know—I am sure that he does —that building regulations of 1985, which were amended last year, require that all new public

561
buildings should be wheelchair accessible and that provision should be introduced for those who are sensory impaired. That has been welcomed by people who are interested in disability issues.

Business
3.1 p.m.
Lord Hesketh: My Lords, it may be useful if I say a word about this afternoon's debates standing in the names of my noble friend Lord Onslow and the noble Lord, Lord Molloy. As the mover is allowed 15 minutes and the Minister should rise to reply not less than 20 minutes before the scheduled end of the debate, in the case of the debate in the name of my noble friend Lord Onslow it means that all other speeches should be limited to a maximum of 10 minutes. If any noble Lord should speak at greater length he would do so at the expense of subsequent speakers. In the case of the debate in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, the number of speakers is such that it is not necessary to propose a formal time limit, but I am sure that noble Lords will agree that it would conform with the spirit of these short debates if they would keep their speeches within the 15 minutes which apply to the mover of the Motion.

Business of the House
The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Wakeham): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That Standing Order 44 (No two stages of a Bill to be taken on one day) be dispensed with for the purpose of taking the remaining stages of the Consolidated Fund Bill tomorrow.—(Lord Wakeham.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Overseas Aid
3.2 p.m.
The Earl of Onslow The Earl of Onslow rose to call attention to overseas development aid; and to move for Papers.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, I can promise that I shall not keep your Lordships for up to 15 minutes, which will allow others to bang on a little longer than they had intended. I can also promise that I did not arrange for my noble friend Lord Archer to make his maiden speech in my debate solely so as to gain publicity for myself. But I am absolutely delighted that he is making his maiden speech on this important subject. Unlike him, I did not circulate my speech beforehand. I rather wish I had done. But I certainly look forward to listening to what he has to say.
I raise the matter again for debate today with some hesitation as we had an Unstarred Question on the subject on 11th November. The reason I come back to it is that the Unstarred Question of the noble Lord, Lord Judd, was not the Question that needed answering. He asked her Majesty's Government,
562
"what level of resources they consider necessary to meet the growing global demands on Britain's overseas aid programme".
Of course the immediate satisfaction of any demand will inevitably lead to further demands which by their very nature cannot be satisfied. The question that has to be asked and thought about is how long development aid should continue. Does it work, or is it counter-productive? Does it support and encourage bad government and allow the continuation of policies of impoverishment?
After all, development aid was invented by the developed countries in 1948. They had gone from Stone-Age to atomic bomb without a single penny of development aid. As was recognised on 11th November last, both by the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, and by the noble Lord, Lord Desai, these questions come from my reading of the noble Lord, Lord Bauer. He pointed out in his book, Development Frontier, that aid only saves the interest costs of a project and furthermore is better described as government to government transfers. Described thus, it can be removed and discussed without the overtones of sentimentality, charity and guilt.
When we began to talk about the subject, the noble Lord and I, I reacted as I think most of us would: that aid was good for starving children and was equivalent to Christian charity; that it was our duty to help; and that we had benefited from Marshall Aid—all the standard answers that are given. The questions I am trying to raise now are not raised on the grounds that we cannot afford it or that we should not do it. I raise them because I am beginning to be convinced that overseas development aid is actively harmful and impoverishes the people whom it is meant to help.
Perhaps I may explain some of my thinking on the matter. In 1850 GDP per head in the United Kingdom was £25. By 1875 it had gone up to £75 per head. There was no development aid from the United Nations. It came from the Scots' hard work, Irish navvies and English labouring and finance. These things came from what was from our brains and from our ability to continue. Venice did not get development aid from Justinian or Theodoric. Why has a barren island off the South China coast, with no water or natural resources, become Hong Kong? It is interesting to note that when Karl Marx saw a screw made by Mr. Guest of Birmingham, he said, "Ah, but our German people could never make a piece of engineering as good as that". Apart from the fact that he was wrong on that, as he was on practically everything else, Essen did not get development aid or subventions from the United Nations Development Fund. Could it be that the poorer parts of the world remain poor because of culture, history, government, popular attitudes or just straightforward tyranny?
When I listened to the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker, answering the debate last November she gave no indication that it entered the minds of her department to query or question all these 40 year-old assumptions. We must think why countries develop. It is worth looking at the economic performance of various societies around the world. Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Ethiopia, Sudan and Somalia are all basket cases of the worst kind. They have all had large

563
amounts of Western donatives, both multilaterally and unilaterally. They are all on the African continent, but are racially and culturally different. Egypt has received, and is receiving, large amounts of aid. Some of its economy works beautifully. The private sector, from Galabeer sellers in the souks to travel agents in Luxor hotels, is competent, keen and efficient. The service is so good that it makes Jeeves look like a galumphing heavyweight. They are, above all, charming. But the difference in attitude of state employees whose jobs are safe but who have no inclination to perform is quite marked.
Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea have all had development aid. Did that development aid help, hinder or have no effect on their progress? To bring our focus nearer home, in Italy, the Mezzogiorno has had large sums pumped into it but it is a Mafia-ridden, corrupt, if charming, sink. In the days of its Norman rulers Sicily was a prosperous, well-ordered and peaceful country. Spain and Portugal discovered large parts of the New World. Did Henry the Navigator get development aid from the Hanseatic ports to allow Albuquerque to become Captain General of the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans? Of course not. But the Hanseatic ports are now having to give large amounts of aid to Spain and Portugal under a provision in the Maastricht Treaty. Money and capital are generated by development. Neither Japan nor Hong Kong has raw materials. The region around Shanghai grows without aid. It grows by hard work and sound money. We must take account of this history and these developments and ask new questions.
Of course there are interests in the continuation of aid programmes. They range from the aidocrats of the UN to the civil servants in our own ODA. Swiss hankers, corrupt third world politicians and honourable men who have been pushing a policy all their working lives will find it hard to question their life's purpose and even harder to accept that it may not just have been unnecessary but actively harmful to the people whom they intended to help. It goes without saying that when someone else pays for something that is necessary, that releases money for other projects. As I have shown in the case of government-to-government transfers, the savings are only the interest payments; the addition to the GNP is marginal and tiny, but the addition to the tax revenues is large and the addition to foreign currency reserves considerable. So it can be seen that aid can be used, and undoubtedly has been, to make it easy for governments to carry out incompetent, tyrannical and economically counter-productive policies.
Sudan has been an enormous net receiver of aid. It persecutes its animist and Christian fellow citizens and its non-Arabic-speaking subjects in a way that brother Boer would never have dreamt of treating the South African blacks. It has pursued economic policies of criminal counter-productivity while being subsidised by English taxpayers.
Tanzania has not been so cruel, but it managed to halve clove production and consequential exports from Zanzibar. It reduced its agricultural output and has received vast sums of Western aid which has been
564
of no benefit to its people. Julius Nyerere, despite his air of sanctimonious and holy socialism, managed to spend a large amount of rich countries' poor taxpayers' money while at the same time impoverishing his own country.
Unquestioning attitudes have led to silly anomalies. For instance, during the Falkland Islands conflict the British taxpayer was subsidising the Argentine Government through the UN development programme and so giving aid to the Argentine. That is the same Argentina which during the 19th century developed and expanded at more or less the same rate as that of the US and Canada and whose living standard in the early part of the century was what we would now call first world but who beggared itself by useless governments from the 1920s onwards. They confiscated assets and impoverished their citizens and their profligacy was rewarded by money from outside.
I do not know whether it is recognised that Iraq was in receipt of Western aid until at least 1987. It is unnecessary when someone can run a large army, buy large amounts of guns and have massive amounts of oil revenues for them to be in receipt of English taxpayers' money.
In the previous debate the noble Lord, Lord Desai, said that we should demand and insist on human rights standards by the aid recipients. What happens if no attention is paid to that? Either we then say that we will cut off the aid—and the consequences of that, according to the aid people who want to give aid, is that people become impoverished—or we have to enforce the demand. If we enforce it we are slap, bang back down the road of Peterson Sahib, protector of the poor, of government and imperium, again.
That has already begun in Somalia where US and French troops are beginning to become involved in law enforcement. Some of us might say that that is a jolly good thing and the Somali should be jolly pleased at having a French foreign legionnaire who was probably born somewhere east of the Carpathians and who speaks bad French but does at least stop them being shot at by some rogue Somalis. Mr. Boutros Boutros Ghali is pushing for a UN administration of Somalia. Without law and order and the means to enforce it, even humanitarian or ambulance aid can become harmful.
The thuggery and brutality of the Somali war lords has prospered and thrived upon the bravery, generosity and compassion of the Red Cross, the Save the Children Fund and other humanitarian agencies. Those people have been forced to pay over foreign exchange money to protectionist gangs. What do protectionist gangs do with foreign exchange money? They buy a new Toyota and stick another second-hand anti-tank rifle or a twin-mounted Browning on top of it. The consequences of that are more thuggery, more protection and more horror.
Aid to Bosnia, it could be argued, prolongs the agony by postponing the inevitable collapse, defeat and subsequent ceasefire. For humanitarian aid to work in Yugoslavia, the fighting has to be stopped. Sanctions are obviously not working and could be classed as fatuous. The Serbs do not seem to have broken the habit of a lifetime with their barbaric

565
behaviour. We must face up to our choice, which is either to force a ceasefire and Serb withdrawal or to arrange a population transfer, as was done after the Balkan War of 1913. Aid is wasted at the moment.
Your Lordships have heard me previously wax irritated at subsidising Indian navies and atomic bomb programmes. You have listed in patience to my querying £75,000 of aid to Singapore. I hope that your Lordships agree with me that governments the world over—not just Her Majesty's Government—should have the political courage and intellectual vigour to challenge and rethink a 40 year-old dogma. I am not asking that out of a hard heart but out of a soft heart. I care about the state of the world. I do not like seeing the subsidising of rotten governments by Western taxpayers' money to enable them to continue forcing cruelty upon their own people.
I hope that the rethink will concentrate on the sound money maxim of free trade—free trade, above all, in agriculture. When we come to think about aid the answer should be not a penny more and, above all, no pennies less. I beg to move for Papers.
3.16 p.m.
Lord John-Mackie: My Lords, I have at the top of my notes the words, "to be sure to congratulate the noble Earl on raising the subject", but I did not appreciate the sophisticated attitude that he would take and that he would be almost asking us to stop aid altogether. I must admit that his researches were good, and I congratulate him upon that. I also had down in my notes to say what I have said many times before: that well over a billion people are starving. Although I agree with some of the points the noble Earl made about governments not being helpful, those people are still starving. Small children represent a huge percentage of those people. We must overcome the difficulties he has mentioned to get food and aid to those people. I cannot stress that point too strongly.
I believe that the idea that we have enough surplus food in the world to achieve that is wrong. I have been told that there is enough food, but I do not believe that for a moment. I am very much against the fact that we are taking a couple of million arable acres out of production in this country when the situation is as I have just described it.
The debate is about development aid. I am especially interested in development aid. We should first get food aid to the people and then help them so that they do not require it again. Those are long-term objectives. It is important to help people develop their own countries. The noble Earl mentioned the small island in the Pacific that turned out to be Hong Kong. But Hong Kong does not produce a great deal. It deals in a lot of money but it does not produce much wealth in the accepted sense of the word.
I should like to put in a word for the Intermediate Technology development group, which I have been supporting for many years. It does a tremendous job of work all over the world although it concentrates upon Latin America, Northern and Eastern Africa and some other places. The group has a tremendous job to do. It has 250 staff, and the total money received
566
which it has available to spend is about £6.5 million. One-third of that is a grant from the Government, another third comes from various trusts and the final third is raised purely by charitable means. That is just over £2 million from each source.
I was talking to the chairman of the group, Mr. Frank Almond, who is quite worried about the money obtained from the Government. It is given every three years. Inflation has decreased, but he is worried as to whether there will be an increase to match inflation in the Government's grant for next year, because it is very much needed. The group relies on trusts and charities to do a little better as well.
Going to these countries is a big task. I have a friend who works for the group. He has been to Venezuela, Peru and other places in Latin America. He said—and I totally agree with the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, on this—that the tyranny of those governments is appalling. He blamed the USA who are taking food from the starving people in those countries and sending back arms to the governments to keep the people down. He thought that that was disgraceful.
I do not wish to say much more except to mention some of the group's activities. It is starting to teach or develop veterinary services and stock feeding in breeding areas of the countries where at the moment there are no veterinary services and many animals die for lack of them. That is one activity. The group assists in developing food production. It is time to find and to encourage people to start and develop new industries in those countries. It is amazing how many people, given a little encouragement and know-how, as well as grants, can develop industry.
I appeal to the Government to ensure that the Intermediate Technology development group receives more money next year.
3.22 p.m.
Lord Beaumont of Whitley: My Lords, we are all grateful to the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, for having raised this important matter today. We look forward to the maiden speech of the noble Lord, Lord Archer.
The noble Earl said that he was basing much of what he had to say—as became apparent—on the analysis of the noble Lord, Lord Bauer. Together with a number of your Lordships, I have devoted quite a lot of time to reading what the noble Lord, Lord Bauer, had to say on these matters. I usually find that his analysis is absolutely spot on. What he says is wrong is wrong, but he then goes on to deduce, as the noble Earl went on to deduce, that there should be virtually no aid at all. The proper solution is that there should be aid but that it should be applied in a different way. It is not that we should abandon helping the poor but that we should learn how to do it rather better than we do at the moment.
I shall attempt, in the few minutes at my disposal, to chart some of the new directions in which I think aid should be applied. I see that I occupy the third slot in the list of speakers and some of what I have to say will be Liberal Democratic policy. I hope that what I say which is not yet Liberal Democratic policy may prove to be so in the future.
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, have we to guess which is which?
Lord Beaumont of Whitley: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, will no doubt correct what I have to say in his winding up speech.
The basic problem is summed up in the aphorism that aid is money taken from the taxation of the poor of the rich world and given to the rich of the poor world who then repay it to the rich of the rich world. We must try to see that that does not happen.
The first point I wish to raise is the subject of debt. We must take great pains to see that our aid does not pile up the debt of poor countries to the rich countries. That is clearly wrong and it has bad effects. The British Government have been good in putting forward the so-called Trinidad terms. These should be applied in full and there should be no more building up of debt. That means that although we can use the mechanism of loans to encourage efficiency, nevertheless all aid should be seen eventually as being a gift. The Good Samaritan did not ask the mugged man to repay with interest the money given to the innkeeper.
The second point I wish to make is that aid must be channelled to the poor. It must be channelled in such a way that it does not stick in the hands of the rich. That point was made by the noble Earl, Lord Onslow. It must not, for example, as in a certain well-known case, be used to buy flour for bread for the middle classes when the working classes of a country do not have enough of their staple, rice.
Non-governmental organisations can apply this kind of aid better than governments. I agree entirely with the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, about the trouble one runs into with aid from governments to governments. It should be furnished and channelled through NGOs and aimed at the poor. It is said that less than 10 per cent. of official aid can at the moment be said to be poverty-focused. But the need is great to help the poor. There has been a 25 per cent. decrease in the average standard of living in parts of Africa over the past few years. That is a 25 per cent. decrease from a standard which was not at all high to start with.
Above all, it is important that aid should encourage the trend to ecological economics—economics which are sustainable and which encourage sustainability. These are coming anyway, but if we start the transition early we shall spare both ourselves and the countries which we are trying to help much hardship on the way.
The aid will start by encouraging the growing of food for the native population and not cash crops for hard currency —growing food to feed the people of East Africa, for example, rather than growing carnations to fly out to the Riviera to earn hard currency for things which are probably needed for the middle classes. Aid should be aimed to encourage a drift back to the countryside from the cities and to tie together, both in developed and undeveloped countries, the population of the country and its basic food producing base. It should tie rural populations together. That is something which we in this country need to learn. Since the beginning of the agricultural revolution in this country, we have not had a countryside which is tied to its productive sources,
568
unlike the countries of Europe which we often rather sneer at for their less efficient agricultural production, but which, because it is peasant, is rather more tied together.
Above all, there should be an emphasis on primary environmental care; meeting basic human needs; protecting the local environment (for the first class reason among others that we need to protect future production); defending non-renewable resources; and a determination to renew renewable resources. It is no use using renewable resources if one does not, in effect, renew them. There must also be an emphasis on empowering local communities to get together to work out their own salvation on a small scale. Diversity should be, and is, linked to social stability and environmental sustainability. We need to achieve those aims all over the world and particularly in those countries we help.
Finally, I come to a matter which is very controversial, not least among the members of my own party. We are all agreed that dumping should be discouraged, but in my view the whole of the agricultural side of GATT needs to be re-thought. Not only are the French farmers right but the tradition of my party, which was understandable in the days of classical economics, must be re-thought. Free trade like capitalism is only a good thing if carefully controlled. Unbridled, it will destroy the earth, and it will start by destroying the agricultural industries of the undeveloped countries which we are trying to help.
3.31 p.m.
Lord Thurlow: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, for giving us this opportunity to return to the subject of overseas aid. Your Lordships have discussed this matter on several occasions in the past. I would say with respect that the noble Earl is quite right to raise the fundamental questions which underlie the great structure of the administration of aid. He mentioned the seminal work of the noble Lord, Lord Bauer. Some 40 or 50 years ago I was much impressed by the arguments of the noble Lord, Lord Bauer. I was in India at the time and it seemed to me that the efforts of all those engaged in aid administration could be compared to Sisyphus rolling a stone up a hill—it just fell down—or trying to drain an ocean of poverty by dipping an occasional bucket into it. It seemed impossible to me at that time that the race between resources and population could be won.
Since then a long period of time has elapsed and things have changed very much. As the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, said, in many ways they have changed for the worse. There have been terrible examples of appalling government. However, I believe it is a mistake to confuse the economic aspects of aid with the political problems of bad government. To any of us who were involved in the process of the transfer of power from the old imperial days to independence it was inevitable that a great many mistakes would be made and a great deal of sheer villainous government would take the place of colonial administration. However, that does not mean that that is part of the horizon forever. There are grounds for hope, and I for

569
my part now firmly believe, that there is a distinct possibility, perhaps even a prospect, that the race between resources and population may be won.
Other noble Lords will speak on the enormous overshadowing problem of population which provides the parameters for the efforts that are being made. However, research, science and technology have in fact now identified the means by which the agricultural and forestry races can be won. They have ascertained that output can be increased far beyond even the appalling rate of increase of population that is predicted.
We are dealing, of course, with method and that brings us to the fact of the enormous gap in knowledge and skills between the developed world and the less developed world. It is surely clear that it is incumbent on the developed world to continue to do all it can to reduce the gap by the transfer of skills. That is the most important single sector of overseas aid. It is a sector that our own government have rightly always placed at the top of their priorities. It is not an easy process of transfer. Finding the right people and giving them the right opportunities is an arduous task which requires a greater input of effort than any of the other more spectacular areas of overseas aid. However, it is enormously worthwhile and it has the greatest long-term results.
As other noble Lords have said, the main question concerns the management of aid. Nothing is perfect but experience is continuously being obtained. The Overseas Development Administration in this country is to my mind the best practitioner of the kind of methods that have proved themselves. Those methods are not set for all time. They are continuously being reviewed and refined. We are fortunate in having the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker, in charge of that department as she has unrivalled experience and wisdom in this field.
I welcome the increased resources that are being given to non-governmental organisations as instruments of our own aid. The amount of money that has been given so far does not amount to a tremendous sum. I believe about £30 million is being given to the NGOs as ammunition. Their absorptive capacity is limited, but I hope and believe that the NGOs will increasingly be able to undertake more tasks as vehicles in the aid process.
The Commonwealth Development Corporation has carried out wonderful work at no cost at all to the taxpayer. The Government lend a certain amount of money for entirely economic projects. It all comes back to the Government and in the past it has done. It is recycled and the corporation gears up anything that is given as loans and multiplies the impact of it enormously. That is an important instrument of aid.
The British Council is, of course, the main instrument, the main agency, entrusted with the administration of our technical assistance. It does wonderful work. I congratulate the Government on succeeding, despite the very difficult budgetary circumstances, in maintaining the resources of the British Council and the Overseas Development Administration this year. Like other noble Lords, I
570
hope that we shall get nearer to the target, which the Edinburgh declaration recapitulated, of 0.7 per cent. of GNP for our aid effort. We are a long way from that, and we have nothing to be proud of in this country in respect of the proportion of our resources which we devote to aid. I hope that it will be possible, despite budgetary stringencies, progressively to increase the figure.
One question which concerns me, in our efforts to help with the transfer of skills to eastern Europe and the CIS, is the impact that may have on the aid to developing countries. It is wrong that that new aid should be at the expense of the areas of the world which need aid most. I hope that some means may be found to separate those two quite distinct sectors, which involve totally different objectives.
In short, I hope that the efforts of this country in the field of overseas aid will be maintained and increased.
3.41 p.m.
Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare: My Lords, I begin by paying tribute to my noble friend Lord Onslow for initiating this short debate which enables me to address your Lordships on a subject which has been close to my heart since my university days. I wish also to express my thanks to your Lordships for the warmth of your welcome to me in this House and your kindness to my wife and family.
I should like to explain why I have attached the name of Weston-Super-Mare to my title. I spent the first 18 years of my life in that seaside resort. My mother, who was a local councillor, still lives there. Weston-Super-Mare has much to commend it. In particular, I bring to your Lordships' attention an extract from the Lancet of March 1886, which some of your Lordships may have missed:
"The climate in Weston-Super-Mare is equable, with a mean winter temperature above that of London. In fact it is only two degrees below that of Torquay, while it is decidedly more bracing and less humid than the latter place and therefore suits a different class of invalid".
The subject of this debate allows me the opportunity to pay tribute to my noble friend Lady Chalker. The work she does for overseas development is universally respected and her name has become synonymous with the achievements of the department over the past few years.
I believe that our responsibility as a nation to those in genuine need cannot be questioned. For, as every school child knows, at the beginning of this century we ruled almost half the land mass of the world. The cliché that the sun never set on the British Empire was accepted by politicians from Vancouver to Christchurch. I became aware of how that responsibility has changed during the last century when, some time ago, I met a Nigerian chief who told me with considerable pride that his grandfather had eaten an Englishman. He had himself been butler to our High Commissioner in Lagos and his grandson had gained a first-class honours degree from Imperial College.
We are aware that the United Nations has requested the leading industrial nations to invest— and I choose the word advisedly—0.7 per cent. of their gross national product in what is sometimes still

571
ineptly referred to as the third world. Although we have not achieved that target we now have the fifth largest aid programme in the world and we shall be spending nearly £2 billion in 1993.
My noble friend Lord Onslow seems to doubt that the money is well spent, but I suggest to the noble Baroness, who is to reply on behalf of the Government, that even during a period of recession there can be no excuse for neglecting our responsibility to the developing world. For as we approach the end of a century we can be certain of one fact. There will continue to be cyclones, earthquakes, droughts and epidemics where aid in various forms will be desperately needed. There will be civil strife, rebellions and wars where our influence and authority will still be called upon, although I accept that however much money is spent and however much political influence we bring to bear we shall never be able to supplant the dedicated nurse who tends the wounded on the borders of Somalia, the surgeon who performs miracles in the shanty towns of Uganda, the Oxfam worker who drives through impossible terrain to ensure that food reaches a tiny village facing famine in Bosnia, and the Red Cross officer who injects new-born children in Ethiopia to protect them from the ravages of polio and tuberculosis.
That was brought home to me vividly by my elder son, who spent last summer working in Calcutta with the Missionaries of Charity under the direction of Mother Teresa, and this summer in the mountains of northern Iraq with Kurds who were still cut off from their villages which had been devastated by Saddam Hussein.
The young so often have the ability to confront us with something that is staring us in the face. My son returned from northern Iraq to tell me that all the Kurds really wanted was the chance to vote for those who ruled them and how they envied the British that simple privilege of democracy. It should not be a privilege. The Mother of Parliaments may be a casual phrase in the corridors of your Lordships' House, but it is appalling that democracy remains unattainable to the shopkeepers of Shanghai, the coffee growers of Kenya and the gauchos of Argentina.
At last, from Kazakhstan and Armenia to Moldavia, the once-enslaved peoples of the old Soviet Union are tasting the first fruits of democracy. Across South America, the small farmers of El Salvador are trying to build that democracy from the ravages of war, the Nicaraguans are groping forwards after a decade of Marxism, and the largest countries on that continent—Brazil and Argentina—are shaking off the legacies of dictatorship. Even in Africa the Nigerians are grappling with a new constitution, the Kenyans are poised for a multi-party election, while South Africans of all colours are edging hopefully towards a democratic state. In Asia the budding entrepreneurs of Shanghai and Canton are yearning to shed the communist yoke. Even the last grim trio of old-style pro-Soviet communist dictatorships—Cuba, Vietnam and North Korea—are beginning to buckle under the advance of freedom.
We are told that we live in a dull age. I shall have none of it. To have witnessed the collapse of
572
communism in the Soviet Union, the dismantling of the Berlin wall in eastern Germany and the emergence of electoral reform in Hungary and Poland convinces me that the next generation will see democracy flourish in many countries that we must have considered beyond hope. Certainly, that is the belief of my elder son. On his bedroom wall is a photograph of a young Chinese student standing courageously in front of three tanks where, in my university days, there would have been a picture of Martin Luther King leading a civil rights march into Alabama.
Lest your Lordships should imagine that the Archers are a family dedicated only to service, I feel that I should point out that while my elder son spent the last two summers in Calcutta and Kurdistan my younger son spent the same holidays in Monte Carlo —with a blonde from California with very long legs.
I conclude on what I hope will not be considered a controversial note. I have been told that your Lordships' House prefers the more courteous and sedate approach when stating one's case. I shall attempt, however unnatural this may be for me, not to disappoint your Lordships. However, should I come across any cause that I believe warrants your Lordships' support, any injustice that demands your Lordships' redress, or any unfairness that requires your Lordships' wisdom, I will not hesitate to bring it to the attention of the whole House. I will at all times try to live up to the reputation of your Lordships' House as expressed so eloquently by the Scottish bard, Robbie Burns:
"Princes and Lords are but the breath of kings,
An honest man the noblest work of God".
3.51 p.m.
The Earl of Longford: My Lords, it is a genuine pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Archer. When I was in publishing, I once asked a famous literary agent which author he would prefer on his books more than any other. He said he would prefer the noble Lord, Lord Archer. I said, "What has he got that most of our other authors haven't?" He said, "He makes you turn over the page." That is obviously a great asset in a writer. I look round the House, which has many writers. I believe that here the noble Lord will have the capacity to make people listen to him. It is a convention that no one should leave the Chamber during a maiden speech. I am sure no one would have wished to leave during the maiden speech of the noble Lord.
The noble Lord paid this House the great compliment, as reported in The Times, of making nine drafts of his speech. I do not know whether, had he made only eight drafts, the speech would have been shorter or longer. But it could not have been any better. Having been a student of his books, I realise that his aim is to be the first among equals. He will understand the allusion. But he will no doubt be well aware of the instruction in the Gospels: if you want to be first, you have to be like him who serves. I am sure he will serve this House most effectively in the years to come.
The noble Earl, Lord Onslow, is the kind of Peer of whom we need more in this House. In a sense, if he

573
had not existed, it would have been necessary to invent him. It is what people imagine the House of Lords to be made up of. His views are undoubtedly those which the popular press associates with your Lordships' House. He takes the view, as I understand it, that if you hand out money to a poor man you almost certainly do him harm. It is a convenient doctrine. We all know how difficult it is, when you see someone in the street and he wants your money, to say frankly, "In your own interest, my dear fellow, I'm afraid I must keep my wallet in my pocket." The noble Lord has a philosophy about all this which is quite profound and needs stating. Most of us are so shocked compared with the noble Lord. I am afraid I do not agree with him.
The Earl of Onslow: I did not say that at all. I asked: is it a good idea to give money to the rich man who is oppressing the poor man, because none of it is going to get to the poor man? That is where the noble Earl, Lord Longford, has totally misunderstood what I was saying.
The Earl of Longford: The noble Earl can interpret his own speech in his own way. I have heard him twice and I am afraid I regard him as standing for a point of view that went out in the 19th century. We need more of that kind of thing here if only to make us think a little harder about why we believe what we believe.
If we take the noble Earl's point of view about aid, I do not know, but probably he is very pleased with the record of the Government. He is not the only one who is perhaps pleased. I am sorry that the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker, is not here—although in a sense I am not sorry that we are to be addressed by her much admired substitute, the noble Baroness, Lady Trumpington—because I wanted to quote something that she said on a previous occasion. She would not say anything that she did not believe, and she said, at col. 309 on 11th November, "Our record is sound." That is the record on overseas aid. I do not know whether it goes back to 1979, or to 1991.
Does any Christian in this audience really believe that the record of the Government has been a Christian record since 1979? I shall not bother noble Lords with facts quoted at the time. The proportion of overseas aid has fallen since 1979 from 0.51 per cent. to 0.32 per cent. Is anyone proud of that? Is that a sound record? I am ready to give way to anyone who rises and says, "That is a good show. That is just the way we want it. Bring it down a bit further, if we can set about it along the principles of the noble Earl, Lord Onslow." I say it is a disgrace.
The record since 1979 is a disgrace. That is my point of view, and one which I think is widely shared now. In the last debate all sorts of grave forebodings were uttered about the cuts to come. On the whole, I suppose, a sigh of relief has gone up, as it might from a man who has been condemned to be hanged and is then told that his sentence has been commuted to life. It is that sort of relief. It is difficult to know, but the noble Baroness, Lady Trumpington, will tell us whether it is true that in the next two or three years
574
real development aid will be cut. It would appear to be so, but everybody can play about with the figures. That would appear to be the case. It is not so bad as it might have been, but it is very bad. That is the way I would approach the subject.
I have had most of my time already, so I shall say just a few more words.
Noble Lords: You have 10 minutes.
The Earl of Longford: I have had half of that. The longer we go on talking, the less remains. I shall just say one word from the point of view of CAFOD. The Church of England is not speaking here today, I am sorry to say, as it is very strongly represented in all these areas. Perhaps some Roman Catholic dissident, or some Anglican defector for about 50 years can say just a word about CAFOD. I realise that CAFOD works in relief with all the Christian bodies.
I am not clear whether the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, will refuse to admit the full implication of his words but the general implication is that overseas aid does more harm than good. That is his general implication. I say only that no one can prove that in a few minutes. I take just one particular example from CAFOD; there are many other examples. The conservation based rural development project for the Adami Tulu district in Ethiopia commenced in January 1988. The situation there was absolutely hopeless. It suffered five years of failed harvest and everything went wrong; now it is exporting food. Perhaps we may take just that one example. Of course it does not prove that all aid is being well spent. But I think the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, has done his bit. He has outraged us; he has outraged everybody with any conscience. But he has done a good job in making us think for ourselves. Let us thank him and go on with the Christian task of increasing overseas aid.
4 p.m.
Lord Selsdon: My Lords, the debate has not gone quite the way I thought that it would. In a provocative way my noble friend Lord Onslow advised us that the title of the debate was unjustified. Other noble Lords made comments which made me think again about what I should say today.
This morning I had the privilege of being in Westminster Abbey at a service for the children of courage, who came later to the Palace of Westminster. They were received by Miss McWilliam at a grand children's party downstairs. During the service there were a few prayers and we thought of the afflicted children present. The prayers were for people with even greater afflictions in other countries. I tried to recall an old psalm:
"Hungry and thirsty their soul fainted in them and they cried unto the Lord in their trouble and he delivered them from their distress".
That psalm is for distress at sea. It is the origin of the cry for aid in distress—"mayday, mayday, mayday" —adopted as the international call. In almost every newspaper, almost every day, one sees a picture of a thin impoverished child threatened in whichever country. To say that there is no need for aid is almost as bad as saying that there is no need for man.

575
My noble friend Lord Archer has great power with the written word and today he demonstrated that he has even greater power with the spoken word. He and his speech have something in common. We expected him a long time before he arrived and we were advised that his speech would be made long before today. But in 10 brief minutes he encompassed the world and reminded us that there are several kinds of aid. One refers most frequently to humanitarian or genuine aid. Why is such aid necessary? Whether derived from the sea, or not, it is based historically on natural disaster; for instance, flood, famine and pestilence. They have recently been replaced by a new form of disaster which one might call simply "political disaster".
The changes in politics around the world have caused a great deal of disruption to many countries, some of which had historic stable positions. However, today incitement, internal distress and internal war leads one to ask what has happened in the aid world. When we had East facing West and a Cold War we were faced with examples of another type of aid called "military aid". For whatever reason East and West reinforced countries in the second and third worlds with arms. That military aid was suddenly switched to humanitarian aid in a way that I find difficult to absorb or to understand. It seems that today we spend more money on sending troops to ensure that aid gets through than we do on the aid itself. Perhaps, therefore, the distribution of aid has caused the greatest problem.
I believe that in future we need to rethink the situation. Humanitarian aid, or aid for distress, can never he forgotten and must always be needed with regret. However, thereafter we are talking of a new kind of aid—indeed, I would drop the word "aid" and use the phrase "development assistance". In that respect the United Kingdom appears to be taking a lead based on its past and on its recent rethinking. One of our first aims and ambitions is to try to eliminate political disaster by assisting, through our own know-how and the strength of our institutions, those countries which are in distressed and disturbed situations to regain stability and productivity.
That calls not so much for humanitarian aid but for development assistance. First, it calls for assistance in the organisation and structure of institutions that within the framework of democracy, however defined, will permit a nation to develop its own national resources, whether mineral, agricultural or human. Thereafter it can generate foreign exchange and reserves, which is easy once that productivity is put in place.
I refer now to the Know-How Fund which was created in 1989 in order to assist Poland as it moved towards democracy. Some £25 million was first committed to the fund and that was increased to £50 million. It was then extended to cover all eastern and central Europe and more recently Albania. That fund is not lively reported upon but I draw your Lordships' attention to its recent annual report, which comes under the Foreign Office. The fund has done a great deal of good in a relatively short period of time. It has made available large amounts of money and in terms of investment studies and so forth its budget has
576
supported some 250 applications from British companies, mostly in the private sector, to start new ventures in those countries. Investment, together with political stability, will help to reduce the need for aid world wide.
Another instrument, which has been referred to in previous debates, is the Commonwealth Development Corporation. That body was set up originally for the Commonwealth. Indeed, some 70 per cent of UK aid still goes to Commonwealth countries. Without any real drain on the public purse that corporation accounts for an expenditure which is equivalent to 20 per cent. of the total bilateral aid budget. Your Lordships may not realise that it pays interest to the tune of some £25 million per year and corporation tax of some £15 million per year. The Commonwealth Development Corporation and the Know-How Fund could, if they were allowed to operate in broader fields, be instrumental in encouraging increased development and investment world wide. Will my noble friend consider broadening the concept of the Know-How Fund to include countries outside eastern Europe? At the same time, will she consider broadening the brief and the mandate of the Commonwealth Development Corporation in order that it may operate in a wider range of countries?
With those two suggestions comes the possibility of private sector investment. That is a real possibility because we are not talking about the third world; we are talking about the second world and countries with enormous natural resources. They have a real demand for manufactures and the ability, with trained and potentially trainable labour, to make a real contribution to the redevelopment of world trade.
One of the Government's policies—indeed, it is that of any government—is to say that trade will encourage development almost more than anything else; hence the importance of GATT. But trade without the investment which follows it will create a weak base because development through investment is vital.
I return to a situation that we face at home. We have a recession yet there is a demand for our goods and manufactures in many parts of the world. There are instruments of government which can encourage the development of that trade. There is the Export Credits Guarantee Department, which needs reinforcing and strengthening. I understand that approximately £100 million is to be committed to the aid trade provision about which my noble friend may comment. I should like to know where and why. At the same time, our contributions to multilateral agencies have been growing. We are still short of the perceived target of 0.7 per cent. I commend to your Lordships a document which I tried to obtain earlier and which should have been available in this House a week ago. It is a copy of the latest British aid statistics and is worth while thumbing through. It demonstrates the breadth of our aid programme world wide.
I tried to find a quotation which was appropriate to more than distress. I found a verse by a Mr. Banks which reads:

577
"For the cause that lacks assistance,
For the wrong that needs resistance,
For the future in the distance
And the good that we can do".
4.9 p.m.
Lord Alport: My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Onslow for initiating the debate. Perhaps your Lordships will forgive me if I recall that the motive of the United Kingdom in providing overseas aid derived originally from our sense of responsibility for our colonial empire. As colonies became independent and as their need for development increased, so our aid effort was extended.
Aid was originally the responsibility of two departments of state: the Commonwealth Relations Office on the one hand and the Colonial Office on the other. At the same time the CDC—the Commonwealth Development Corporation—to which reference has been made in previous speeches, was set up to initiate and invest in projects which would contribute to improving the standard of living and economic viability of newly-independent, undeveloped countries of the Commonwealth. Great care was taken in those days to ensure that aid and investment had no political strings attached, and was seen by the recipient countries for what it was intended to be, only a direct contribution to their development and improved standards of living.
It was to give added emphasis to this that the Department of Overseas Development was set up in the late 1950s, separate from the Foreign Office, the Commonwealth Relations Office, and the Colonial Office. In recent years, however, the fact that overseas development has become part of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has meant that the provision of aid has become increasingly a means for supporting British foreign policy overseas. Aid is given, or perhaps tends to be withheld, partly to the extent to which Her Majesty's Government approve or disapprove of the policies of the recipient governments, as opposed to the extent to which the aid is needed to improve the lives of the people over whom they rule. Partly it is given in order to support British commercial interests in the country concerned.
Aid is no longer directed solely towards the development of the under-developed countries of the Commonwealth, and so we find that the Commonwealth Development Corporation cheerfully invests, for instance, in the prawn industry in Thailand and in the telecommunications system in Ecuador. I totally disagree with my noble friend Lord Selsdon, who wished that process to be extended.
It is worth drawing your Lordships' attention to the extent to which British overseas aid policy has changed, because it has two results. First, it weakens an important element in the relations between the United Kingdom and the third world countries of the Commonwealth. Secondly, by linking aid to political influence it will increasingly be seen by those who receive it as a new form of colonialism.
As we know, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and there is today a very good example of the connection between aid and politics in Somalia.
578
Thousands are dying of starvation. To help them to get the food they need 30,000 American troops have been sent to take control of the country and in the hope of enabling food to get to the starving, to disarm the gunmen, to restore some sort of law and order. It is clear from what the Secretary General of the United Nations has said that it is hoped that thereafter Somalia will have established indigenous representative institutions acceptable to the world—that is, of course, to Western opinion—as seen through the eyes of the United Nations.
Anyone who knows the clan system and character of the Somalis knows that unless Somalia becomes a sort of United States or United Nations mandate, to use an unfashionable term, if the American troops withdraw in a month or even in six months' time the warlords will be back in business and the gunmen back on the streets in a matter of days. I am not in any way decrying the American effort. It is the sort of thing we might have done in the last century. After all, British penetration of East and West Africa was largely the result of a great humanitarian effort to end the slave trade.
If, as some noble Lords have argued, aid should be used to promote human rights in a country—that is, the release of political prisoners, or the institution of political forms along lines acceptable to foreign eyes —then, to insecure and suspicious governments in the third world, and particularly in Africa, a new form of colonialism will seem to be starting. The United Kingdom should be extremely careful how far it allows itself to become involved in using aid as a means of achieving political objectives, whether under the auspices of the United Nations or of the European Community. After all, we have had a long and successful experience of being an imperial and colonial power, but the world today is not the world in which our empire was created. We can still try to provide aid where it is needed. We can still use our very real influence through diplomatic means to ensure human rights and ordered government. We can stop the supply of arms. But if we allow our aid effort to drag us into situations which require military action and the assumption of political responsibilities in overseas countries, our whole aid policy will become discredited. If there is to be a new era of humanitarian colonialism, I believe strongly that Great Britain of all countries should ensure that it does not become involved.
4.16 p.m.
Lord Reay: My Lords, like other noble Lords I feel and regret the absence of my noble friend Lord Bauer from this debate. As my noble friend Lord Onslow acknowledged in his audacious and provocative speech, he derives the core of his ideas from the brilliant and illuminating writings of my noble friend Lord Bauer. I have often wanted to ask my noble friend Lord Bauer why he thought it was that a radical Conservative Prime Minister like Mrs. Thatcher, as she then was, should have sent him here yet never sought to put into practice the only possible policy that could have followed an acceptance of his ideas; namely, the abolition of the aid programme.

579
Perhaps the answer lies in politics. We want to give aid like we want to give to charity. We feel it our duty. It clears our consciences. We do not want to achieve anything by it. So when my noble friend Lord Bauer, or my noble friend Lord Onslow, can demonstrate that we achieve nothing, or that what we achieve is actually harmful, we are perhaps not as concerned as we might be. If that is the case, then the Government should assume, as rightly they have assumed, responsibility for doing all they can to ensure that the money spent on aid is well spent.
Speaking for myself, I was delighted and relieved that the overseas aid budget was left intact in the recent public expenditure round. I would congratulate my noble friend the Minister on that. The modest financial saving that might have been made would surely not have been worth the outcry that would have followed. The record of this Government on aid, I would suggest, has been excellent. Although the aid budget had, of necessity, to suffer when across-the-board cuts in government expenditure were made in the early 1980s, subsequently it was allowed to resume its increase, adding 8 per cent. in real terms since 1987–88. Today, our aid programme runs at well over £2 billion a year. We can be proud of the fact that it is the fifth largest programme in the world. It is also widely praised for its quality, for being well targeted, and its expenditure well controlled.
We are lucky that we have, or the developing countries are lucky that we have, outstandingly efficient voluntary organisations. The Government have done well to introduce considerable conditionality into the distribution of aid, and here I cannot follow my noble friend Lord Alport. Pressure is now put on aid recipients with unimpressive records to open up their countries to foreign investment, to liberalise their trade, and to clean up their administrations. Indeed, an increasing part of our aid rightly goes on helping countries in those areas.
The idea of attaching political conditions to aid was once indignantly rejected as imperialist by most developing countries. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union has collapsed also any credible alternative to the capitalist system in the eyes of developing countries. The ways of the West are not repudiated as they once were. Many elements in developing countries approve of the fact that conditions should be attached to aid, seeing it as a means to help them secure better government.
In pursuing this line the Government have been in tune with the development of opinion within the European Community and OECD. Indeed, I believe they have given a lead.
Nevertheless we must remain clear in our minds about which of our policies bring the most benefit to the developing countries. It is the expansion of trade which brings the greatest benefit to developing countries and indeed it is they which, above all, benefit most from the growth of trade. To take an example from United Nations figures, world trade in manufactures multiplied by a factor of seven in the years between 1970 and 1986. At the same time the share of the developing countries in that rapidly expanding trade grew from 3½ per cent. to 13 per cent.
580
It was that phenomenon which produced the NICs in Asia; in our lifetime they have been low-income developing countries. It is the observation of that phenomenon which has helped to make developing countries more favourable to the process of trade liberalisation.
The story of the liberalisation of trade will not end with the Uruguay Round, whenever that is completed. Plenty of trade barriers will still remain on agricultural products and textiles, for example, although progress is being made. The fight for free trade—of such crucial importance for the countries of central and eastern Europe—must be maintained. I know the Government will maintain it, and I hope they will continue to enjoy the support of the parties opposite. In my view, however, little service is done for developing countries by harping on the degree to which donor countries have failed to reach the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent. of GNP. Personally, I regret that we ever subscribed to that target. It simply encourages an attitude of dependency in developing countries and gives currency to the belief that our generosity, and not their efforts, holds the key to their future development. It is also a particularly misleading target, since a country could progress towards it by shrinking its economy, without of course any benefit to the developing countries.
Our appearance in this league table, however meretricious it is, on a level with Switzerland, Japan and way above the United States, nevertheless seems to me eminently respectable and generous. Our aid programme began as a post-colonial phenomenon, as money which we spent largely, to the tune of 70 per cent. or so, on Commonwealth countries because we were loath to say goodbye altogether to empire and its obligations and ties. Today our feelings towards the Commonwealth have changed, they are less intense. But meanwhile, as the world has integrated and the spread of information has been revolutionised, the British public is daily reminded of the extent of suffering in aid-receiving countries. I doubt whether the public would welcome—certainly it does not seem to demand—a major cut in our aid budget.
Meanwhile, a new horizon is rapidly opening up closer to our own doorstep. The needs of the countries of eastern Europe and of the former Soviet Union are pressing themselves ever more urgently on our attention. We cannot ignore them. We must do everything we possibly can to give them access to open markets and help with the building of those institutions, skills and habits which are necessary for the proper operation of a democratic capitalist system.
They, the countries of central and eastern Europe, must come to play a more important role in, and receive a greater share of, our total overseas assistance programme. We must help them help themselves. We cannot do it for them—a lesson which to this day we probably have not fully learnt so far as Commonwealth countries are concerned. But in the future they too, and we in our relationship with them, will have to take aboard that truth.
4.24 p.m.
Viscount Craigavon: My Lords, obviously I am grateful to the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, for introducing this debate. If I may say so, I think he was slightly ambitious in introducing such a controversial thesis—almost a philosophical thesis—into such a short debate. I had the chance, some years ago, of taking part in a debate with the noble Lord, Lord Bauer, on population. That is the subject I am mainly going to speak about today. The noble Lord, Lord Bauer, decided that he had not got the better of the debate on the Floor of the House and he continued a correspondence with the Minister for the following six months, which the Minister then circulated to the speakers. So I had a very good idea of how controversial is the thesis which the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, is now advancing.
As the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont, has pointed out, I think there are definitely two sides to this argument. However, I certainly would not criticise him for raising it in this way although the actual circumstances do not give the chance for a proper debate on this subject. I should like particularly to focus on one area, which is the responsibility of the ODA: that is its Health and Population Division. I believe that area underpins much of the work of the ODA generally, especially for the long term. I should like to advocate to the House in general and to the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, in particular, that money spent in this area is money well spent. I believe progress can be made on this. The noble Lord, Lord Thurlow, used a rather graphic phrase referring to the overshadowing problem of population. I do not personally think of it like that, but there is a considerable problem to be addressed and I believe that the ODA is attempting to do so.
May I first express a welcome to the noble Lord, Lord Rea, on the Opposition Front Bench. He has been a very considerable and well-informed supporter of population in the area in which I have been involved over the last few years. I know that he is not an uncritical supporter, but it is very welcome to see him on Labour's Front Bench.
I should like to refer to a quotation from a United Nations agency, to be found in the excellent and highly readable booklet produced by the ODA last September, entitled Action on Health and Population. Significantly, the quotation does not come from the United Nations Population Fund but from UNICEF and it says:
"The responsible planning of births is one of the most effective and least expensive ways of improving the quality of life on earth".
The commitment of the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker, in this field is widely acknowledged. To me she seemed to be taking the lead in Europe, both in the preparations for the Rio Summit and in the recent excellent resolution under her chairmanship of the EC Development Council on Family Planning in population policies in developing countries. This resolution was a considerable achievement in focusing the thoughts and maybe the actions of our European partners in this particular area.
582
In this resolution it is useful to see that while recording the progress that has been made in making family planning more widely available, it has been noted and accepted by our European partners that:
"It has been estimated that 300 million women and men worldwide would like but do not have access to the means freely to plan the number and spacing of their children".
That is reflected in the frequently used but nevertheless effective slogan of the ODA: "Children by choice, not chance."
The second part of this Development Council resolution is entitled "Framework for Action" and it acknowledges the pressing need for increased activity in this field. It says:
"Resources are relatively scarce in relation to needs".
The various initiatives and priorities mentioned will be followed up both before and during the next Development Council meeting under Danish chairmanship. It is reasonable to hope that this resolution will help in galvanising at least some of our European partners in this field.
In trying to set an example, how do we and the ODA fare? Our level of funding for population activities has recently improved slightly and is now just over 1 per cent. of the ODA budget. It would be difficult at this time to ask for more new money, but I would hope that within the existing ODA budget a significantly greater proportion could be directed to population activities.
I welcome the considerably increased support for the United Nations Population Fund, UNFPA. The increase has been of about 50 per cent. over the past two years. It is very likely that both the UNFPA and the IPPF, which is the International Planned Parenthood Federation, will benefit significantly from the change of American attitude following the change in American leadership. The prospect of the re-entry of the United States wholeheartedly into this field gives some small grounds for optimism. I say that not just because of the prospect of further dollars being devoted to this field but because the United States have considerable influence in certain parts of the world, and their guidance and moral leadership in this area—to the extent people agree with that phrase—is needed at the world population conference to be held in Egypt in 1994.
In this country some significant figures can be seen in the Answer to my Question for Written Answer on 26th November asking about the level of ODA grants to United Kingdom NGOs in the past three years. The ODA has rightly given encouragement to the excellent work of Marie Stopes International with a substantially increased grant. The ODA has also tried to encourage some of the larger development NGOs to consider the incorporation of population elements in their existing and future programmes. That practice is becoming much more common and acceptable. One of the major international development agencies of which I have particular knowledge is CARE. That body is currently making population one of its priority areas. The increasing importance of the role of NGOs, which was touched on by the noble Lords, Lord Beaumont and Lord Thurlow, was stressed by the move of the Prime Minister at the Rio Summit to call a follow-up international meeting of NGOs next year

583
in Manchester. It is recognised that the commitment and involvement of all the independent sectors is critical to the effective implementation of the agreement signed at the Rio Earth Summit.
Despite the considerable efforts and plain speaking of the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker, at Rio the role of population was unfortunately downgraded. I know that the lead ministry in the follow-up conference as at Rio is the Department of the Environment, but I hope that the Minister will convey to her colleagues the very strong feeling of just about everyone involved with population organisations that it is essential that population is put back firmly and formally onto the agenda at the Manchester conference.
As my earlier UNICEF quotation implied, those of us who talk about the urgency of population are not just talking about numbers but about quality of life —for example the spacing of wanted children with a chance of proper nutrition and care. To those who were prepared to listen at Rio that message and its connection with the environment got through. The enormous unmet need for family planning has been agreed. The existing money allocated to this area by the ODA is well spent. We are most fortunate in our Minister. I hope that she will be able to keep up the recent momentum by allocating a higher proportion of the existing ODA budget to population activities. Population aid necessarily has its main benefits in the long term, and in this particular field we cannot afford the short-term option.
4.33 p.m.
Lord Bonham-Carter: My Lords, I should like to join others in thanking the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, for introducing the debate, even though I find myself in disagreement with almost every sentiment he uttered. Equally, I have great pleasure in following the noble Viscount, Lord Craigavon, with whom I find myself in very general agreement.
One thing the debate demonstrates is that debates change nobody's opinion whatsoever. We debated this subject on 11th November and a large number of the people who are speaking today spoke then. They all spoke in exactly the same spirit and used the same arguments that have been used this evening. I propose to follow in those admirable footsteps.
I must admit it is a very odd time to be discussing the theoretical pros and cons of aid, for however seriously one may take the arguments developed by the noble Lord, Lord Bauer, in the 1970s it was in the 1970s that he developed them. As I tried to point out at the last debate—with which I think the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, agreed at that time—emergency aid is different from long-term development aid; it falls into a different category from long-term development aid. Thus, the Bauer doctrine does not apply to it.
What seemed to me to be wrong about the speech of the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, was that he failed to establish the link between aid and the evils which he deplored. Aid may have been given to governments guilty of many sins of commission and omission, but it does not follow that aid caused those sins to be committed. The fact that Britain got rich in the 1850s
584
without overseas aid does not mean that the absence of overseas aid made Britain rich. The fact that people survive without doctors and medicine—as I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Rea, will agree—does not mean that doctors and medicine have not helped some people to survive. The fact that many people under medical care die does not mean that doctors are always responsible for their deaths. It was that logical gap in the noble Earl's speech which made me find his arguments intellectually unconvincing, even if they might also have been emotionally unconvincing—as they were.
To be discussing this matter is very peculiar when the world is awash with areas that require overseas emergency aid quickly and on a massive scale. The three main areas in question are: Somalia, Bosnia and Southern Africa. In the case of Somalia and Bosnia the situation has deteriorated in the past year. In the case of Southern Africa there has been rain, but whether it is enough nobody knows. Even if the rain is enough Southern Africa still suffers from the consequences of the most appalling drought in living memory, the conflicts that have wracked that region of the world, AIDS and the impact of world recession. For all those reasons we must look at aid to Southern Africa with great care because it remains very high on the agenda. We must ask whether government policy measures up to the very serious demands which have been made by those three areas—not to speak of Bosnia and eastern Europe—all of which require substantial investment from this country, much of which goes under the name of aid.
The plans revealed in the Statement in November show a nominal increase in overseas development aid to the south in 1993–94 but a freeze in 1994–95 and 1995–96. I do not think that those concerned deserve the praise which the noble Lord, Lord Reay, gave them. The freeze means that there will be a fall in real terms by the amount of inflation and because of the consequences of devaluation, as explained vividly and compellingly by the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, in the last debate. I conclude that it cannot be right to freeze aid in 1994–95 and 1995–96 but that at the very minimum the level of aid should be maintained in real terms, not only for humanitarian reasons.
Here we come to the very interesting point made by the noble Lord, Lord Alport. It is undoubtedly the case that the aid we are giving now and have given for the past few years is not only for humanitarian purposes but for political purposes. The fact of the matter is that in many countries of Africa there are signs of moves towards more open and democratic government, which I think all of us applaud.
It is true also that to introduce the political reforms which those countries are trying to do, is an extremely difficult operation—perhaps one of the most difficult upon which society can embark. What is certain is that it is almost impossible to make those changes at a time of economic crisis with standards of living falling and enormous economic pressures present. Therefore it seems to me to be right and proper that at such a time we should be aware of the strains and pressures with which the leaders of those African countries are faced. We should give aid to ameliorate them.

585
That does not seem unwise, even though it may be called neo-colonial. We are pursuing precisely the same policy in central and eastern Europe. The reason we are giving large sums of money through the Know-How Fund—substantial amounts, though perhaps not enough—is precisely because we want to support the changes that they are making to their political and economic arrangements. We recognise that that is difficult and believe that those changes are more likely to be made if we help to alleviate some of the economic pressures which confront them.
I support that policy and believe that we should be open about it. We should not pretend that we are doing it for different reasons. It is valuable that that point was brought out in the debate by the noble Lord, Lord Alport. What is true also is that we are increasing the aid we are giving to central and eastern Europe and decreasing our aid to Southern Africa. The Government assert that there is no link between the two. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Thurlow, that it is difficult to argue that increasing aid to central Europe and decreasing aid to Southern Africa are not linked. The aid is political and should not be decreased at this juncture for the reasons given.
There is a clear distinction between long-term political development aid and the emergency aid we are sending to, say, Bosnia or Somalia. The argument for long-term development aid is more difficult. It can only be justified if it is seen as an investment. If it is seen in that light there is no doubt that it is justified. In the last debate we held on this subject I pointed out that the building of roads throughout Europe by the Roman Empire significantly diminished starvation through famine, simply by making the distribution of food more easy. Similarly, the building of railways and roads in India in the 19th century by the British Empire had the same effect. That was aid that demonstrably paid off.
That kind of aid may be called investment. Every government —except, oddly enough, this Government—believe in investing in the infrastructure. Infrastructural aid which cannot be financed from within poor countries is something in which one should invest. A second form of aid which is undeniably valuable is education. Again I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Thurlow, that the most effective aid is the transfer of skills. That is what aid in education and literacy brings, and it also has an effect in helping to control the populations, for reasons we discussed in the last debate.
The case put forward by the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, has not been made out. The connection between aid and the evils which we and he deplore is not one that can be established. For that reason and other reasons put forward in the debate I feel that the aid we give now is justified. The aid we give to the South should at least be maintained at the level it has been in the past (and if possible increased) and the aid to central and eastern Europe is given for political reasons, about which the noble Lord, Lord Alport, has reservations, which I understand but do not share.
4.45 p.m.
Lord Rea: My Lords, this physician has failed to heal himself and I am afraid therefore that your Lordships will have to tolerate my rather husky voice.
I was delighted when the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, won the ballot for this debate, although we discussed the topic only last month. Any discussion on improving the lot of the poor majority of this world is important—it is probably the most important of all issues. If we get it wrong, in the end we shall be dragged down through environmental degradation, migratory pressure and war. If we get it right the result could be steadily increasing trade, wellbeing and peace for both the South and the North.
My noble friend Lord Judd set out the need for overseas development in the last debate. He put it under eight headings. In seven of those this country would actually benefit directly as well as the less developed countries concerned. It was only the eighth heading which emphasised the moral imperative of redressing the gross imbalance between our wealth and their poverty.
The noble Earl often surprises the House. He is rather like a spin bowler. One is never quite sure where the ball is going to come from. But just as a googly can take wickets, so does the noble Earl from time to time. He certainly made some valid points, although I do not follow his whole thesis. Of course it is right to monitor the effect of aid carefully, especially when it is given to governments of developing countries. Too many projects, especially those channelled through multilateral agencies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, have only benefited the ruling elite—in Africa sometimes called the "Wabenzi" because of their taste in expensive German motorcars—and failed to help the majority of ordinary, poor people.
I do not need to convince most of your Lordships that well-targeted aid is useful; many examples have been given this afternoon. But I should like to point to the subject on the Order Paper, which mentions "development aid". That is not emergency aid. As was pointed out by the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, they are not the same thing. I much enjoyed the maiden speech of the noble Lord, Lord Archer, but he seemed to confuse the two. Well-targeted development aid will tend to reduce the number of disasters in the future which require emergency aid.
I should like to point out to the noble Earl that most developing countries would rather not need to accept aid. They would prefer to pay their own way in the world and heave themselves up through trade and hard work, as we did in the last century, though we took a lot longer than is necessary now. Unfortunately, the cards are stacked against developing countries, as has been pointed out by a number of noble Lords—and here I mix a metaphor: the playing field on which they have to trade is pitched so far against them that it is almost like a football pitch on the north face of the Eiger with a howling gale blowing down it. Prices for traditional commodities have hit rock bottom; international debt is an onerous burden and merely servicing it absorbs most, if not all, of the earnings of some of the poorer countries, let

587
alone allowing them to pay the debt back. The value of allowing aid to flow back to developing countries is critical to allow many of them to remain solvent and keep going existing essential institutions such as education. Even that is not enough for many poorer countries, especially in Africa, whose standards of living are falling dangerously at the moment.
To make matters worse, the less-developed countries have difficulty selling their own products which are value added —that is manufactured or semi-manufactured products—because of the import tariffs imposed by the industrial countries. The noble Earl gave a marvellous example of that last month; namely, the Bengali jeans manufacturer whose business went bust because of the raising of tariffs in North America. The World Bank has calculated that sub-Saharan Africa will need development aid to increase at 4 per cent. per annum during the 1990s to meet modest development targets. But the best aid that we can give would be to get an economic bulldozer to level out that precipitously adverse playing field in trade.
When I spoke to the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker, last week she spoke enthusiastically about the benefits which will come to the developing world from GATT when the final arrangements are agreed. She did not seem to realise that GATT is very much a double-edged weapon for the nations of the South and probably for us as well. When the noble Baroness replies (I have given her notice) can she say whether tariffs in the industrial countries really will come tumbling down and, if so, how soon after the new GATT regime starts? Equally important for food production in the less developed countries will be the GATT position on the export of subsidised food by the countries of the North. Will the subsidies be reduced or completely eliminated? The impact of imported subsidised food is highly damaging to small farmers in the South who cannot compete and who may thus give up and migrate to the already overcrowded cities of the third world. One recent study has estimated that a million of Mexico's 3 million peasants will be displaced by US big farming undercutting maize production as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement. I keep wanting to refer to the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, because I so much agreed with all his speech. As he said, free trade has a very damaging effect on food production.
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving way. I so agree with what he says. When he reached the point about United States maize production, it is damaging because it is so subsidised. That is the evil of it.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, my noble friend may speak at the end.
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, enough said. I fully agree with the noble Lord.
Lord Bonham-Carter: My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord for giving way. The sentiment about free trade with which he agreed was in fact expressed by my noble friend Lord Beaumont.
Lord Rea: My Lords, what is worrying about GATT to all the major NGOs operating in developing countries is the proposed multilateral trade organisation (MTO) proposed in the final draft to run the GATT arrangement. That will be a new bureaucratic world power alongside the World Bank and the IMF, with very little democratic control apart from a biennial meeting of heads of state. It is necessary that the aims, structure and control of that body be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. I hope that sometime in the new year we shall have an opportunity of debating the whole GATT agreement in full because there are some very important issues which affect us and the developing world.
Perhaps I may now ask the noble Baroness to answer some detailed questions about our overseas aid budget. Again, I have given her some notice of this matter. What proportion of the budget of approximately £2 billion will go to bilateral aid; how much to multilateral agencies; how much is going to NGOs to assist with their work and how much is going in the coming year to the population-related activities referred to by the noble Viscount, Lord Craigavon? I appreciate very much his kind words. How do all the different proportions of aid relate to the figures for previous years? As regards the multilateral agencies, can the noble Baroness tell us the result of the recent replenishment, last month, of the International Development Association, which is part of the World Bank? How does that relate to previous replenishments, and what influence have we had in the decisions about how the money should be disbursed? It has been the subject of major criticism in the past, particularly concerning the possible damage which the World Bank's projects may have on the environment.
Can the noble Baroness also say what is the current status of the International Fund for Agriculture Development? In the minds of many of us it is a very effective United Nations agency in relieving poverty through its assistance to small farmers in the poorest countries. What will the actual effect be of the devaluation last September on our aid budget? That is a matter which has been mentioned by other speakers.
I turn briefly to debt. Can the noble Baroness say how near the Trinidad terms are to achievement? I have two very brief final points. We have discussed the "conditionality" of aid in Question Time in recent weeks. The noble Lord, Lord Alport, has raised the matter, as have other speakers, as to how we might influence the type of regimes to which we give aid. As regards Indonesia and other countries, the Government stand accused of selling arms to repressive regimes. In answer they claim that these countries have a legitimate right to defend themselves. Those countries buy arms while receiving a great deal of aid from us. As we know, Iraq used the arms which were sold to it while we were giving it aid against its own people and eventually against us.
The Government claim that selling arms to these countries is legitimate because they have a right to defend themselves. Perhaps I may here quote from General Hartono, of the East Java military command. After a recent army exercise in Java he said:

589
"Present threats are different from 20 years ago. From our analysis of events and incoming information, the most likely scenario in the next 5 - 10 years will be domestic security disturbances".
I need not say anymore after that.
Finally, as regards the points made by the noble Viscount, Lord Craigavon, I can only add to his remarks that a small expenditure now will pay big dividends in helping the world's population to level off in the next century at a lower level.
Our efforts in the field of overseas development aid are woefully inadequate. We are tantalisingly close to being able to achieve the target of 0.7 per cent. when we consider the peace dividend—which is still there and actually growing. Only then will we be starting to make a serious impact on the world's most pressing problem, which is the gross and intolerable discrepancy between the health and wealth of the nations of the North and the nations of the South.
4.58 p.m.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, here I stand before you conscious that I am very much in my usual role as second-hand Rose in the absence of my noble friend Lady Chalker. I am sure that we all listened attentively to the initiator of this debate, my noble friend Lord Onslow, with his quaint speech, to which I shall return. Beyond reasonable doubt the maiden speech of my noble friend Lord Archer was as original in concept as we expected from his fertile brain. I add my congratulations to those which he has already received.
When my noble friend Lady Chalker of Wallasey spoke to this House on 11th November on the eve of the Chancellor's Autumn Statement, she was unable to reveal the Government's plans for aid spending. Despite some of the gloomy speculation, the aid budget is to continue to grow. The noble Earl, Lord Longford, may be heartened to hear that our external assistance programmes, as a whole, are set to rise in cash terms by more than £200 million to £2,362 million by 1995–96 over this financial year. Planned provision for aid to developing countries for next year will rise by 3.5 per cent. in cash terms—an increase of 1 per cent. in real terms—to £1,900 million. These sums are a clear demonstration of the Government's commitment to a substantial and effective aid programme for developing countries.
The noble Earl, Lord Longford, quoted my noble friend Lady Chalker when she said, "our record is sound". In fact, he repeated that once or twice. Perhaps I may continue the quote. After saying that our record is sound my noble friend said:
"Since 1987–88, the Government have increased their aid to developing countries substantially—by 8 per cent. in real terms. Our expenditure last year—1991–92—at nearly £1,800 million, was 3 per cent. higher in real terms than the previous year".—[Official Report, 11/12/92; col. 309.]
Again, I submit that my noble friend had every reason to state that our record is sound.
The Earl of Longford: My Lords, may I intervene?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, I have only a limited time; let us have a little chat afterwards.
590
I return to my noble friend Lord Onslow. He is quite right to remind us to question the basis on which we give aid. Only by a continuous process of questioning and adjustment will we ensure that our aid is used most effectively to meet the needs of the world's poorest people. But he is quite wrong to imply, as he has in the past, that aid is a force for harm.
In the minds of many, aid has become associated with crisis and despair. Images of suffering fill our television screens. But we should not let those images —vitally important though they are—obscure the progress there has been.
The Earl of Longford: My Lords, will the noble Lady allow me to intervene now, or is she not accepting any interventions at all?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, no.
Developing countries as a whole have significantly improved their living standards over the past three decades. Between 1965 and 1990, low and middle income countries saw an unprecedented rise of 85 per cent.
Baroness Seear: My Lords, why the hurry? Cannot this debate continue until half past five? Is the Minister really proposing to go on, uninterrupted, for another half an hour?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, that is very probable if I am to answer, I hope sufficiently, all of your Lordships' questions and leave time for the instigator of this debate to reply.
I have lost my place, so I shall repeat that between 1965 and 1990, low and middle income countries saw an unprecedented rise of 85 per cent.—that is, 2.5 per cent. a year—in per capita incomes. Over those years life expectancy rose from 51 years to 63, and the rate of adult literacy from 42 per cent. to 64 per cent. Those represent substantial and very real changes for the better for millions of people in developing countries.
The countries of east and south-east Asia have taken the lead. Their rate of economic growth over the past 25 years has approached 8 per cent. a year. But they were not the only countries to do well. The poor countries of south Asia —including Bangladesh and India—and Latin America increased their per capita incomes by almost 2 per cent.
The other side of the coin is, of course, less encouraging. Sub-Saharan Africa is a particular cause for concern, with its rapid population growth and frequent affliction of natural and man made disasters. The development hopes of many African countries have not been realised. But, even here, there is progress.
Many countries are pressing ahead with political and economic reform. In the debate in this House on 14th December my noble friend Lady Chalker described the encouraging changes in a number of countries in Southern Africa. Elsewhere, Mauritius, which undertook difficult economic reforms in the early 1980s, has performed well in recent years; and Ghana has transformed its policies and managed a 5 per cent. per annum growth rate.
The right domestic policies are vital. But other factors also contribute to successful development.

591
Trade and market access have been key ingredients. That is why the breakthrough in the GATT negotiations on agriculture is so heartening. Poorer countries could gain up to 90 million dollars from a successful GATT agreement: the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people in developing countries could benefit. I am most grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Rea, for giving me advance notice of his questions. If I may, I shall return to GATT later.
Aid has also made an important contribution. The key to a country's success is its people. Long-term development aid has helped developing countries improve their health and education services so that people are better equipped to contribute to development. In addition, aid has helped produce the right climate for development and economic growth by providing the incentive and support for reform.
Close targeting of aid is a key to its effectiveness. That is why our aid is focused on areas central to promoting sustainable development. These include the promotion of economic reform, of better standards of government, the reduction of poverty, better education and health, improving the status of women, and help with tackling environmental problems.
Our aid is effective, but we are most certainly not complacent. We strive continually to ensure that taxpayers' money is used for the purposes intended. I fully share your Lordships' concern that aid should not be used to keep corrupt regimes in power. That is why our aid programmes put such a high priority on good government. Good government means more efficient and effective administration, ensuring respect for human rights, popular participation in the decision-making process, upholding the rule of law and curbing excessive military expenditure. Those are all vital in themselves, but they are also prerequisites for sustainable development and for the effective use of aid funds. Where countries flout the principles of good government we act accordingly, as we showed, for example, in suspending bilateral aid to Sudan, Somalia and Burma.
In reply to a point raised by my noble friend Lord Onslow, there have been numerous conflicting reports of how much aid is being looted. However, it is important to understand that the risk of looting is inherent in the delivery of humanitarian aid in any crisis situation. We need to weigh the amount which may be lost against that which will reach those in extreme need.
On the subject of corruption, which, again, was mentioned by my noble friend Lord Onslow, I can advise him that the Government and other donors have a duty to ensure that aid goes only to those in real need and not to corrupt or unethical political elites. We owe this duty both to our own taxpayers, who have a right to know that their money is being well spent, and to the people of the countries to which we give aid, who have the right to know that our aid will help the poorest and not line the pockets of the well-off. Given the sums involved in the international aid effort, there is inevitably a risk that money will end up in the wrong hands or be used for the wrong purposes.
592
We take this risk seriously. Our attack on potential corruption is two-pronged. The first prong is the emphasis that we put on good government. Central to good government is accountability: financial accountability, so that people can clearly see and understand how funds are allocated; and electoral accountability, so that that country's people have a real say in who forms their government. Good administration and respect for human rights are also crucial. By focusing our aid programme on those countries which practice good government we significantly reduce the risks of corruption and, by helping to promote good government elsewhere, we are helping to develop better-run administrations which will be less prone to corruption.
The second prong of our attack on corruption is our procedural safeguards. The Overseas Development Administration has rigorous criteria—economical, technical and environmental—to ensure the quality of its projects. Projects are subject to detailed and extensive financial reporting. We check that the money is being spent on what it is supposed to be spent on. We also check that what is bought is still what is needed. When British firms supply equipment for a project, we pay the firm direct. We monitor the implementation of our projects on the ground to guard against any misuse of aid funds.
Britain's humanitarian assistance has no political strings attached. Nowhere is this more seriously tested than in Sudan, and we had a moving debate on that this week. Our emergency aid is channelled to the needy through UN agencies and NGOs regardless of religious or political affiliations. Indeed, 80 per cent. of our aid is targeted on the poorest countries of the world; not to the rich, as implied by my noble friend Lord Onslow. A strongly worded resolution on human rights, in which we played a major role, was passed in the UN Third Committee recently. It attracted significant African support, an indication that concern is not confined to donors.
The noble Lord, Lord Alport, spoke about Somalia. The key problem in bringing relief to the suffering in Somalia has not been the availability of food and medicine but ensuring the security of supplies. Recent attacks on food convoys and the shelling of the UN ship as it approached Mogadishu port clearly demonstrated that the security situation was worsening. This could not be allowed to continue. We therefore fully accepted the recommendation of the UN Secretary General to the Security Council that new measures would be needed to secure the relief operation. That is why we co-sponsored SCR 794, adopted on 3rd December, authorising UN member states to establish as soon as possible a secure environment for humanitarian relief. We are contributing RAF transport planes to the operation. The operation is proceeding well with the airport and port in Mogadishu made secure and bases established at Mogadishu and Gailalassi. United States and French troops today reached Baidoa. Overall, the operation has encountered minimal opposition and the Secretary General will report on the progress of the operation on 18th December. We hope that its objectives will be achieved quickly.

593
The noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, spoke about the Intermediate Technology development group. This is a very effective organisation which delivers aid precisely where it is needed. The noble Lord may have seen a television programme on 23rd May which featured ITDG's project on Kenya, part funded by the ODA, through which the technology to make fuel-efficient stoves is passed on to women's marketing organisations. This stimulates the rural private sector directly as well as saving scarce fuel.
The noble Lord, Lord Thurlow, referred to aid targeting. The Government accept internationally agreed targets but, in common with many other donors, we are not in a position to set down a timetable for reaching them. Future levels of our aid will continue to depend on our economic circumstances and on other calls on public expenditure. Our average aid/GNP ratio over the past five years is 0.30 per cent. It is significant that we have maintained this average during a period when our programme has grown substantially in real terms. It is important, too, to look at not only how much we have spent but how we have spent it. The OECD has commended us for the effectiveness of our aid programme, including our poverty focus.
Government aid is not Britain's only contribution to the international development effort. I specifically mention the many British voluntary agencies which do excellent work in developing countries, both in providing humanitarian relief and in long-term development work. I should like to tell my noble friend Lord Selsdon that less than 10 per cent. of our aid to developing countries consists of humanitarian aid. The overwhelming majority of our aid is for long-term development aid.
My noble friend Lord Selsdon referred to extending the Know-How Fund outside Eastern Europe. The transfer of skills and technology fundamental to the Know-How Fund is also at the heart of our aid to developing countries. British experts employed by the ODA, British NGOs and British consultants are all part of the progress. What we call the Know-How Fund in Eastern Europe does extend throughout our aid programme. It is called technical co-operation.
The noble Lord, Lord Alport, implied that commitments to the Commonwealth in our aid programme had diminished. That is not so. Around 70 per cent. of our bilateral aid goes to Commonwealth countries.
The noble Viscount, Lord Craigavon, spoke about population. Population planning was one of the key sectors identified by the Prime Minister at Rio on which we would concentrate our activities and resources. The Department of the Environment recently issued a consultation paper on the NGO conference to be held in Manchester next September. Its theme will be sustainable development, in which population has a crucial role. The Government warmly welcome responses to the consultation paper from CARE and others on all aspects of sustainable development.
I now arrive at the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Rea, of which he gave me notice. The noble
594
Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley, will not be surprised that I cannot at all agree with his words concerning the French farmers and GATT. With regard to GATT, existing provisions for tariff-free or reduced tariff entry into developed countries for developed country manufactured goods will continue to apply under the general system of preferences. Exports to developing countries of subsidised agricultural produce will continue but the Uruguay Round will introduce the first restrictions on subsidies. This will be a major step forward for which the UK fought hard. Subsidised exports would be reduced by 36 per cent. in budget terms and by 21 per cent. in volume terms. Domestic subsidies will be cut by 20 per cent. Food aid is not covered by the Uruguay Round. There is no intention to restrict the ability to deliver food aid. Reduction in agriculture subsidies in developed countries should promote food production in developing countries. As at present, developing countries will be able to raise tariffs to protect infant industries or as temporary safeguard measures.
With regard to the breakdown of the type of aid, Ministers are now looking at aid priorities in the light of new planning figures. It is too early to say what the breakdown will be. I should like to point out to the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, that exchange rates move up as well as down. It is not possible at this time to say what precise impact the change in the value of sterling will have. But, in any event, spending under the aid programme is very largely in sterling.
The noble Lord, Lord Rea, asked whether developing country debt is increasing. Developing country debt is continuing to increase slowly but debt to commercial creditors has been decreasing. A growing share of the overall debt burden is made up of official debt, which is often on highly concessional terms. As a result of this and several other factors, including continued debt rescheduling, OECD figures show that the amount developing countries have been paying to service their debts has been decreasing since 1989.
With regard to government policy on debt conversions, the Government believe that it is generally more effective to use aid directly to support development activities than for financing debt swaps. But we welcome debt conversion schemes which benefit debtors by reducing the resources needed for debt servicing. In September ECGD announced that it would offer a portion of its developing country debt for sale. Sales will normally involve cancelling the debtor's foreign currency obligation with the purchaser acquiring the right to local currency. The local currency can then be used by purchasers to fund debt equity swaps. For example, sales will benefit debtor countries by facilitating investment and reducing the amount of foreign currency needed for debt servicing.
We live in difficult and turbulent times. The scene appears to change with frightening rapidity. The increases in wealth in developing countries are not just a set of statistics. They mean that people live longer and in better health, are better educated, have increasing opportunities to improve their livelihoods.

595
Aid helps to improve the quality of life for millions of people in the poorest countries. That is a goal worth striving for, and that is why I am glad to assure my noble friend Lord Archer that the Government are dedicated to continuing that vital work.
5.20 p.m.
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, I thank all noble Lords for taking part in the debate. It is quite fun being in a minority of one. Some of the questions I posed were brushed aside and not answered. I found it interesting that the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, said that in the Roman Empire, the construction of roads put down famine and that in the Indian Empire the railways produced more trade. That is the point I am making. Sensible development does not need outside aid. It generates its own tax base. The Aswan dam in Egypt was built without one penny of outside aid. It increased the Egyptian Government's revenues by double the amount of money—
Baroness Seear: My Lords, the noble Earl is not suggesting that it was the Britons who financed the Roman roads, is he?
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, that is what I do not suggest. It was the Roman government. It was a unitary state with a unitary currency, all minted at Lyon, if I am not wrong. They were built by legions, although that is neither here nor there.
The point I am making is that development produces its own wealth creation. If that development does not produce wealth creation, it is a waste of money. The other important point is the realisation that dumped agricultural produce is a menace. That was mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Rea. The noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, said the opposite. He said that it was an awful pity to have set-aside. We have set-aside because we have a distorted CAP. It produces seriously cheap food that we dump on the world market, and that impoverishes third world countries. No one thinks that that is anything other than crassly idiotic.
It is impossible to differentiate between the economy and politics. They are one and the same thing. The point raised on ambulance aid is important. It sometimes gets out of hand. I do not know what the answer is. I wish I did. The dilemma is posed brutally in Somalia. Do we drag in people? Do we allow the money raised by honest and good people and distributed by brave people to be diverted from its target? I should not like to be unarmed in the middle of Baidoa, surrounded by a collection of warring Somali gangsters in Toyotas with anti-tank guns mounted on them, thank you very much! They then have to pay for protection, and we know what protection does. I am merely posing the questions. The noble Earl, Lord Longford, failed totally to understand that. I want to emphasise strongly that I am not saying that we should not give to the poor. I am saying that if we are not careful we shall give to the poor in such a way that it impoverishes them. What we must do is buy anything they can produce. Buy, buy, buy and—
Baroness Trumpington: Is my noble friend winding up?
The Earl of Onslow: Yes, I am winding up. We must buy anything they produce. With that I submit myself to the glare of my noble friend Lady Trumpington. I thank your Lordships for taking part in the debate. I hope that it has been a valuable debate. Before I sit down, I must congratulate my noble friend Lord Archer for keeping his speech so uncontroversial. He concentrated on Californian blondes, Weston-Super-Mare and his children and managed to avoid most of the subject. I must congratulate him. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion for Papers.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

Unemployment and Housing
5.24 p.m.
Lord Molloy Lord Molloy rose to call attention to the link between unemployment and the provision of housing; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, a good job and a decent home are fundamental to the contentment of our people. Millions of people in this country have neither. While the world recession was not the Government's responsibility, some of their responses to the situation have been somewhat pathetic. Let me give one example. It is their abysmal, insane proposal to shut 31 pits. I do not suppose anyone in the Government knows what a coal mine is and how it operates. The Government merely think that they have miners. Of course they have miners. They never stop to think of the incredible machinery needed to keep those mines safe, of the scientists and technicians involved or even of those who make miners' helmets. The Government thought of none of those things, because they have little knowledge of this country's great industries.
The crisis may not be entirely the Government's responsibility. It is a world problem. It was not the nation's financial institutions that delivered the worst recession since the Second World War. It does not give me much pleasure to say this, but I must acknowledge on behalf of millions of working people that the Government were insensitive when they entered the ERM at the wrong exchange rate, kept interest rates too high for too long, and failed to respond to the calls for relief from consumers and business until the number of people in arrears with their mortgages had risen to an astonishing 1.9 million.
Great slices of manufacturing have been wiped out, and nearly 3 million people have been put on the dole. That is the Government's fault. They failed to respond to the incredible situation we found ourselves in due to the world recession. Unemployment is the curse of family life. It does not mean merely that the breadwinner is out of work. When young people are out of work—especially apprentices who cannot carry on because the firm is packing in—their souls are depressed. Unemployment endangers our nation's civilised discipline. It impoverishes our nation. Many

597
of our young people believe that they have no future in this country. Economists and businessmen suffer the same grave anxieties.
We must acknowledge that there is no easy short-term solution. We must always be aware of the dangers of inflation. However, as Beveridge said, full employment in a free society is a real possibility. Immediately after the greatest war in the history of mankind, the British Government did remarkable things. They created full employment and the NHS. They were all achieved after millions of our men and women had been fighting a great war. It is about time we gave back to them their right to have jobs and houses. We need confidence. Job losses damage confidence. Our young people are affected. There are 750,000 young people unemployed. In Scotland the position is so disastrous that unemployment has risen by 133 per cent.
It is the nation's task not merely to reduce unemployment but to re-establish full employment. Unemployment is expensive for the Exchequer. All aspects of unemployment cost about £25 billion. That is the annual cost of our present level of unemployment. It is disastrous. Those who have done nothing about it are responsible for the disaster. It is frightening to have nearly 3 million people out of work. The claim has been made that it is economic lunacy for 400,000 building workers to he jobless at the same time as 140,000 families are homeless or, if not homeless, living in temporary accommodation. That in itself can be a disaster. Overcrowding and living in these depressing places affects a family in a savage manner.
Our political democracy must constantly put the welfare of ordinary men and women on the agenda of political discussion and concentrate on it. I sincerely hope that the Government will henceforth do that, for unemployment invades the deep serenity of a happy home. It is caused by the cold austerity of unbridled laissez-faire, greed and vulgarity.
The loss of work to an ordinary British workman is the loss of status, encouraging the degrading shadow of poverty. Yes, preventable poverty is a crime. Our people deserve better of us: let the TUC, the CBI and the Government get together to see whether somehow or other they can find a realistic answer to this dreadful problem.
When we look at housing alone, it has been said quite rightly that at one time people in the United Kingdom were the best housed in the world. We are now dropping right down to being one of the worst. It also once used to be said that an Englishman's home was his castle. Millions of our families in this country have not even a cellar to live in. It is a fundamental crime. Homelessness is now a nationwide crisis. More or better housing is a basic civil right, yet the Government and the councils have no real programme. Local authorities need guidance from the Government and the Government have failed them as well as the people.
Many problems are caused by the breadwinner losing his job. No job, no home for the family! In 1991, the private sector had the lowest level of
598
completions since the First World War. The record of those wonderful people who do not believe in anything being publicly owned, the idiots who would not even mind privatising the British Army or the Royal Air Force, is a disaster. If we want to understand the problem, we should look at the massive, insuperable problems facing Westminster City Council.
Scotland has had an increase in homelessness of 133 per cent. over a couple of years. In general, local authority capital expenditure is to decline by £316 million up to 1995–96. That in itself is an incredible threat; it is a positive disgrace. It is the kind of attitude that led to people sleeping in cardboard boxes in the London streets. If I may say so, the thousands of cardboard box sleepers in London's streets are not merely a disgrace. They cause severe problems for our police who handle the situation admirably. If the police were not doing a good job on the streets of London with the people who cannot help sleeping in cardboard boxes, the situation would be serious.
Government spending in real terms has fallen from £11.5 billion in 1979 to £5.5 billion in 1991. Yet Shelter claims that the provision of homes costs less than homelessness. It is cheaper to put a family into a home of its own or a rented home than to treat it as homeless and cause the home to be repossessed when the family cannot afford to keep up payments on the house. The simple term "repossession" seems to be enough for the Government.
I believe that practical and compassionate understanding is necessary rather than just saying that so many have been repossessed. What that means is that there are many ordinary people whose lives have been savagely attacked and demeaned. The attack on homelessness and unemployment through government spending on public sector housing in England was £4 billion a year ago. Yet a programme to increase output to 100,000 homes would cost an extra £2 billion. At the same time, it would create employment with roughly 100,000 jobs.
The men and women who can design and construct a variety of homes are brilliant people—architects, designers, engineers and others. But they are not designing homes; instead, they are unemployed. I cannot understand why the Government cannot see that. It could be interpreted as an unrealised form of masochism by the Government. The general view of specialists is that the problem with the Government's approach to housing policy is that it offers decorated branches but no solid trunk.
We have heard the promises; we have listened at Question Time to all kinds of things that encourage us. Then when we wait for them to be made reality, they have gone with the wind. Our Government should respond to people and not be put off by the high prices which are always put up by the Treasury. It is better that the Government should talk to Shelter and the other organisations.
In the mid-1970s the UK was one of the best housed nations in Europe. If we wandered round Europe in those days, the point always made by the French, Dutch and Germans was our remarkable housing formula in the UK. Measuring housing

599
expenditure as a percentage of GDP, we are now at the bottom of the table. At one time in the mid-1970s we were at the top. That should give the Government anxiety. The unemployed are those who have lost their homes—repossessed because they could not pay the mortgage. They feel bitter. That is dangerous for the nation and the Government must do something about it. When the breadwinner loses his job and has to surrender his house, which is repossessed, it amounts to a catalogue of despair for thousands of people.
I can just imagine it. I can remember it happening to my family. My father was a mercantile engineer of high standing. My parents were buying their own house; they had five children by that time. Suddenly, there came unemployment. My father was not wanted any more. He went up into the mountains of Wales to see whether he could find work among the miners. He went to the docks. He could find no work. So from our nice little house we had to move into one room to find shelter for the seven of us. As a youngster of about eight or nine, I asked, "What kind of government have we and what kind of country do we live in?"
Those questions are being asked today by millions of ordinary, decent people who may not have any particular political outlook. All they know is that the Government have allowed them to suffer this terrible embarrassment. Hundreds of thousands of people are suffering a catalogue of despair.
Another example of what happens when people lose their houses, as so many millions have, is the long-term separation of husband from wife, sometimes followed by divorce. The family is split. The grievous effect of those events on the children of such a marriage is too terrible to contemplate. But it happens. With unemployment and homelessness we are creating broken families.
So there is an urgent need for the Government to seek the guidance of Shelter and the CBI. On many of the sub-committees of the CBI are brilliant men and women who can give terrific advice. They are able and well experienced. The same applies to the TUC. We may be able to have guidance from the council of churches and representatives of local authorities. We should bring in the bankers who can help enormously and, I understand, wish to do so. What is wrong with the CBI, the TUC, the bankers and the housing associations that the Government cannot bear to listen to them?
I must say a few words in favour of the present housing Minister, Sir George Young. He has done his level best, and he is a good trier. He seems to understand the situation. It is about time he received more support from the Government. I hope there will be a genuine appreciation of all the bodies I have mentioned.
Homelessness and unemployment are the twin cancers that threaten our country. We were threatened before back in the 1930s and during the last war, but in the end we won the day. It is vital to erase the threats and help those in need and thereby raise the status of our nation. That is a worthwhile aim. I plead with the Government to understand what a lack of housing means to people and what it means to people when they lose the house for which they may have
600
been paying over four or five years. I plead with the Government to understand what it means to an ordinary British family to be put out on the streets with their children. I ask the Government to give full consideration to housing and unemployment and to consult with the bankers, the TUC, the CBI and all the other organisations that understand the problems of housing and of the unemployed. If the Government do not do so, a desperate situation could arise in our nation. All I ask is for the Government to acknowledge that threat and be prepared to make a fresh start to erase ultimately unemployment and homelessness. I beg to move for Papers.
5.41 p.m.
Lord Skidelsky: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, for introducing this important topic and for giving us the opportunity to discuss it. I must say that I was puzzled to know how he would link up unemployment with housing provision. After he sat down I was still not quite sure what the economic link was. His argument seemed to be that the Government have created high unemployment, that high unemployment causes homelessness and therefore the Government ought to build lots of new houses. That seemed to be the gist of the whole matter.
However, the noble Lord did not look into or analyse the real relationship between unemployment and housing or consider the possibility that one cause of high unemployment is the nature of our housing market as it has developed over many years and the labour immobility that results from that inflexible housing market. The noble Lord did not consider how housing might be made more flexible to lower unemployment. I believe that is the gist of the economic case.
I agree completely that unemployment is too high. I also agree completely that there is a shortage of rental accommodation. But is the solution simply to go on adding to the municipal housing stock? I do not think it is. If we look at the housing tenure structure in Europe, one basic difference between the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe stands out; that is, we have the lowest private rental sector in Europe— about 7 per cent. Compare our housing position with that of Germany and France, our two most successful competitors. The figures for owner occupation, private renting and social renting are: for Germany 40 per cent., 42 per cent. and 17 per cent. respectively; for France 53 per cent., 20 per cent. and 17 per cent.; for Britain 67 per cent., 7 per cent. and 26 per cent. Compared with Germany and France we have a much larger percentage of home ownership, a substantially larger social rental sector and a much smaller private rental sector. The structure of our housing tenure is very different from that of the continent with a much higher proportion of privately owned houses, a much smaller proportion of privately rented houses and a larger municipal housing sector.
The automatic response of the Opposition parties to homelessness is to say that we must build more council housing units, even though, except for Holland, we already have the largest municipal

601
housing sector in Europe. But there is one thing that is crucially wrong with that policy. The point can be put quite bluntly: the greater the proportion of the working population in municipal housing, the greater the immobility of labour will be. The reason is not the rent subsidy, but because once one has been allocated a council dwelling all the incentives are to stay put in it. Someone who rents a council house in one region will have the greatest difficulty obtaining one to rent in another area. In order to move he will have to rent or buy a house in the private sector and give up his council house together with his subsidised rent. That limits mobility among council house tenants, particularly among the unemployed who might otherwise move to take jobs. Thus, one of the main purposes of a rental sector, to encourage labour mobility, is strangled at source. From the point of view of mobility, the sale of council houses was a clear gain and for that the Government must be congratulated.
I would not, therefore, favour any substantial expansion in municipal housing provision at the present time unless a proper market is established in council housing tenancies, exactly as exists in the unregulated private rental sector. If rents were to be set at market levels there is no reason why local authorities should not advertise vacancies in the newspapers exactly as private landlords do. The market system here can be used to support the social housing sector and make it work for the benefit of the economy.
The main problem, as practically all who have studied the housing problem will agree, is the small size of the private rental sector. That is something to which I have already alluded. That has shrunk to 7 per cent.—by far the lowest percentage in Europe. But the position is worse than that. Of that 7 per cent., about one-half is accounted for by regulated tenancies; tenancies with controlled rents—that is, rents subsidised by the landlord—and rents with security of tenure. This means that one-half of the private rental sector is not part of the housing market at all. There is no more a market in regulated tenancies than there is in municipal tenancies. The incentive is for holders of these tenancies to stay put, irrespective of their employment prospects in that area, because if they move they lose not only their subsidised rent but also their security of tenure.
The fact that the great bulk of rented accommodation in this country is outside the housing market has an enormous bearing on the question of the shortage of affordable—that is, low rent—accommodation. Other things being equal, the narrower the market for goods or services, the higher prices will be. Rents in the unregulated private sector are much higher than they would be if there was more accommodation to let and the problem of homelessness is correspondingly increased.
I think we can now see, to my way of thinking, the real nature of the link between housing and unemployment. It is almost exactly the opposite of that postulated by the party opposite. The tenure system which applies in municipal housing and
602
regulated lettings increases the rate of unemployment by reducing the mobility of labour. Patrick Minford, Michael Peel and Paul Ashton have calculated that,
"under present UK labour market institutions around 2 percentage points of today's unemployment is due to the immobility of unskilled labour induced by the Rent Acts and Council house subsidies".
That is 2 per cent. on the natural rate of unemployment, or about 600,000 workers. That is a colossal figure. Yet that is the system which the party opposite has supported through thick and thin. Whenever the Government have moved towards decontrol, the Opposition have vowed to put the controls back, in strengthened form, if they return to power. Their policies and threats can be held directly responsible, unintentionally of course, for there being 600,000 more unemployed than we need to have. That fact should be better appreciated than it is.
In the Housing Act 1988 the Government decontrolled new private lets through the shorthold system, but on the whole that has not led to any noticeable expansion of the private letting market. The reason is that landlords and new investors have become too discouraged by the history of the Rent Acts since the First World War and too afraid of retroactive legislation, as occurred in 1974, to enter the market, especially at the lower end where the threat of reimposition of controls is greatest. I do not see any other explanation for the fact that at present there is admitted to be a large stock of unused accommodation, not only in London.
I do not believe that one should restrict oneself to analysis. One should propose constructive measures to improve the situation. What can be done to enlarge the market for rental accommodation? Three reforms follow from the arguments that I have put forward.
First, rents in the municipal and regulated sectors should be allowed to find their market-clearing level. For the regulated sector there are many suggestions but one that attracts me as a first step would be to amend Section 70 of the Rent Act 1977 so as to require the rent officer to have regard only to the rent allowable for housing benefit in fixing a fair rent for a regulated tenancy. Nothing is more absurd than the Government paying out £70 or £80 a week, or even more, in housing benefit whereas fair rents for regulated tenancies are fixed at half that amount on average. If tenants cannot afford the market rents they should be subsidised by the Government, not by the landlord.
My second proposal is that security of tenure should be ended on all existing tenancies with perhaps a two-year period of notice. New contracts could then be negotiated freely between landlords and tenants at market rents, or a mandatory repossession order could be served. I favour a scheme of compensating regulated tenants by establishing a procedure for commuting property rights established under the Rent Act 1974 into cash. Commuting property rights into cash is an old tradition and I believe that would be a fair procedure for bringing to an end security of tenure. However, the right of repossession on payment of agreed compensation must be automatic, except in the case of the elderly or sick.

603
Finally, all council house tenancies should be marketable. That would be an imaginative way of combining security of tenure, which would not be an issue in council house tenancies—and that would be the main difference between council house tenancies and private tenancies—with an incentive to move if a job became available in another place. If the tenant moved the lease would simply revert to the council.
The effects of those reforms taken in combination would be as follows. Their very first impact might be to raise the average level of rents somewhat but there would soon be downward pressure on rents in the whole of the rental sector, thus increasing the stock of affordable rental accommodation. They would put downward pressure on house prices by increasing the attraction at the margin of renting rather than buying. That must certainly be an advantage at present. They would encourage new residential building for rent. They would encourage the ownership of capital other than housing by making it more attractive to invest in shares, small businesses and so on. The ending of tax relief on mortgage interest would also pull in the same direction, but that is a topic for another time. Those reforms would also tend to lower the rate of inflation, which everyone thinks desirable, and they would lower the rate of unemployment substantially by increasing labour mobility.
Standing in the way of all those desirable consequences is the Opposition's obsession with rent control and allocating municipal housing by officials rather than by market forces. Is it so difficult to agree that the existing system of controls—a relic of former conditions—has served the economy exceedingly ill over the past 50 years? Is it so difficult to work together to find an equitable scheme for bringing this pernicious system of controls to an end?
We all accept the goal of an enlarged rental sector. That was true of the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, in his opening remarks. I have argued that the best way of bringing that about is to increase the size of the market for rental accommodation because that is the only method consistent with increasing labour mobility, which is one of the chief purposes of a rental sector. Economists are virtually united in considering that increased labour mobility would lower the rate of unemployment, which we all want. I believe that the Government would go ahead with a scheme of decontrol, subject to suitable safeguards, if the Opposition supported it. This should not be a party matter. The ball is in the court of the party opposite.
5.55 p.m.
Baroness Turner of Camden: My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Molloy for introducing a debate on the subject of unemployment, linked to housing, and in particular for the impassioned and informed way in which he did so. We debated unemployment as recently as 25th November when a large number of noble Lords indicated their interest in the subject by participating. Unfortunately, the response from the Minister on that occasion was disappointing. We argued then for the Government to develop as a priority a strategy to deal with unemployment, stressing that it should be given precedence over
604
everything else. My noble friend has extended the debate today by including housing, and how right he was to do so.
I was surprised by the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, who seemed to argue that unemployment was basically the result of immobility. That is not the case. There is now unemployment in almost every area of the country, and in some areas it is very substantial. Therefore, simply increasing mobility will not help to solve the basic problem.
The two most basic requirements of civilised living are a job and a home. Quite often, it is not possible to have one, and to keep it, without the other. That is seen in stark terms among young homeless people. They cannot get homes without jobs and no one will give them jobs if they do not have a permanent address, so they are permanently marginalised. It is hardly surprising that we are seeing an increase in petty crime, and sometimes violent crime, as such young people become increasingly alienated.
I do not want to go over again the worsening unemployment figures. My noble friend has already referred to them. Suffice it to say that in 1975, according to the system of assessment then in place, unemployment stood at 3.7 per cent. of the workforce. On the same basis—and one has to use the same system because otherwise comparisons are meaningless—we have unemployment now of 14.7 per cent. Much of that new unemployment is in the South East among people who would not in the past have imagined that such a thing could happen to them.
Many are in a desperate situation. Encouraged into the housing market in the 1980s they now find themselves with mortgages they cannot repay and houses they cannot sell at the prices they paid for them. In 1982 an average of 132 people a week had their homes repossessed because they were unable to repay their mortgage loans. One borrower in every 200 was six months or more in arrears with mortgage repayments. In the summer of this year one household in every 32 was in arrears and the weekly average of repossessions was 1,375–10 times the number of 10 years ago. Clearly we need, but do not have, a mortgage benefit scheme to assist owner occupiers who are at risk.
So we have an increasing problem of homelessness. We have been warned that it will rise. Homelessness will increase and council waiting lists will lengthen unless the Government double the number of new homes provided each year for rent, according to a recent study by the Housing Corporation. Yet the number of new private homes started by builders fell sharply during the summer, according to recent published figures. If the trend continued throughout the year, the total number of housing starts by private builders would be the lowest for more than a decade. The fall was offset by an increase in public sector starts including those made by housing associations. But overall public and private starts still fell by 3.6 per cent. compared with the same period last year. At the instance of the Government, housing associations seem to have taken over from local councils the role of providing social housing—a move that I personally do

605
not find particularly acceptable, although I have no wish to denigrate housing associations which in the main do a reasonably good job.
I believe, in contrast to the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, that it should be a continuing role of local authorities to provide low rented housing and that the Government should facilitate that role. I agree with the noble Lord that we have a structure in this country that is far too heavily weighted in favour of private housing ownership—not really ownership at all, because the ownership is mostly with the building societies. That has arisen because of past government policies in that area. But municipal housing need not mean immobility. If there is enough municipal housing people will be prepared to move from one area to another.
It seems incredible that with all this obvious need there should be so much unemployment in the building industry itself. Employment in the industry has fallen by 400,000 in the three years to June 1992. Employment continues to fall sharply. In addition, there have been job losses in the materials and supply industry. Short-term prospects for employment in the industry are poor. The industry does not expect an upturn in the private sector until there is a return of consumer confidence.
In the public sector, completions are expected of the order of 30,000, reaching 35,000 for each of the two subsequent years. The increased capital receipts for local authorities are expected to be used largely for refurbishment of existing housing stock rather than new build. These statistics have to be seen against the need highlighted by organisations like Shelter, which argues for 100,000 new homes a year, and the Institute of Housing, which puts the figure at 130,000 a year.
The Trades Union Congress, as my noble friend said, has called for a major programme of house building to relieve homelessness. It points out that only 22,000 homes for rent were built last year, which itself falls short of the Government's target of an average of over 50,000 a year. It says that making money available to buy up 20,000 unsold properties will not create new homes and that while local authorities will at last be able to use some of their capital receipts from the sale of council houses, their overall capital programmes are being cut sharply.
A study undertaken some years ago claimed that each new house built created 2.5 new jobs. The Building Employers Confederation points out that the cost of supporting unemployed building workers, of whom there are now large numbers is costing the Exchequer £1.8 billion a year in unemployment pay and social benefits.
Building homes has a quick-acting effect upon employment. That is one of the reasons why I believe my noble friend was right to link employment and housing in this debate. New homes lead to a demand in other areas such as furnishing, kitchen equipment and other goods. This in turn helps to create employment in those areas. Until the Government act to restore confidence, either by building homes, or allowing or indeed encouraging local authorities to do
606
so, we shall not get out of the vicious circle. Unemployment, not only in the building industry but across the economic spectrum, will continue.
The Government may be proud of the fact that inflation is now below the rate in Germany. But that has been achieved at a truly awful price: by the one in 10 people within the workforce now out of work (even on the Government's own figures); by those fearing loss of their homes or whose homes are already repossessed; and by the homeless, particularly the young homeless, who face a bleak and uncertain future.
I return to the theme of the debate, so ably introduced by my noble friend. Everyone has a basic requirement—a job, a place in society and the status that gives, and a home—without which it is impossible to lead a satisfying and fulfilling life. It is the job of government to facilitate those very modest ambitions. I await with interest the Minister's response.
6.5 p.m.
Lord Gisborough: My Lords, we hear about the unemployed and homelessness in London. But the situation is not confined to London. I would like to speak by reference to figures I have from my own county of Cleveland, which is probably representative of most other areas.
Many of the young unemployed there are second generation unemployed whose fathers were made redundant years ago, and there has been no pattern of example of going to work. Thus, in that county, 29 per cent. of unemployed people in the 18 to 24 bracket have never had a job. Thirty-seven per cent of those unemployed for six months have no skill.
Even if the young have succumbed to the encouragement to get training, they have found, or at least perceived, that there is no job at the end of it. Little wonder, when there are 35,000 unemployed in the county looking for work. Moreover, they see the Government taking away 180 jobs to go to Bath, a place where there is virtually full employment.
These youngsters without the skill to get a job, without the will to get a skill and without a home, look at the advertisements on television and feel that they can never partake of the goods on offer. They have no job; they feel no worth or self-respect; they have no income and no home. They feel outside the mainstream of society and that it is all the fault of what they call society. They just turn off and form a permanent alienation that can lead to a very dangerous situation, not least to those who have homes and cars. That is probably a substantial cause of the spread of drugs, for that is an occupation that not only enriches them but one in which they can get their own back on society. The drugs then promote further crime against property and person.
In nearby North Yorkshire, 77 per cent. of offenders are out of work. That is not only bad in itself, but those offenders cannot even be punished as they have no money from which to pay their fines. Many of them have a succession of appearances in court that make a nonsense of the unit fine system.
The biggest town in Cleveland is Middlesbrough, which has problems that probably are not unique in

607
the country. Middlesbrough was originally a centre of heavy industry. In recent years, there has been a dramatic reduction in employment in the iron and steel, chemical and shipbuilding industries. The council is leading regeneration in the area and Middlesbrough was one of the successful contestants in the Government's City Challenge programme targeted for East Middlesbrough.
Unemployment is a major social and economic problem, particularly within the challenge area and on council housing estates. Unemployment rates in the challenge area average 22 per cent. The average for the Middlesbrough area is 14 per cent. Within the challenge area, long-term unemployment is more common combined with low educational achievements and low or redundant skill levels; 46 per cent. of the challenge area's economically active residents are semi-skilled or unskilled labourers.
The East Middlesbrough area consists mainly of post-war council estates, where unemployment is just a symptom of wider deprivation. On these estates the majority of tenants are receiving benefit—82 per cent. of council tenants receive housing benefit. Crime levels are high; burglary rates are 30 per cent. higher than in the rest of the borough. Residents experience higher infant and standard mortality rates. There are more overcrowded households and higher levels of single parents.
Although it is principally a council housing area, right-to-buy has introduced numbers of owner occupiers, but mainly in the better estates, concentrating deprivation in the less popular areas. The housing stock is generally in good condition. However, problems of poor environment, vandalism and litter are prevalent.
Employment is the key factor which would have the greatest beneficial impact on the area. The economic profile of the area is changing gradually with the introduction of economic and employment schemes under the City Challenge programme. City Challenge schemes are of great benefit, providing new stimulus to the housing market and helping to regenerate decayed areas. It has given skills activity, involvement and employment and has introduced economically active residents who have been able to become owner occupiers at affordable costs.
Unemployed people are being encouraged to improve their own housing situation by getting involved in self-building schemes. One scheme in the City Challenge area will provide 22 such homes. The participants will receive training in a construction trade as well as broader personal skills instruction. Once built the houses can be rented or occupied on a shared equity basis depending on the individual's employment and income situation.
High unemployment and resulting poverty have a significant impact on private sector housing. For example, the older housing is becoming increasingly unfit and house owners are becoming less capable of funding repairs. About 7,000 older private houses in Middlesbrough are now classed as unfit. That in turn puts increasing pressure on scarce resources available for renovation grants. Not only does it mean increases in terms of numbers of applications but each
608
application costs more. For example, 76 per cent. of grant applicants are on income support or from low incomes and are entitled to 100 per cent. grants. The implications for the council's resources are therefore severe.
Outside the towns and in the country there is still homelessness, brought on by the high prices of second homes. One of the best and most imaginative schemes to help people into houses is the low housing cost schemes. Many of those depend on the generosity of land owners. One example reported recently was at East Harlsey where the land was not just undersold but was actually donated. Similar schemes are run elsewhere, and I think that the Development Commission has played a part along with district councils.
In June it was reported that a new scheme was underway which was recruiting householders to let out their spare room to someone who is homeless. The scheme has been successful and should be emulated elsewhere. It may even help some houseowners who are having difficulties with their mortgage repayments.
But both locally and nationally a lot has been done and is being done to tackle the evil of homelessness. More than 53,000 homes are being built per year and housing associations will be enabled to buy more than 16,000 houses for those in need. The Tenants Initiative will help first time buyers to the tune of £50 million. The drop in interest rates should make a significant difference to mortgage repayments, knocking off some £130 a month for the average house. Nearly £30 million a year is to be made available to help those sleeping rough in central London. One curious fact is that free beds are at this moment provided by the City of Westminster but the rough sleepers prefer not to use them. The housing investment programme and the revenue subsidy will help local authorities to cope with their particular problems, as will the ability in future for local authorities to spend some of their funds from the sale of their assets on new houses and other capital projects. The increase in the number of homes during the past decade has in fact exceeded the growth in the population. But more people now have second homes and more people are single or divorced, doubling the demand.
But the Government cannot be accused of just sitting back from it all. The noble Lord, Lord Molloy; went slightly over the top in his criticism and lost some of his credibility. I wish to point out that £4 billion a year has been given to Action for Cities involving 57 inner cities; 11 City Challenge round one have £82 million per year; 20 for round two have £150 million per year; DoE Urban Group programmes account for £1 billion going to inner cities and derelict land; £255 million of city grant has generated £1 billion of private sector investment in inner cities; and there were 8,700 Urban Programme projects in 1991. The list goes on.
No one can deny that the Government have made every effort to combat both unemployment and homelessness with a great variety of different and successful schemes to tackle both. But the fact remains that both evils are with us and will remain with us for a long time to come. They will continue to demand the closest attention by the Government for years to

609
come, particularly in the north of England. Failure to deal with this demand may jeopardise the very fabric of society as we know it.
6.15 p.m.
Lord Ross of Newport: My Lords, I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, on his choice of subject and on his bravery in coming to the House with the aid of two walking sticks. He fell off a horse and we welcome his speedy recovery. I am sorry that the noble Baroness, Lady Fisher of Rednal, is unable to be present. I understand that she is unwell. Only today the City of Birmingham announced 3,000 redundancies, some of which are in the building maintenance department.
The lack of any real debate on housing during the general election in May was extraordinary. I tried to stir it up in my own party, but that did not happen. We have, however, had some small but welcome initiatives since the election, in particular in the Autumn Statement. Much remains to be done and many of us believe that it could be done despite the financial restraints which curtail current government action. I read a despondent article in Building Material Producers dated 4th December which stated:
"Conditions in the housing market have deteriorated sharply since August and a steep decline in house building activity is anticipated as the year draws to a close. This is reflected in a downward revision in the forecast for starts in 1992 to 125,000 from the 130,000 expected in July. Dramatic redundancy announcements are deterring buyers who are so far failing to take advantage of low mortgage rates. House prices are expected to fall further over the winter months".
That is a depressing story.
I have considerable respect for the housing Minister, Sir George Young, as does the noble Lord, Lord Molloy. He does not lack advice. Having recently vacated the chairmanship of the National Housing Forum, which I occupied for some three years, I have a pretty good idea of the number of professional and charitable bodies on the housing scene. They are deeply involved, well informed and have put forward some extremely well researched proposals. I imagine that many must land on the Minister's desk almost daily.
A major development within the past decade is the welcome consensus which covers the whole field of housing provision. I am sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, is no longer in his place because I wish to refer to some of his comments. No longer is "private" in renting terms a dirty word. During the latest general election a housing spokesman for the Labour Party said that it would be pleased to see the private rented sector rise to about 15 per cent. of the housing total. That attitude represents a change. Indeed, all political parties want to see the role of private landlords substantially enlarged. When I was a member of the other place and some 15 years ago made remarks to that effect I was nearly hounded out of court. We should pay due respect for that welcome state of affairs to the Rowntree Foundation and its director, Richard Best. It has funded so much good work, including the two reports chaired by His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh and other reports through the National Housing Forum.
610
I wish to comment on some of the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky. He spoke of the immobility caused by the control on rent. I agree that there is a certain amount of truth in that. However, when the housing market and the building construction industry was booming in the South, particularly in places such as Docklands, vast numbers of people travelled down to work from the North East and the North West. One had only to be at Euston Station at 5.30 on a Friday night to see the Scouses going home to Liverpool and then coming back on the Sunday night train. I know personally many Geordies who came down from Newcastle to work. They were earning large wages but they came because the work was available and they went home at weekends. Mobility would certainly be helped if there were a bigger private rented sector.
The noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, says that most people can face market rents. I invite him to look at the Evening Standard any night of the week. He will see columns of advertisements for accommodation to let, but they are mostly at rents upwards of £150 a week. Those in receipt of housing benefit cannot possibly face such rents. If they were able to they would not receive housing benefit because that would be ruled out by the rent officer as far too high an amount to pay. However, I agree with him that if we can get rents nearer to a sensible return on capital value—and, after all, house prices have come down remarkably over the past year or two; I understand it is even possible to buy a flat in parts of Wandsworth for about £10,000 at the moment—people could get a return on the rent. It is nearly there. It is a disaster for the people who own those places, and these are the poor devils who are being repossessed in large numbers at the present time.
Anybody who has bought a property auction catalogue or had one sent to him will see there are marvellous bargain auctions every month. It is a tragedy to see all these repossessed homes being sold by the building societies. Some are even sold by housing associations. I cannot understand it. The Network Housing Association has been selling some of its properties. There are a lot of greedy people about who buy these properties cheaply. They do not intend to occupy them. They put them back on the market with a £10,000 upward hike and sit back and wait. It is a nasty situation. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, will read some of those remarks when he gets his Hansard.
The best article that I have seen from any political source in recent times is that by George Walden, MP, a former Conservative Minister. His main expertise is usually in foreign affairs and he is often seen on television. He is a very capable person. He quoted Mr. Tim Melville-Ross, who is the chief executive of the Nationwide Building Society, as calling for the end of mortgage tax relief. I had an argument with Mr Melville-Ross at a meeting at the Building Societies Association with the Council of Mortgage Brokers because he wanted to double it at that time. He seems to have changed his mind, and I welcome that.
Let me quote from what Mr. Walden said:

611
"Over the last few months, housing history has been made. Mr Tim Melville-Ross, chief executive of the Nationwide Building Society and chairman of the Council of Mortgage Lenders, has called for the end of mortgage tax relief. More than that, he said that home ownership in Britain is an 'obsession'. But Mr. Melville-Ross is as right as he is brave. As an MP, I have seen the raw end of our home ownership obsession. What do you say to the distraught mother in a council house, whose 23-year-old son responded to government incitement to 'get on the housing ladder' by buying a one-bedroomed flat for £55,000 which he had to sell for £30,000 two years later, so starting life more than £25,000 in debt?
How do you deal with the middle-aged couple on a smart estate, when they tell you that their little building business has failed, they can't keep up the mortgage on their £90,000 semi-detached (now worth £65,000), and are going with their two children into bed and breakfast?"
In a street I know well in Ryde a house has just been repossessed. Sadly, a man was made unemployed and he had seven children. They are split up and have gone into bed-and-breakfast accommodation. What an appalling situation. They tried to break back into the house the next day—and, God knows, I sympathise with them—but they were turfed out.
At the end of this article Mr. Walden says:
"Telling 68 per cent. of the people they are worth less than they suppose is not popular politics. But the government could at least change the emphasis of its housing rhetoric to make clear that the overriding national need now is to make private renting a real option".
I support that.
"At present, the government can't win. Like everyone else, it knows that MIRAS is costly madness"—
I think it is £6 billion plus—
"but can't say so. It has to pretend to be in charge, but the root causes of our housing problems are either out of its hands —such as our phenomenal increase in family break-ups—or untouchable, such as MIRAS.
Conservatives have got their philosophical knickers in a twist on housing. Preaching home ownership is incompatible with free choice. MIRAS is incompatible with a healthy aversion to indiscriminate subsidy. A 'home-owning democracy' is a nannying slogan, and a 'property-owning democracy' never meant houses in the first place, but shares or whatever people chose to own—houses included.
Modern Conservatives shouldn't be pandering to fetishes, but telling people the truth".
I share Mr. Walden's belief that we have to get to grips with MIRAS and put much of the £6 billion that it currently costs the state to better effect. I am told by my deputy leader that it is nearer £8 billion. It is a large sum of money whatever it is.
Obviously the timing of such a move must be carefully considered and some measure of housing cost relief put in its place. Otherwise we put in jeopardy the low income owners who desperately depend on it. I do not see why it should go to all those people on £100,000 plus. They are the sort of people I would tackle first. Various suggestions as to how this could be done have already been circulated widely and will be well known to Her Majesty's Government.
Have they the courage to act? The suggestion was in the second report of His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh. This is the time to act, in the early stages of the Government's term of office. This is the time to get to grips with it. People will see the sense of it in a few years' time. At least the suggestion ought to be openly discussed and not used as a party political football. If we take the case of the repossessed couple referred to in Mr Walden's article, which could be
612
repeated many thousands of times, what nonsense it is that they cannot be helped before having to vacate their home.
The experimental mortgage to rent scheme which was talked about a year ago seems to have died a death. Even the housing associations currently seeking to acquire some 20,000 low-cost homes under the Government's £630 million scheme, which I welcome, have been told that they must acquire only vacant properties. Although I saw in the Observer on Sunday that something like one in 10 are claimed to be repossessed homes, certainly in Wales—I have to talk from Welsh experience as I sit on a Welsh housing association; incidentally we are buying 27 properties—we are told that they must not be properties with people in them which are about to be repossessed. The properties must be empty first. That is a great shame because we ought to be able to help them before they are evicted.
Putting families into bed-and-breakfast accommodation is the most soul-destroying and expensive way to house the homeless. Surely some of the money could have been used to acquire such properties before they were vacated. Once families qualify for housing benefit the chance of getting them back into low paid work recedes, and so more unemployment results. There is certainly a case for looking at the restructuring of housing benefit itself. Moreover, housing associations should be trying to provide accommodation for a whole cross-section of the community; otherwise they fall into exactly the same trap as the large local authority housing estates. I recently rejoined a management committee of a housing association in a rural area, and we estimate that at least 70 per cent. of our tenants are on housing benefit.
I hope the Minister will deal with this. There is a move that has been going on for the last few months in Wales—and I gather this is now happening in England—to restrict the number of housing associations carrying out actual developments. It is claimed that, with standardised designs and larger contracts, even if split between sites, the money will go further. That has rightly been condemned by the federation in Wales, and I hope it will be condemned by the National Federation of Housing Associations in England.
Before this movement takes off, I beg Ministers to look back at the mistakes of the 1960s when such ideas were again rife. The cost of putting right errors of design then has been phenomenal. One has only to go to Andover. It cost millions to re-roof the houses in Andover that were all built with flat roofs. Moreover, statistics from Rowntree also show that on average smaller housing associations build more cheaply. If we really want to put more of the smaller local builders, architects and surveyors—who are apparently surviving on work coming from housing associations—out of work, this is a good way of doing it —giving it all to the Laing's and Wimpey's of this world. But it is not the right way to go about this, and I hope the practice will die a quick death. I hope to get an undertaking from the Minister that this will be looked at.

613
Who, worth his salt, giving his time freely and willingly—and one gives a lot of time and reads a lot of paper—will want to serve on a housing association that deals solely with management and has little or no say on the construction side? We are there because we want to see houses built for the children in the area in which we live. Will housing associations in time be obliged, as is proposed for local authorities, to go out, if they are purely managers, to compulsory competitive tendering on management? The mind boggles at the way we might be dragged along in due course. We do not get paid, and we willingly spend much time and effort on the job, but our enthusiasm will be killed stone dead if that is the way we are to proceed.
But the Government may feel that this is the way they want to go. They have cut the Housing Corporation cash allocations for 1993–94 and 1994–95 by a total of £350 million, while claiming that the target of 50,000 houses can still be met—a target which is only half what it should be, because by common consent in the social market building sector we should be building over 100,000 a year. Even the Audit Commission said 70,000.
I am running out of time, but I should like to suggest that there are alternatives to bed-and-breakfast. Why on earth do we not use prefabricated units? Why on earth do we not use decent mobile homes on decently serviced sites, giving people a bit of privacy and somewhere for the kids to play? It would not cost the earth. I cannot understand why this is not being done. Actually, it has happened a little bit in Southwark and one or two other places. Also, what about all these empty offices all round London? I suggest to the Minister that he takes the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors latest journal as bedtime reading tonight. He will see that it is perfectly feasible to convert offices into living accommodation. If we do not do that we shall have thousands of offices —I say to him quite seriously—empty in the City and elsewhere.
Case studies show that conversions to residential units are perfectly feasible, and surely desirable. Seventy-two per cent. of sites in Islington are plainly suitable for residential use and only 17 per cent. for commercial use. We could at a stroke bring people back into our city centres, put the many empty office blocks to good use and reduce some of the traffic problems that now exist. "Planning" is a dirty word for the Government, but let us bring it back. Let us look at the transport problems. Do not let us shut down London's best hospitals and then bring everybody back into town. That is the way we ought to be going, and saving some of our countryside.
In July of this year the theme for National Housing Week, promoted by the NHF, was "Homes for our Children". We commissioned a report from Jean Conway, Jane Dark and Christine Holman of the Sheffield City Polytechnic. It was said that this was an excellent piece of research and was indeed commended by the Minister himself. I should like to quote from its
614
conclusion, and then I promise to sit down. The heading is "What happens now?". Jean Conway says this:
"If there is no serious response to the housing needs of young people a number of consequences can be predicted. The short term emergency provision, the DoE's Rough Sleepers Initiative, is already full with nowhere for people to move on to. In the medium term those who are young and inadequately housed today will be in their 20s, establishing families and still inadequately housed in five or so years time: they will be the priority homeless of tomorrow and a more costly housing need to meet.
Demographic trends show a decline in the proportion of the population of working age soon after the beginning of the next century. Yet young people without a decent home find it very difficult to obtain training and skills, get a job and maintain it. If they are not housed, they cannot be the workforce which will be needed to keep the economy going".
Perhaps that is an argument for a development of the "Foyer" type which occurred in France, where hostels provided for young people also include training and leisure facilities, skills for living and counselling on employment. It is true that one such centre opened in Nottingham in March and others are under construction in Southwark and the North West. All the details, plus many of the excellent suggestions, are included in the publication Homes for Our Children. I hope that the Minister will take time to read it: I can lend him my copy.
6.33 p.m.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, said in his opening speech on this very welcome debate—and may I say, like the noble Lord Lord Ross, we are delighted to see him back here after his accident—the two things that matter most to people and that make possible decent and secure family life are a job and a home. The truth is that if you are unemployed in this country you are now increasingly likely to be homeless and if you are homeless in this country you are almost certain to be unemployed.
The Government's industrial policies have seen our manufacturing industry undermined. Unemployment has risen to nearly four million. New socially rented housing is down to a quarter of the starts of the late 1970s, and in consequence more and more marginal families are pushed into an owner occupation which they can barely afford in good times and which is impossible for them to maintain when unemployed.
Why? Because over the last decade we have not had a housing policy from this Government but a tenures policy: a switch from one tenure to another, from socially rented to owner occupation. Money, which could and should have been invested in new homes, has instead been spent on financing the debt with which to add not new homes to the stock but to change tenures within the stock. At the same time, the success of that policy, and in good times we would support it, has been subverted by the Government's own economic and industrial policies of mass unemployment. This has meant that families could not afford their homes when they had bought them. So, as the noble Lord, Lord Gisborough, described so eloquently and in such accurate detail, we face a

615
landscape of mothballed factories, repossessed homes and crumbling stock while the unemployed become homeless and the homeless remain unemployed.
If you are unemployed you are increasingly likely to be homeless. Why? If you are unemployed your home is both secure and affordable only if you are in socially rented housing with full housing benefit. But if you are a private tenant your problems are very real because landlords of new tenants demand a month's rent deposit in advance and often a month's rent as well while benefit is paid fortnightly in arrears. If you are unemployed in any case many landlords will not take you. If they do, housing benefit often does not cover the full rent. As the Rowntree Foundation has shown, a third of tenants' claims for housing benefit were cut, usually on the ground that in 25 per cent. of all cases the rent charged was above the fair market rent. On average, therefore, the tenants had to find the extra £20 themselves out of income support already top-sliced for fuel, water and debts.
The noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky notwithstanding, it is the tenant who pays and not the landlord who subsidises. As the tenants seldom can do so, they are usually evicted for arrears and put on the streets, regarded as intentionally homeless, and not rehoused. Not only private tenants but owner occupiers are hard pressed. Over one million people at the moment cannot afford to move because their homes are worth less than they paid for them. Two-thirds of employers, as the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, rightly said, are complaining about rigidities in the labour market, but they are rigidities following the rigidities of a housing market dominated by owner occupation. After all, there are nearly twice as many vacancies in the private sector as there are in the local authority sector, but because families cannot sell they cannot move.
More alarmingly still, nearly a million families have heavy arrears on their mortgages, and in the last 12 months 80,000 families suffered repossession. As many of them were held to be intentionally homeless only 20,000 of those 80,000 families were able to seek and obtain decent affordable housing from the local authority. That is 200 families a day repossessed: twice the figure of two years ago. If such families become unemployed and they are owner occupiers on income support, half the mortgage interest payment is paid for the first 16 weeks. As a result, debts mount, from which many never recover, arising from the other 50 per cent.
Even so, they are the lucky ones compared with those families where perhaps a husband loses a full-time job and a wife remains in a modest part-time job—as a nurse or a shop assistant—where she is on family credit. As a result the family receives no help with mortgage payments at all. If that family is sensible, she too will stop work. She too will become unemployed in order to keep her home. That is perverse social policy.
Every government initiative so far to aid the situation has been an utter failure, as the Minister will confess if he is honest. I am sure that he will be. The housing associations' leased management scheme on behalf of building societies, which the Chancellor in another place proudly announced would acquire over
616
40,000 repossessed homes for families, in a year has helped just 120. Forty thousand was the bid and 120 is the result. The new vaunted scheme in the Autumn Statement, by which housing associations are going to get £580 million to buy 16,000 repossessed properties, will do no such thing, the noble Lord, Lord Gisborough, notwithstanding. It is already clear that they are going to buy new build and not repossessed homes. In any case it is not new money but money mainly brought forward from the next two years of housing association expenditure, and therefore at the expense of their own rents and building programme.
We have not had a housing policy but a tenure policy. We have seen the sale of 1.6 million council houses (which otherwise we would support) that has reduced stocks to let by pushing marginal families into owner occupation. Local authorities in many places now have to buy back those same homes from former council tenants who are too poor to pay for them and maintain them. We have seen the voluntary transfer of stock (71,000 houses) to housing associations and shared equity schemes. Of all the absurdities, we now see a rent-to-mortgages scheme that will push marginal families still further into the ranks of owner occupation that too few can afford at precisely the time when the opposite is needed—a mortgages-to-rent scheme to keep people afloat in their own homes and eligible for housing benefit.
One of the many items of research carried out by the Rowntree Trust has shown that less than 30 per cent. of young couples who are both working can afford to buy a new modest home. Barely 45 per cent. can afford to buy a modest Victorian terraced house. To ask them to do so in good times is a strain; to ask them to do so when one or both partners is unemployed is impossible. We would support the Government's initiatives to change tenure if they added to housing choice and to the housing stock. Instead, they have done neither and we see the results around us. As my noble friend Lady Turner said, only socially rented housing offers decent quality, affordable housing with rents covered in full by housing benefit. Only socially rented housing breaks the link between low income and what is often literally lousy housing that in the past has done so much to produce family poverty, ill health, illiteracy and deprivation. What the unemployed need, and increasingly cannot gain access to, is social housing. Notwithstanding what the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, said—and I believe he was wrong—the loss of private renting has not been because of the emergence of council housing; the loss has been to owner occupation. We accept that tax subsidies have artificially weighted owner occupation at the expense of both private and social renting alike.
In the early eighties social housing represented some 40 per cent. of new starts. It now accounts for only 23,000 of a much lower total of 163,000 properties. We have seen social housing go down to a quarter of what it was in the early eighties. I take my own authority of Norwich. In the 1970s as housing chairman I chaired a committee concerned with the building of 700 to 1,000 council houses per year. They were good quality semi-detached houses cherished by

617
their tenants. The rent arrears were very low. We never saw any but the proverbial tramp sleeping rough. Never during the 11 years that I was housing chair did we put families into bed and breakfast accommodation for more than a weekend. Those houses have been sold off and the rungs of the ladder are no longer available to the next generation. In consequence, Norwich has £40 million of capital receipts, none of which it can touch. That is idle, wasted money. At the same time, people are sleeping rough in cars, under bridges along the River Wensom and trying to sleep in the shadow of the cathedral spire—something that people have not done since the days of the blitz. Walk around Norwich at night—and I invite the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, to do so—and you will stumble across bundles of black sacks and newspapers left out for the refuse collectors. Dimly in the dark one will see that there are fellow human beings there.
Homelessness has soared; it has tripled since 1978. As Shelter reminds us, nearly one million people applied to local authorities as homeless in 1991. Nearly half of that number, despite what the noble Lord said at Question Time today, are homeless because their present living conditions with families or friends have broken down. They have been living in spare bedrooms and have not been able to wait out their time on ever-lengthening waiting lists. Often husbands and wives sleep with their respective families. Twelve per cent. of those families are homeless because of mortgage arrears; 15 per cent. are homeless because private tenants have lost security of tenure, notwithstanding what the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky said. In other words, three-quarters of those families owe their homelessness directly or indirectly to government housing policies.
In 1979 in the city of Norwich only one family in 10 was housed by the local authority on grounds of homelessness; the figure is now over one in two. Approximately 150,000 families, or some 500,000 adults and children, are officially treated as homeless by local authorities. As many again, though homeless, are not deemed to be of sufficient priority and have joined others in squats, have slept on floors or have remained with violent partners and at risk. If it is the case that once unemployed one is increasingly likely to be homeless, whether in the private rented sector or in owner occupation, so is the reverse true: if one is homeless one is almost certain to be unemployed.
During the general election I was working in Great Yarmouth. I was shown a corner house that had been empty since the previous August and was deteriorating badly. It had been owned by a couple. The husband whose wife had become pregnant was a carpenter and had lost the opportunity for overtime. Their income had been more than halved. As a result he could not keep up his payments and was repossessed. After bed and breakfast accommodation, he was rehoused. The only property that a good local authority could find was a cottage about 10 miles out in the countryside. He could no longer afford to run his car. He lost his home and as a result lost his job as a carpenter. What he swapped for both of them were debts. That was a story manufactured by government.
618
If people are unemployed they are likely to be homeless; if they are homeless they are almost certain to be unemployed. Eighty per cent. of the heads of homeless families are unemployed, and most of the homeless are families. Those families go largely into bed and breakfast accommodation; that is, shabby hotels and hostels, where on average they stay for nearly a year. Two-thirds of those families live in overcrowded conditions. On average 21 people share one cooker. The wiring, cooking and hygiene arrangements are downright dangerous.
What of the young single people for whom local authorities can and do take no responsibility? Shelter's night line received 23,000 calls from people, nearly half of whom were sleeping rough and 40 per cent. of whom were under 25. Many have no homes to go to. Only about 1 per cent. of young people are in local residential care. These people form one-third of all the young homeless on our streets.
The Government may talk of its London initiative but the £33 million this year is a cut in cash terms on the £38 million last year. The problem grows. As a result, youngsters sleep rough and risk drugs, prostitution and AIDS. They are our children.
The homeless need homes. As the noble Lord, Lord Ross, and others said, we need something like 100,000 new homes for social renting each and every year. That has been said by the Audit Commission, the National Audit Office, the Tory-led ADC, the Institute of Housing, the National Housing Forum, the Housing Corporation and all academic research. Where is that housing to come from? Nationwide £6.5 billion is tied up in capital receipts, of which £5 billion cannot be spent. The Government will point to the release of capital receipts for the next 13 months. The AMA estimate that it will be £300 million this year and £550 million next year, making £850 million in all—far from the £1.75 billion that the noble Lord was erroneously, in my view, quoting today during Question Time. Since £400 million of that £850 million will be taken away from credit approvals and Exchequer subsidy for improvement grants will fall from 75 per cent. to 60 per cent., as the noble Lord, Lord Gisborough, rightly reminded us, it means that government will be allowing local authorities to spend more of their own money this year to permit the Treasury to spend less.
We are certainly not seeing much new money. We are not even seeing much additional money. We are seeing the money of local authorities substituted for Exchequer subsidy. In the process local authority total capital spend will be restored to where it was two years ago. That is all that the much vaunted Autumn Statement initiative represents. So much for new initiatives. It means therefore that while my local authority still has £40 million of capital receipts tied up, it will probably only acquire and be able to spend £4 million under the Government's Autumn Statement and much vaunted new initiative. A welcome release, perhaps, but nowhere near touching the size and scale of the problem.
We know what needs to be done. We know that we need to reform housing benefit and give tenants in the private rented sector additional security. We know

619
that we need to help owner occupiers who are unemployed or on low incomes to stay in their own homes either by converting the mortgages to rent to enable them to enjoy housing benefit, or by allowing those on family credit to receive a mortgage benefit so that they are not penalised perversely if they seek low paid work. Above all, we must build 100,000 new homes a year to rent.
The Government's figures, as my noble friend Lord Molloy reminded us, show that it costs twice as much to keep families in bed and breakfast accommodation —£14,000 a year—as it does to build them a new home, around £7,000 a year. As the National Audit Office said in 1990,
"Paying bed and breakfast charges in the long term, rather than as a temporary expedient, is more expensive than building new council accommodation".
The benefits are that those newly housed may then become the newly employed. As my noble friend Lady Turner reminded us, new building feeds speedily and directly into employment; it releases demand without sucking in new imports and worsening the balance of trade. Every £20,000 spent on construction creates a job; every new house built creates a job on site, a job in the construction supply side offsite and probably half a job in retailing-related manufacture. Thereby those newly employed can acquire housing of their own. Build a rented house and in the process one earns enough pay to buy a home of one's own. Yet instead, in 1990 we saw 5,000 building firms become insolvent; in 1991 the figure was 7,000. There were 600 jobs lost every working day in the construction industry over the past three years—400,000 in total. Half of the cost of new building would immediately be recouped through the saving on benefit payments. In Norwich around one-fifth of the men out of work come from the construction industry; half would be back in work if we were able to release just half of our capital receipts.
I invite the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, to take a second walk around Norwich—a city with which I know he is familiar—and he will see thistles in the fields bought a decade ago for housing; he will see homeless families in bed and breakfast accommodation; he will see unemployed building workers at risk themselves of becoming homeless, and he will see £40 million of untouched, unusable capital receipts idling away—wasted money, wasted lives. I wonder what kind of economic madness afflicts us all, what blinds us to the misery of homelessness that we have constructed when instead we could have constructed homes.
6.53 p.m.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I too join other noble Lords who have spoken in the debate in welcoming back the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, after his recent illness. He is in fine voice and has quite rightly drawn attention by his Motion to the link between housing and wider economic issues. As with so many other issues, achieving our aspirations for housing depends on what we can afford, not just as individuals but as a nation.
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, and the noble Lord, Lord Ross of Newport, for their accolade to my
620
right honourable friend the Minister for Housing, Sir George Young. I understand the respect in which he is held in housing circles.
Of course, government cannot create jobs. It is industry and commerce that create employment by producing the goods and services that customers want. Government's role is to establish an enterprise economy that will generate sustained economic growth and jobs.
We are committed to low inflation and sound public finances as a sound basis for growth. British business is now well placed to take advantage of the lowest interest rates in the European Community and a highly competitive exchange rate. The benefits of that, and the measures to boost investment and confidence announced in the Autumn Statement, should be felt, and will be felt, in renewed growth, wealth creation and providing new jobs. But where homeowners have lost their jobs, income support ensures that they have sufficient funds to meet their reasonable housing commitments. The interest payments on a mortgage are included in the calculation of a claimant's weekly needs. For those who rent their home, housing benefit will help an estimated 4.5 million people meet their rent liabilities in 1992–93.
With Christmas approaching we have seen a rash of news stories lately about the problems of homelessness; and it is, of course, right that at this time of the year in particular we should recognise the difficulties faced not only by those sleeping rough in the streets of the capital and elsewhere but by those who are living in some of the unsatisfactory kinds of temporary accommodation. But this is not just a seasonal issue, as some people seem to think. This is a year-round problem, which demands year-round concerted action. If housing were considered more newsworthy throughout the year, perhaps we would have more reasoned coverage of how the problems are being tackled: by central Government, by local authorities, by the Housing Corporation and the housing associations, and by charitable and Church groups—exactly the kind of bodies mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Molloy.
Real progress has been made and following the Autumn Statement of my right honourable friend the Chancellor, we are well placed to go on making progress over the coming years. The measures we have taken to help the housing market and the construction industry will not only give a boost to confidence but will be of particular value to those who need help with their housing.
First, the Chancellor announced an additional £580 million for the Housing Corporation in 1992–93 to help housing associations purchase new, empty or repossessed homes. We estimate that that will mean 16,000 new units of social housing stock. The target we have set of 153,000 new units of social housing over the three years from April 1992 should be comfortably exceeded; in fact, we now expect 170,000 homes to be made available over that period.
An excellent start has been made already with over 1,200 approvals given for housing associations to buy some £62 million worth of property by 10th

621
December. The purpose of the package is to stimulate the housing market and to provide homes this year. Prompt action is vital if both those aims are to be achieved. We are satisfied that the Housing Corporation is well on course to meet our target that all transactions should be approved by the end of March. A further £20 million is being made available through the corporation to enable housing association tenants to buy homes in the private sector, and £30 million through local authorities to enable council tenants to do the same. The estimated 3,500 homes in the social sector which that frees up will then be ready for use by those in housing need, including homeless families.
Secondly, the relaxation in the rules on local authority capital receipts will give authorities an estimated £1.75 billion of extra spending power. We expect that they will devote around £1 billion of that towards the renovation of run-down council estates. Not only will that mean valuable improvements in living conditions for the tenants of those homes, but it will also provide employment in construction and building maintenance.
The capital partnership which we have set in place aims to encourage local authorities to direct their new spending power towards projects which will be of lasting benefit to their local communities. Government grant or credit approvals of £200 million will be available; and the Housing Corporation will seek to improve the output it can achieve from the £400 million it has available for new schemes next year by taking advantage of capital partnership opportunities. In addition, we have set up a £30 million Housing Partnership Fund to provide incentives to those authorities which are less able to raise receipts, but which nevertheless have worthwhile projects.
I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, and I can disagree about the exact numbers, but the principle of allowing local authorities to spend 100 per cent. of their receipts is one for which she has fought for a considerable amount of time. Instead of harking back to the money that was raised in the past, the noble Baroness and her local authority should look forward to the assets which they have in their local authority area and see how they can be put to sweat more for the needs of the local people.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for giving way. I entirely endorse every word of the final two sentences. In the light and spirit of those remarks, can we hope that the same attitude will be taken to the existing receipts which are held unused, idle and wasted by local authorities and not just as regards the receipts which are about to come to local government?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the noble Baroness will know that I am not in a position to give her any comfort about the existing receipts. The announcement that we made is one clearly for future receipts.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, why not?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I am quite happy to tell the noble Baroness why not. It is because this is a
622
policy which has been in existence for many years. We believe that local authorities with the greatest amount of receipts are not necessarily the ones which need most money. Furthermore, we have public expenditure considerations to take into account. I am not at all convinced that it has been Labour Party policy, particularly at the last election, to release all past receipts to be used by local authorities. I am sure that this is an area which we shall come to again. The point is that over the next 13 months there is a magnificent opportunity for local authorities to demonstrate that they can do what they have always said they can do; namely, to spend money wisely and responsibly and to look after the needs of local people.
I have so far mentioned two points of action. Perhaps I may now move to a third. The Chancellor announced the continuation of the Rough Sleepers Initiative, with additional provision of some £86 million over the next three years. The programme has visibly reduced the number of people sleeping rough in central London. The latest count of people sleeping rough in central London, carried out by voluntary organisations last month, found 420 people sleeping rough, which is down on the 1,000 plus estimated before the initiative began. As I said at Question Time earlier today, what is particularly encouraging is that of the 420 people identified, only 20 or so were aged 18 or under, which would seem to indicate that young people in particular are benefiting from this initiative.
The noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, suggested that we had cut available resources. It is not a cut. It represents an additional £60 million over the resources earmarked for the Rough Sleepers Initiative before the Autumn Statement. At a national level, the Government give grants under Section 73 of the Housing Act 1985 to voluntary organisations concerned with the single homeless. This year resources of £6.1 million are going to support 150 projects across the country which are of direct help to single people who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless. Of those projects 81 are aimed specifically at young people, which we hope this year will secure supported or independent accommodation for around 8,700 young people; provide resettlement advice and training to around 21,000 young people, as well as aftercare and support to around 3,200 clients once they have secured more permanent accommodation. It should be noted that resources for Section 73 grants have been increased to £6.45 million next year; and, in total, over £20 million will be available for Section 73 grants over the course of the next three years.
As far as the benefit position of young people is concerned, the Government take the view that the majority of people aged under 25 are non-householders and that their average earning power is lower than that of older people. Benefit rates reflect that. Sixteen to 17 year-olds already have the positive options of continuing in full-time education, getting a job or taking up the guarantee of quality training through youth training. We believe that replacing income support for 16 and 17 year-olds with guaranteed YT places is an important step in steering these youngsters away from early dependency on benefit.
Baroness Turner of Camden: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving way. Is he telling the House that the Government are able to keep their guarantee to young people so that there are training places for everyone who wants one? Is that really the situation?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, yes. We have always made it clear that the guarantee is in place and it is exactly that. It is a guarantee of training for all those who require it in the age group. This is a well-trodden path. I have had many discussions with the noble Baroness, Lady Turner, on this subject. The point is that there are occasional gaps between people seeking a job and coming onto a YT place. But the principle of what I have said is one that should be supported from all parts of the House. We do not want to create a dependency culture. We want to provide good quality youth training. That is what we have done over the course of the past years and that is what we shall continue to do.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for giving way. He has been generous. In the light of and in the spirit of his remarks, and the fact that he has recognised in his reply to my noble friend Lady Turner, that there are occasionally "unfortunate" gaps between seeking and obtaining a YTS place, will the Minister therefore undertake to restore benefits in that place so that people—we estimate between 80,000 to 100,000 across the country—are not left destitute?
Lord Strathclyde: No, my Lords, that is not necessary. As I said in my initial comments, we are not seeking to create a dependency culture for people in this age group. There are other opportunities: getting a fulltime job themselves, staying in fulltime education, or taking the choice of a YT job. That is what is appropriate for people in that age group and that is what works. Youth training remains central to the Government's commitment to training. The employment department is ensuring that no TEC or LEC in Scotland is being prevented from meeting the guarantee through lack of funds.
I now turn to the title of this evening's debate. I feel that there is a misleading connection between unemployment and homelessness, as my noble friend Lord Skidelsky pointed out. For the vast majority of those who face the personal tragedy of unemployment, one does not necessarily lead to the other. Housing benefit is available for tenants and income support is available for owner occupiers to enable them to stay in their homes until they can find another job. The noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, made a valiant attempt at making the link. In her argument she created that link; but I do not believe that it can be generally applied that if you become unemployed you naturally become homeless or that, necessarily, if you are without a home that you are unable to find a job.
Baroness Seear: My Lords, I apologise for interrupting the noble Lord. Is he not aware that in order to meet the opportunities in the labour market it is often very necessary to leave your home and go to another part of the country? That is when difficulties
624
arise. You cannot get into a council house and you cannot buy. What are you to do? When I was an area board chairman of the MSC we were constantly up against that problem. We had jobs in our area and there were people in the north-west of England who would have liked to have taken them, but there was no accommodation that they could afford either to buy or rent. Surely there is a connection with unemployment.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I believe that the noble Baroness is right to raise this problem of housing and mobility. We as a Government are committed to helping people in the social sector who need to move for employment reasons. We currently provide 100 per cent. funding for the housing mobility agency homes to run a number of schemes, including the national mobility scheme and home swaps, as it is called, to help council and housing association tenants to move to the area of their choice for employment or social reasons. Perhaps this is an area which we need to investigate further in order to provide the opportunities. With the figure which my noble friend Lord Skidelsky used of a 2 per cent. reduction in unemployment, and if we can marry up job opportunities with people who need the jobs, that is a substantial advantage and something that we should aim to be doing.
Many noble Lords have drawn attention to the problems of the relatively small group of young unemployed people who have no home to hang onto—the rough sleepers on whom we are targeting help. That includes help not only in finding permanent accommodation, but also in finding appropriate training and jobs through, for example, job clubs and the Foyer initiative.
The aim of our housing policy is to ensure that a decent home is within reach of every family. Most people prefer owner-occupation, but there are many who either do not choose or who cannot afford that option. It is vitally important that we target public subsidies effectively on those families and individuals who are in greatest need and that we ensure that the resources that we are able to spend on housing are used as effectively as possible.
Lord Ross of Newport: My Lords, the Minister has been kind enough to give way several times, but perhaps I may raise just one more point. He said that housing benefit, or other forms of benefit, is available to those who need it, but there is a problem when the male earner loses his job if his wife is still in a low-paid job. In that case, they do not qualify for housing benefit. That is the problem, is it not? Those are the people whose homes are now being repossessed. They do not qualify for help because the wife is in work, albeit low paid work.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, in that case the noble Lord will be glad to hear that, through the reduction in interest rates and the negotiations between my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the lenders and the banks, fewer and fewer homes are being repossessed. Naturally, we should like that to continue.

625
The noble Lord, Lord Molloy, and other noble Lords referred to the economic lunacy of 400,000 building workers being unemployed when thousands of people are not housed. Perhaps I may reiterate the measures that we took in the Autumn Statement. There will be £1.75 billion extra spending on capital projects; cash plans for road programmes are being maintained; capital spending on health is at an all-time high, and the Jubilee Line extension is to go ahead. This year, of all years, was a tight year for public expenditure, but the Government have done their utmost to provide the construction industry with a boost. The £750 million of additional money to boost the United Kingdom housing market by purchasing new, empty and repossessed homes will have a significant effect on confidence while providing an additional 20,000 units of social housing.
In a most interesting speech, my noble friend Lord Gisborough was right to draw attention to the importance of spending on inner-city improvements to tackle both housing and employment issues. I am grateful to him for pointing out so many of the initiatives that are taking place.
The noble Lords, Lord Molloy and Lord Ross of Newport, mentioned the huge expense of bed-and-breakfast accommodation. As I pointed out earlier at Question Time, in the 12 months up to 30th September the use of bed-and-breakfast facilities as temporary accommodation fell by 23 per cent. That is a considerable achievement. All sides of the House must agree that bed-and-breakfast accommodation is not always the most appropriate place for homeless people.
We recognise the difficulty, to which the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, referred, that some homeless people face in raising a deposit to gain access to private rented accommodation. I hope that she will be encouraged to hear that we are funding a pilot scheme in London, run by the Notting Hill Housing Trust, to provide rent deposits for homeless people. In due course, we shall evaluate the success of that scheme to see whether it should be more generally extended.
There is clearly a great deal more to be done in housing the homeless and in providing more opportunities for people to find their own homes, whether in the private rented sector, through housing associations or local authorities, or through owner-occupation. The picture for the future is by no means a bleak one. We are providing extra finance for new homes. That will help to increase opportunities for employment. During the 1980s we built an enormous number of houses. We also provided unparalleled opportunities for increasing employment. I feel sure that what we did in the 1980s we can do again in the 1990s.
7.15 p.m.
Lord Molloy: My Lords, I was a little perturbed by the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, who seemed to suggest that people who might be placed in council housing could be sufficiently well off to buy a house of their own and that their income should be looked into.
626
One of the most detestable Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom's history involved the means test. I feel sure that the Government will not return to that.
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Ross of Newport, for his kind remarks and other noble Lords for their personal remarks about me. I am grateful also for the magnificent support that I received from my noble friends on the Front Bench. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion for Papers.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

Bank of England: Long-Term Price Stability
7.16 p.m.
Lord Ezra Lord Ezra rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they consider that additional responsibility should be given to the Bank of England to assist in securing long-term price stability.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I start by thanking those noble Lords who have stayed until this late hour to debate this Unstarred Question. They are a small but highly qualified group.
I have put down this Question for debate because of the continuing importance of the issue of inflation and the need to reassess the long-term approach to it, particularly following sterling's withdrawal from the exchange rate mechanism. Membership of the ERM introduced for the first time an institutional element into the policy for dealing with inflation. Now that that has gone, perhaps for some time, it seems to me to be desirable to consider what alternative institutional means can be developed.
Before doing so, however, I think it would be helpful to put Britain's recent experiences with inflation into historical perspective. The Governor of the Bank of England referred to this in his important speech to the London School of Economics on 11th November. He showed that persistent inflation is a relatively modern phenomenon. From the mid-13th century until the start of the 20th century the value of the currency had been relatively stable, with the exception of a period of inflation in Tudor times and at the end of the 18th century, at the time of the Napoleonic wars. However, even in those two cases, the increase in inflation had been relatively slight compared with what has occurred in the present century. An analysis of inflationary trends in this century shows that the period of greatest price instability was concentrated in the 1970s and the 1980s. In the 1970s, price inflation reached a peak of 24 per cent. in 1975. It was subsequently brought back to 8 per cent. in 1978 by actions taken by the Labour Government on wages and on public spending. The peak of inflation in the subsequent decade was reached in 1980, largely as a result of the increase in VAT. By 1986 inflation fell to 4 per cent. but rose again to almost 11 per cent. in 1990. This was followed, as we know, by severe monetary tightening with interest rates going up to 15 per cent. Since then, and helped by entry into the ERM in October 1990, inflation has been brought down to the most recently announced figure of 3 per cent.
So, the experience of the past 20 years, during which inflationary pressures have been the most intense in our recorded history, has shown that governments have tended to act after high inflationary levels were reached and then brought the level down again. While this may have appeared to indicate some success of government policies, it has also had the effect of substantially destabilising the economy and accentuating the succession of booms and recessions to which we have become more prone in Britain than in other Western countries. To avoid this going on into the future, it seems essential that some longer-term system for securing price stability should be devised.
In this connection, it is instructive to consider what has been going on in other Western countries. Let me start with Europe and then move to some countries outside Europe. The role of the German Bundesbank is well known. It has the primary responsibility by law to safeguard the currency by regulating the supply of money and credit in the economy. Its main weapon for doing so is the level of interest rates. It is perhaps less well known that a number of other European central banks also have a major responsibility for ensuring price stability in their respective countries. For example, the independence of the Banca d'Italia has significantly increased over the past decade. It now has statutory authority to set the official rates on discounts and advances, and a Bill currently before the Italian Parliament would eliminate its remaining links with the Treasury. In the Netherlands price stability is the primary policy objective of the central hank. It has considerable operational autonomy, although in the last resort responsibility lies with the Finance Minister. He may give directions to the bank but so far has not done so. In Austria the central bank has the formal responsibility of maintaining both the internal and the external value of the currency. This responsibility was introduced with the National Bank Act 1955. In Switzerland the National Bank has the responsibility for monetary policy including the setting of interest rates. In France the central bank has formal responsibility for the regulation of credit and operational monetary policy, although it, too, like some other countries, is subject to directions from the Ministry of Finance.
Moving outside Europe the responsibility of the Federal Reserve of the United States is as well known as the role of the Bundesbank. But the role of the Bank of Canada is perhaps less well known. It has the responsibility for carrying out policy to achieve inflation targets agreed with the Minister of Finance. In New Zealand the Reserve Bank was given independence in 1989 in the formulation and implementation of monetary policy. Inflation targets are set by agreement between the Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Reserve Bank and currently are set at between 0 and 2 per cent. by 1993. The Reserve Bank is accountable for its performance to Parliament and publishes a six-monthly monetary policy statement. The Finance Minister has the right to sack the Governor for non-performance. So far he has performed.
It seems to me that, in the light of this review of
628
what has been happening in a number of leading Western countries, the time has come to re-examine the role of the Bank of England in helping to achieve price stability. Some steps have, indeed, already been taken in this direction. In the Mansion House speeches of the Chancellor and the Governor delivered on 29th October 1992 explicit targets for inflation were set with the objective of achieving less than 2 per cent. over the longer term, and a move was taken towards more institutional and open procedures for achieving this objective. Regular monthly meetings are to be held between the Chancellor and the Governor starting this month, and the monthly report which would be considered at that meeting would be published. The first such report has already been issued. Whenever a change of interest rates takes place the authorities would set out an account of the reasoning behind it. This was done on the occasion of the last two changes in interest rates. Furthermore, the Bank would produce a regular quarterly report on inflation which would analyse inflationary trends and pressures in the recent past and would take account of likely future developments.
These are important steps forward. But I believe that the publication of analytical reports and an indication of possible future trends does not go far enough. I hope we shall be told in addition what conclusions the Bank has reached. These could be included in the quarterly review to which the Bank is now committed. Indeed, the quarterly analyses would in my opinion be incomplete if they did not conclude with the action recommended by the Bank in the light of those announcements.
I wish to suggest that the time is now ripe for the Bank to be given greater responsibility in securing long-term price stability and that in the discharge of this responsibility it should be directly accountable to Parliament. I submit that it is essential that an effective institutional framework should be established to secure price stability in the long term and, above all, to avoid the ebbs and flows which have been so damaging to the British economy, particularly in the past 20 years.
Inflation is now at a low level and, according to most estimates, is likely to remain low for the next year or so. But, on the basis of past patterns, inflationary pressures could begin to take hold once more as the momentum of economic recovery gathers pace and the impact of sterling evaluation works its way through the system accompanied by a widening trade gap. Indeed the first signs of this have already become apparent. It has just been announced that the producer input prices, seasonally adjusted, rose by 2.4 per cent. in November. That is the biggest monthly rise since October 1976–16 years ago. Compared with November last year, input prices rose by 4.1 per cent., well above the current annual level of inflation. Inflationary trends must be anticipated and suitable action must be taken before, not after, the next inflationary spurt.
The review of experience in other countries shows certainly that there is no unique blueprint for dealing with this issue. I would therefore like to suggest that the subject of identifying the most practical means of

629
securing long-term price stability should be remitted to an ad hoc committee of this House, for which provision has been made following on the Jellicoe Report. I would visualise the task of such a committee being to analyse past trends on prices and inflation, to review what is being done in other countries to contain inflation and to make recommendations.
Recent history has shown that it is possible, through government action, to bring down inflation once it has reached an unacceptably high level. What has so far proved elusive is to maintain inflation at a low level over a long period. This is the problem to which I feel we should now address ourselves with urgency.
7.28 p.m.
Lord Boardman: My Lords, before dealing with the main argument of the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, perhaps I may pick up one point that he made in regard to the rise of 2.4 per cent. which has just been published. The noble Lord should surely recall the familiar 'J' curve, which inevitably means that after a deflation of one's currency the immediate consequence for some months is an increase in import prices before the benefit of the increased export prices comes through. I would be very sad if the figure which the noble Lord quoted were taken as undermining confidence in the attack on inflation which has been so successful and which I believe will continue to be so.
I have no present interest to declare but I was for some years the chairman of one of our leading clearing banks. In that capacity I had many discussions and meetings with the Bank of England. I know quite a lot about its operations from that end. A long time before that, when I was Chief Secretary to the Treasury, I saw quite a lot of the Bank of England from the other side of the table. I saw its operations in the relationship with the government of the day. While the noble Lord does not go so far as to suggest that there should be an independent Bank of England, it must be an almost inevitable consequence of his speech—giving greater responsibilities to the Bank of England; and indeed, to pick up a phrase that is often used by some on the Benches opposite, the independence of the Bank of England is something that should be secured. I strongly disagree with that. If I deal with that point I may not be dealing directly with the point made by the noble Lord about setting up a group to study the issue. I shall deal with what I believe to be the worry underlying the Question that he has tabled. He gave various examples of countries which allocate different responsibilities to their central banks. I shall not try to cover all the countries. I do not know the conditions in many of them.
Perhaps I may pick upon three of the countries to which the noble Lord referred. I shall take Germany first. The Bundesbank has always been held up as a great example of the independence of a bank from the political considerations of the Government. That is a much overstated claim. When Germany created unity and brought in East Germany, the Bundesbank said what it believed should be the rate of exchange between the ostmark and the deutschmark, but it was
630
Chancellor Kohl who said what it would be. It was Chancellor Kohl's political decision that dominated. The views and advice of Karl Otto Pöhl were overruled, with the inflationary consequences that we are all seeing in Germany today.
The noble Lord also referred to the Fed, about which I know a little. He must take care when comparing the system in the United States with any system that might be applicable here. As we know, there is the presidential office on the one hand and Congress on the other, with the Fed stuck between them. The Fed is subject to many political influences and political appointments which severely constrain its freedom. It is not an effective parallel.
The noble Lord mentioned New Zealand. Superficially it seems to be an attractive argument. The system in New Zealand is new. It started in 1989, or something like that. It has been effective in bringing down the rate of inflation, but no more effective than have been the Government in bringing down the rate of inflation in this country, where we are now down to the level quoted by the noble Lord. But at what price? When one sees the economic conditions in New Zealand which have resulted from applying those measures, one wonders whether it is a price that the New Zealanders will think is worth paying.
I ask your Lordships to consider the consequences of giving to the governor or the Bank of England itself a greater responsibility. It would be giving to a non-elected body the responsibility for a large part of our economic policy. Economic policy has to be dovetailed in with fiscal policy. It is the two together that form the basis of the political decisions that have to be made by the political body of the country. In our case it is this House and another place. One cannot have one body with responsibility for monetary policy and a political body to deal with fiscal policy.
The noble Lord suggested that it should be the Bank of England's responsibility to control inflation. That is something that we should all like to see severely controlled. If it were decided that it was necessary to have a massive increase in interest rates to control inflation, would it be right for some non-elected body to impose that upon society, regardless of the enormous unemployment that it might cause and the effects upon our overseas trade that might result from it? I challenge the suggestion that an unelected body should be given that responsibility.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, I should like to make it clear that I did not suggest that the Bank of England should be totally independent. I said that there were many different examples in many countries that we should study to see what greater responsibility it might exercise.
Lord Boardman: My Lords, I follow that, but it seems to me that the inevitable consequence of the noble Lord's speech must be greater independence, if not complete independence, for the Bank of England. That would have serious political and economic consequences. Let us just look at the present position. The Bank of England has a large measure of freedom at present. It has close consultations with and gives a

631
great deal of advice to the Treasury. The noble Lord referred to measures that have been taken recently, even as recently as October when we have the monthly monetary report and wide consultations. Some may feel—I sometimes do—that the degree of wide and open consultation is too wide and too open to achieve the right objectives.
The advice given by the governor and the Bank of England is not something that any Chancellor of the Exchequer can lightly ignore. I was Chief Secretary to the Treasury a long time ago and the then Governor of the Bank of England was my noble friend Lord Richardson of Duntisbourne and the Chancellor of the Exchequer was my noble friend Lord Barber. I remember the Governor of the Bank of England coming to the Treasury and laying down firmly what would be the economic consequences of a certain action. He spelt out the consequences of the alternative courses. He made firm and strong recommendations as to what he believed was then appropriate. I shall not enter into what happened as a result or to what extent that advice was followed. But the power of the then Governor of the Bank of England, no doubt still enjoyed by the present governor, to tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer what he believed was necessary and right in the circumstances was strong and compelling. That advice would not have come more strongly or powerfully from an independent Bank. The noble Lord said that he was not suggesting an independent Bank, but that is what flows from what he was saying.
The ultimate weapon of the Governor of the Bank of England, if the Government and the Chancellor of the Exchequer take a certain course which he believes to be extremely damaging to our economy, is to say, "I have the right to and will resign". That is the ultimate weapon. The resignation of the Governor of the Bank of England because he felt so strongly about some economic matter would make any Chancellor of the Exchequer sit up and think hard before going ahead with the decision.
There is a further complication. The international markets result in enormous funds flowing across boundaries at the touch of a button. That makes it difficult to regulate and control the various factors that go to make up inflation, let alone all the other consequences of the flow of funds. Let us just contemplate Black Wednesday, which will be well known and remembered by most of us here. Your Lordships will recall that interest rates were increased twice in a few hours and then brought down as the country came out of the ERM. It was not a happy picture.
Who is to have the power to increase interest rates? If the greater responsibility were to be with the Bank of England, it flows from the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, that that power would be in the hands of the Bank of England. It would have the responsibility of putting up and pulling down interest rates. I do not know who would have gone to Brussels that night to see how the ERM could be rejigged. I do not know whether it would have been the Governor of the Bank of England, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or both, trying to compete as to who got
632
onto the aeroplane first. That is an example of what happens if one tries to shift the responsibility away from the Government and the Chancellor to some other source, however important that source may be.
I believe it to be important that the Bank of England should retain its present relationship with government. It has the power to advise the Chancellor, the right to be consulted and the right to have an important influence upon this country's monetary policies. It also has a vast range of other responsibilities. It may be only right to mention its responsibilities as a regulator and supervisor of the banks and many of the financial services of the City of London. That is a vital and difficult task, with all the foreign banks in the country and the various financial arrangements that exist. The Bank has to bear with, be supported by and suffer from all the regulations and legislation that have been passed in Parliament—the Financial Services Act and Banking Acts galore.
The last thing I wish to see on top of all this is that we have a consortium of people set up to look at the Bank to see what could be done to make further changes. There are imperfections in its operations, and I am sure that the Bank of England would be the first to acknowledge them. It is aware of them and is trying to improve the whole time. It deserves considerable credit for the way in which it has achieved that.
The last thing we wish to do is to pull it up by the roots and examine them just to see what further changes we should make. There has been far too much of that in the past. I believe that we should leave the Bank of England alone to develop in the light of all the experience it has had and of the many lessons that have been learnt in the past few years. We should leave it to develop and to carry on in its present form.
7.40 p.m.
Lord Cobbold: My Lords, I am pleased to have the opportunity of supporting my noble friend Lord Ezra in the debate on this important subject. I agree with all that he has said and support fully his recommendations.
The issue at stake is ultimately whether politicians can be trusted, or, indeed, can trust themselves with the management of money creation. Is the temptation to finance expenditure by printing money rather than by unpopular taxation too great to resist? I do not agree with the noble Lord, Lord Boardman, when he says that fiscal and monetary policies cannot be separated. I believe that in theory they quite definitely can. Government have a right to tax and to borrow against future revenues. But I am not at all sure whether they have the right to borrow from themselves by running the printing presses. There is a clear case for separation of these functions.
Certainly in this country since the war our track record on monetary management is pretty bad, as my noble friend Lord Ezra has already explained. We have followed a stop go, boom bust cycle. Intermittent bursts of inflation have reduced the value of our currency to a small fraction of what it was worth at the end of the war. That policy has encouraged

633
short-termism and has had damaging long-term consequences for our interest rates and the capital development of our industry.
Rather like an alcoholic, we recognise the problem but we find it extremely difficult to kick the habit. Cynics may argue that secretly we are quite content to stay the way we are and that we prefer periodic binges and the inevitable hangovers that follow to what might be described as the boring life of steady growth. Personally I hope that this is not the case, but if the cynics are right then there is little point in changing the status quo.
However, I shall assume that the cynics are wrong and that we are still seeking the holy grail of non-inflationary sustainable growth. Indeed, it is in any event the much trumpeted policy of Her Majesty's Government in spite of our sudden exit from the ERM. It is embodied in the provisions for economic and monetary union in the Maastricht Treaty which the Government are committed to ratify.
The question therefore for debate is whether monetary policy is best left with the government of the day or whether it should be delegated to a separate institution. In the latter event, what exactly should the mandate of the institution be and to whom and by what mechanisms should it be accountable to the public?
In this country, as with many things, the management of monetary policy has evolved in a largely natural and undocumented relationship between the Treasury and the Bank of England. Even before nationalisation the Bank of England did not really have control of monetary policy. In 1937 Montagu Norman told a gathering of Commonwealth central bankers:
"I am a creature of the Treasury".
The Bank of England Act 1946 did not define the objects of the Bank, nor the scope or aims of monetary policy. It merely codified the relationship between the Treasury and the Bank, giving the Treasury power to direct the Bank, and between the Bank and the City, giving the Bank the power to make regulations governing the operations of the commercial banks provided that they were in the public interest and approved by the Treasury—powers which in practice merely confirm the status quo.
We have never had in this country the degree of independence granted to the Bundesbank by its constitution, although I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Boardman, that in the end even the Bundesbank is not wholly independent. Therefore what we would require is not so much privatisation of the Bank to achieve this objective but, by a statute, a clear definition of and separation of the roles as between the Treasury and the Bank, followed by statutory delegation of powers to the Bank under a clear mandate, with recognisable and effective lines of democratic accountability.
The noble Lord, Lord Boardman, felt that giving the Bank of England greater autonomy in this way might have had more dire consequences for the management of affairs associated with Black Wednesday. I cannot think that anything could be
634
worse than the way in which that event was managed by our monetary authorities collectively, so I believe that that is not an important point.
The starting point now must be what exists in the constitution and powers of the European system of central banks as embodied in the Maastricht Treaty which is due to be ratified and to which we shall almost certainly become signatories. Article 105 of the treaty states:
"The primary objective of the ESCB shall be to maintain price stability. Without prejudice to the objective of price stability, the ESCB shall support the general economic policies in the Community".
These policy objectives are listed in Article 2. I believe that that definition is broadly satisfactory for an "independent" role for a central bank.
The independence of the ESCB for member governments is also underwritten in the treaty in Article 7 of the Protocol which forbids the seeking or taking of:
"instructions from Community institutions or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other body". The independence guarantee in this form is also broadly satisfactory.
However, on accountability and reporting I think there is room for improvement. The reporting commitments in Article 15 are for a published quarterly report, weekly financial statements and an annual report,
"to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission and also the European Council".
I believe that this is not satisfactory. Those provisions should be and will have to be extended in order to achieve the necessary public credibility for the democratic accountability of the institution. There must be more public information on actual policy and operations, akin, for example, to the Open Market Committee minutes of the Federal Reserve system in the United States. Again as in the case of the Federal Reserve system, there should be more public hearings before probably the appropriate committee of the European Parliament and perhaps before combined specialist committees of national parliaments meeting together. Only in this way will true public accountability be achieved.
The Bundesbank benefits from widespread support among the German population. Any institution at the Euro level or at national levels will have to strive to achieve such popular support if it is to succeed.
Given therefore that Maastricht will be ratified, we shall be committed in any case under Article 108 to ensure that our national legislation, including the statutes of our central bank, are compatible with the treaty and the statute of the ESCB before it is established.
That is only a few years away, once again assuming ratification. I hope that the Government will take steps to move in this direction well before the time limit expires. It takes time to establish credibility, and if the Bank of England is to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Bundesbank it must be given time to play in the new rules and operating principles.
I welcome the Government's latest initiative on the monthly meetings to which my noble friend Lord Ezra has referred. I also welcome the quarterly report on inflation and on the management of monetary policy.

635
I hope we can move quickly on from here. We need as soon as possible to have a White Paper from the Government on the whole subject and to have the opportunity of a full debate in both Houses of Parliament. Once again I thank my noble friend Lord Ezra for raising this subject and I hope the Minister will take active steps to promote further action on this matter in the near future.
7.50 p.m.
Lord Desai: My Lords, We are grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, for raising what is a very important question. As he has said, although not many noble Lords are participating in this debate the quality of it has been good. A debate such as this shows the good contributions Members of this House can make on this problem.
I start by saying, perhaps in a pedagogic way, that we are not actually discussing price stability as much as the stability of a low rate of inflation. I do not believe anyone would even try to maintain a zero rate of inflation over a period of time. What we are really talking about is stability in a rate of inflation which is maintained at a reasonably low level, roughly akin to the targets the Government have set. There is a further problem here. Which inflation rate does one take as one's measure of price stability? That has not been referred to so far.
As we have seen increasingly throughout the 1980s the retail prices index is not a satisfactory all round measure of inflation. I should like the Government to look into whether there are ways in which one can improve the measurement of the rate of inflation, especially as regards what factors should or should not be included in that measure. Mortgage payments are a problem area here. We need to know whether there is a drift in the RPI that is caused simply by the way it is measured. I shall not go into the technicalities of the matter but I could concoct cases in which the true rate of inflation could be zero but the RPI could still be either positive or negative.
We have all agreed that inflation is a problem. However, I feel we have not considered in sufficient depth some of these rather dull technical measurement problems. The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, related an historic account of inflation. During the period from 1600 to 1939 the value of the pound stayed the same on average. It went up and down a little but, by and large, it retained the same value. It is only since 1939 that we have experienced persistent inflation in the sense that—if my memory serves me correctly—not a single year has shown a negative rate of inflation. Before we all get carried away, I should say that that has also been the experience of many other advanced capitalist countries. But paradoxically that was also the period of the fastest rate of growth in the capitalist world as we know it. We must remember that.
I am not saying that inflation is good for growth or anything like that, but we have to remember that it is insufficient to consider inflation by itself. We must also consider income growth. What we really want is for economics to serve the world. The bottom line is whether people are becoming better off. We desire low
636
inflation only in as much as people can demonstrate that low inflation is a cause of high growth. I do not believe that can be demonstrated.
Baroness Seear: My Lords, I am sorry to trouble the noble Lord but it would help me at any rate if he could clarify a point. Does he not consider that what he has just said as regards an improvement of the standard of living must be accompanied by stability and the expectation of stability? Otherwise the standard of living will rise for a little while but after that funny things may happen to it. Does the noble Lord agree with that?
Lord Desai: My Lords, I quite agree with that in principle. However, there is the paradox that during the post war period, 1945 to 1975, the UK economy experienced its highest ever growth rate on a sustained basis. However, it also experienced inflation at that time. I do not wish to give the impression that I am in favour of inflation but I believe that, eventually, we will have to discuss the costs of achieving a low rate of inflation, and whether low inflation leads to growth. If it leads to growth we should aim for low inflation, but we should not aim for low inflation just for its own sake. During the inter-war period the central bank did not wish to have falling prices much less a low rate of inflation. But the cost was such that as a consequence the reputation of the central bank, in those days at least, became extremely low. I shall return later to an examination of what a central bank can achieve.
In the 1950s and 1960s we had quite low rates of inflation except for the period of the Korean War. However, as has been pointed out, the 1970s and 1980s were bad decades. That experience has convinced me that the UK economy is extremely susceptible to external shocks. Our inflation of the 1970s was to a large extent imported, due to the quadrupling of oil prices. Other people may disagree with that view. As our economy is susceptible to external shocks, we must be careful when deciding on policies to reduce inflation. Is is just monetary policy that will reduce inflation, or is it a mix of monetary and fiscal policies? In that respect I agree with the noble Lords, Lord Boardman and Lord Cobbold. It is not that monetary and fiscal policies cannot he separated: I think they should not be separated. I believe a combination of monetary and fiscal policies would eventually achieve the twin objectives of low inflation and substantial growth. If we let those two policies drift apart, I do not believe we shall achieve our objectives.
There have been three attempts to reduce inflation once it had risen. The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, has referred to this matter. In each of those three cases monetary policy played a secondary, passive role rather than a primary role. When the Labour Party was in power between 1975 to 1978 the inflation rate came down from 25 per cent. to 8 per cent. That was achieved with some monetary control but it was principally achieved with an active incomes policy. That is an important point.
In 1980 to 1983—this has been illustrated by Professor Wilfred Beckerman—the UK economy benefited greatly from a high exchange rate and falling

637
import prices. Those continuously falling import prices were important. The control element in that situation was not so much the control of the money supply, because monetary targets were not always met, but it was rather the control of the fiscal deficit. The PSBR control was important. I did not like it at the time but it was effective. The tight fiscal policy achieved the reduction in inflation and not the control of the money supply. I believe that the money supply is a hard thing to control in an open economy, especially with globalised financial markets.
The final episode I wish to refer to is that of our entry into the ERM. I do not wish to discuss whether we should or should not have entered the ERM. However, the fall in inflation coincided with a tight external discipline. I do not believe that in any of those three episodes I have referred to, one could have separated out monetary and fiscal policy. Exchange rate policy, fiscal policy and monetary policy together contained inflation.
Central bankers are suddenly in fashion. They have a great reputation for competence—I do not know why. We ought to examine the record.
Since other noble Lords have mentioned this I should point out that it is not a question of the autonomy or otherwise of the Bundesbank and the Austrian central bank. It is not often appreciated that there is a wage bargaining structure in both those countries which sustains monetary policy. That is also the case in Sweden. One needs a sensible wage bargaining structure, which we do not have and are not likely to have. It is not merely that somehow the Bundesbank controls money supply effectively and therefore achieves low inflation or that its independence is important. The important point is the wage bargaining structure.
Secondly, there is a strong anti-inflationary culture in Germany. As the noble Lord, Lord Cobbold, said, we lack an anti-inflationary culture in this country. It will not be easy to inculcate such a culture. I believe that the rumblings against the Maastricht Treaty and about the unbearable cost of our being in the ERM, which finally we abandoned were due to the fact that a sustained fight against inflation over a period of more than two years seems to be beyond the political capacity of any party.
It is not a question of the central bank being able to control inflation because of its independence. To believe that inflation can be controlled by banks one would have to believe in a strong and naive monetarist theory that somehow money supply and money supply alone causes inflation and that control of interest rates would guarantee an anti-inflationary policy. I have written a book about the subject—I do not believe a word of that theory.
I agree that we should have a great deal more information. The system should be much more open. There should be transparency in the negotiations between the Treasury and the Bank of England to the extent that such transparency would not affect market sentiment. However, in the final analysis I believe that a good anti-inflationary policy can only be achieved through a framework to which both politicians and
638
the banks can adhere and which they can sell to the population. Unless one can sell an anti-inflationary policy to the population it will be difficult to replace inflation. We have designed institutions such as our housing market which are sustained by an inflationary psychology. How is one to change people's attitudes?
While I concur with the noble Lord that a central bank has a role to play, I believe that that is much exaggerated. Inflation is a complex problem. We are grateful to the noble Lord for allowing us to discuss the matter.
8.3 p.m.
The Minister of State, Department of Transport (The Earl of Caithness): My Lords, our debate today has been both stimulating and, as the noble Lord, Lord Desai, said, well informed. It has benefited from the contributions of noble Lords who have a wide range of relevant and valuable experience. I, too, am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, for providing us with this opportunity to examine a timely and important issue. I have to say that I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Cobbold, that the important issue is price stability, not the status of the Bank of England.
We all know the problems which high inflation causes. It erodes savings. It causes misallocation of resources. By doing so it erodes the potential for long-term growth and is, as the noble Lord, Lord Callaghan, once put it, "the father and mother of unemployment".
That is why the Government have made the control of inflation their priority since being first elected in 1979. That is why my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has set an explicit target for underlying inflation of 1 per cent. to 4 per cent. a year for the rest of this Parliament. It is why in the longer term we want to get inflation down to 2 per cent. or less.
Mr. Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the US Federal Reserve Bank System, has proposed a definition of price stability as being a rate of inflation which is low enough not to influence economic decision-making. Our policies can achieve that.
Some people point to countries such as Germany and claim that they provide clear evidence that an independent bank is better able to deliver low inflation. Others may go further and suggest that bank independence might be a pre-condition for such achievement or argue that it lessens the risks of inflation.
It is certainly true that Germany has over the past 40 years or so enjoyed an enviable record of consistently low inflation. But that is not simply the result of the independent status of the German Bundesbank. Both the noble Lords, Lord Cobbold and Lord Desai, observed that the German people, not surprisingly, are strongly determined to maintain price stability, having lived through the horrific hyper-inflation of the 1920s and the immediate post-war years. What is less often observed is that at the time when German inflation was at its worst— 200,000 million per cent. in 1923—Germany already had an independent central bank. That is not a good record.

639
If we look more closely at one of the recent cases where the establishment of an independent central bank has been accompanied by a fall in inflation, we find no magic at work. The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, mentioned New Zealand. New Zealand reformed its monetary system in 1988, and price stability was adopted as the goal of monetary policy. In the following year, the New Zealand central bank was granted independence so that it might pursue the price stability objective. New Zealand's inflation rate has come down from around 6 per cent. to 1 per cent. since then, but it has done so because very tight monetary policies have been applied. But, as my noble friend Lord Boardman reminded us, at the same time New Zealand has suffered a recession lasting six quarters, with a fall in output of 4½ per cent.
Some have claimed that the very act of making the central bank independent can improve credibility and so make squeezing out inflation less painful. The experience of New Zealand is enough to show us that bank independence of itself is unlikely to offer easy and guaranteed solutions.
Nor is low inflation impossible without an independent central hank, if the right policies are pursued. Over the past 20 years Japan has had one of the lowest inflation rates in the Group of 7 major industrialised countries; and more recently France has achieved an excellent record on inflation.
The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, gave an interesting summary of those countries with central bank experience. There is no single and generally accepted notion of independence. It is of course very much a matter of degree. Even for those banks with a great deal of formal independence the division of responsibilities is in practice not a simple matter, and we see hank and government working closely together.
The Bundesbank is often considered the epitome of an independent central bank. Internal monetary policy is indeed a matter for the Bundesbank, but the Bundesbank is also obliged to support the general economic policy of the federal government, albeit without risking the performance of its monetary oversight. When it comes to exchange rate policy, the picture is different. Decisions on exchange rate parities within a fixed rate system are taken by the federal government, but after close consultation with the Bundesbank. For example, Germany's position on ERM parities and realignment is determined by the government. My noble friend Lord Boardman reminded us that at the time of unification it was the federal government that made the final decision on the deutschmark-ostmark exchange rate.
The Netherlands Bank also has a high degree of independence in its determination of monetary policy but, as the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, pointed out, the ultimate responsibility lies with the Minister of Finance and the government retain the right to issue formal directives to the bank. Decision on fixed exchange rates are a joint responsibility of the bank and Minister of Finance in law. Indeed, the law governing the Netherlands Bank is very similar to that governing the Bank of England. The noble Lord mentioned that the Dutch Government have never
640
issued a formal directive to the bank, but neither have the UK Government ever used their powers to issue formal directions to the Bank of England.
In Italy, as the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, said, the Banca d'Italia was in January this year given sole responsibility for setting the official rates on discounts and advances. But it is of course far too soon to judge what effect this will have in the longer term, or what additional steps, if any, will be taken to increase the bank's responsibilities. We must remember that the bill is aimed at severing the bank's remaining links with the Treasury. It has not yet been considered by the Italian Parliament and may well not be approved, at least not in its present form.
In the cases of the Dutch, Italian and French central banks, cited by the noble Lord, the freedom of activity of the central hank is firmly hemmed in by the need to meet ERM requirements—a condition set in each case by the government.
As some of your Lordships have pointed out, the UK has not recently enjoyed price stability for more than a generation. Between 1972 and 1982 the rate of inflation varied between 6 per cent. and 27 per cent. The average rate over that period was 14 per cent. But the UK's experience has demonstrated that the right policies get inflation down whatever the institutional arrangements in place. Between 1982 and 1986 we got the rate of inflation down to a low point of around 3 per cent. because we ran tight monetary policies, as the noble Lord, Lord Desai, said, buttressed by firm control of public spending. It is true that we over-estimated the impact of the 1987 stock market crash and underestimated the impact of financial deregulation, and so allowed a build-up of inflation in the late 1980s.
But those misjudgments were shared by all parties, all institutions, and almost all commentators. They were also shared by other countries in similar circumstances. And most importantly, once the problems became clear, we acted to tighten policy. We started to raise interest rates in summer 1988.
Over the past two years, we have brought RPI inflation down from 10.9 per cent. to 3 per cent. Underlying inflation in November was 3.6 per cent., the lowest rate since February 1988. Interest rates fell from 15 per cent. to 10 per cent. between October 1990 and May this year. Those are impressive achievements and they have not come easily.
Since we left the ERM, we have seen a significant but justified easing of our monetary policy. The exchange rate is lower. Interest rates have fallen by a further 3 percentage points to 7 per cent. They are now at their lowest level since 1978. This easing of policy has come about without taking risks with inflation, and my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has left us in no doubt that he will take whatever action is necessary if our inflation objective, and hence our prospects of long-term growth, are put at risk.
In the United Kingdom, the conduct of economic policy is the responsibility of the Government alone. Some noble Lords have argued that this makes it more difficult to get the policy right. But it can make it easier. The Chancellor has been able to balance tight

641
control of public spending with a relaxation of monetary policy. This contrasts with the recent experience of Germany where divided responsibilities have meant that the inflationary consequences of reunification have had to be met largely by higher interest rates, as the fiscal deficit has burgeoned.
Baroness Seear: Would the Minister agree that if, on the famous occasion when the Bundesbank was overridden by the government over the exchange rate between the East and the West mark, the Bundesbank's advice had been taken, the position not only in Germany but throughout the Community would today be a great deal better.
The Earl of Caithness: The noble Baroness may very well be right. But the fact remains that it was the government that decided. The government have the power to decide, not the Bundesbank. It comes back to the point that I was making earlier. It is a matter of the degree of independence. That varies from situation to situation. In the case of Germany, the federal government made the decision. I share some of the thoughts of the noble Baroness as to what the consequences might have been had the Bundesbank had the power. The trouble was that the Bundesbank did not have the power.
What I have said does not mean that there is no room for improvement. We have now an explicit inflation target, which we are determined to hit. We have explained the way in which we will monitor money supply growth, changes in asset prices, the relationship between market interest rates, and other indicators of the monetary stance.
In the past we have not sought to explain the progress of our monetary policy in detail in the way we will now do. But my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has recognised, now we are outside the ERM, that the need for confidence in the Government's judgment is greater and that we need, therefore, to explain clearly what we are doing. In future, that is precisely what will happen. I was grateful for the welcome that the noble Lord, Lord Cobbold, gave to that. The Treasury has now published for the first time its monthly monetary
642
report, which is the document that the Chancellor and the Governor of the Bank of England have in front of them at their regular monthly meetings.
As your Lordships know, the last two interest rate cuts have been accompanied by detailed accounts of the analyses which led to the decisions. In future each change in interest rates will be accompanied by a point-by-point account of our reasoning. The Bank of England will soon begin to publish quarterly inflation reports, setting out the progress being made towards the Government's inflation objective.
The noble Lord, Lord Cobbold, raised the question of the European Central Bank and the Maastricht Treaty, which will come before your Lordships in the not too distant future. We need to distinguish between the current position and Stage 3 of the Maastricht Treaty. Under Stage 3 of the treaty Article 107 provides for an independent European Central Bank. In the event of a decision to move to Stage 3, the Bank of England, like other central banks, would become part of a system of central banks. But I have to remind the House that the United Kingdom has no commitment to move to Stage 3. At present, the Government are responsible for monetary policy. Again I come back to the point: what really matters is that the right policies are being pursued.
I have taken note of the many points that have been made in our discussions this evening. I will draw them to the attention of my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
What matters for long-term price stability is that the policies pursued by the monetary authorities are right, not who decides those policies. In the United Kingdom we have a long tradition of ministerial accountability to Parliament for the discharge of economic policy, including monetary policy. We have the right policies and we have no plans to abandon our traditions or the Government's accountability.

Civil Service (Management Functions) Bill [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to.
House adjourned at seventeen minutes past eight o'clock.

  DEFAMATION PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE
  DEFAMATION PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE
  SLOVENIA, CROATIA AND BOSNIA
  SLOVENIA, CROATIA AND BOSNIA
  EAST TIMOR: XANANA GUSMAO
  EAST TIMOR: XANANA GUSMAO
  NUCLEAR ARMS REDUCTION: US AND RUSSIA
  NUCLEAR ARMS REDUCTION: US AND RUSSIA
  CYPRUS
  CYPRUS
  LIBERIA: HUMAN RIGHTS
  LIBERIA: HUMAN RIGHTS
  ECONOMIC AND MONETARY UNION: MULTIANNUAL PROGRAMMES
  ECONOMIC AND MONETARY UNION: MULTIANNUAL PROGRAMMES
  SUNDAY TRADING: SMALL BUSINESSES
  SUNDAY TRADING: SMALL BUSINESSES
  PIT BULL TERRIERS
  PIT BULL TERRIERS
  PRESIDENT-ELECT CLINTON: HOME OFFICE INDEX CHECK
  PRESIDENT-ELECT CLINTON: HOME OFFICE INDEX CHECK
  SENTENCING: MANDATORY PUNISHMENTS
  SENTENCING: MANDATORY PUNISHMENTS
  BETTING SHOPS: EVENING OPENING
  BETTING SHOPS: EVENING OPENING
  LIFE IMPRISONMENT: CASE REVIEW
  LIFE IMPRISONMENT: CASE REVIEW
  POLICE DOGS
  POLICE DOGS
  DEFENCE CONTRACTORS: BILL PAYMENT
  DEFENCE CONTRACTORS: BILL PAYMENT
  ARMY TRAINING
  ARMY TRAINING
  ROSYTH ROYAL DOCKYARD
  ROSYTH ROYAL DOCKYARD
  AIR-TO-SURFACE MISSILE PROJECT
  AIR-TO-SURFACE MISSILE PROJECT
  THE ADVISORY GROUP ON REHABILITATION
  THE ADVISORY GROUP ON REHABILITATION
  ENGLISH HERITAGE FILES: DESTRUCTION
  ENGLISH HERITAGE FILES: DESTRUCTION
  NIGHTSTOP SCHEME
  NIGHTSTOP SCHEME
  IRAQ: ARMS SALE INVESTIGATION
  IRAQ: ARMS SALE INVESTIGATION