Sitting of 15 July 1992

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

    SOUTH YORKSHIRE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT BILL [Lords]
    Orders for Second Reading read.
    To be read a Second time on Tuesday 20 October.

    LONDON REGIONAL TRANSPORT (PENALTY FARES) BILL (By Order)
    Order for consideration of Lords amendments read.
    To be considered on Tuesday 20 October.

    PRICES'S PATENT CANDLE COMPANY LIMITED BILL [Lords] (By Order)
    Orders for Third Reading read.
    To be read a Third time on Tuesday 20 October.

    RIVER HUMBER (UPPER PYEWIPE OUTFALL) BILL [Lords] (By Order)
    As amended, considered.
    Queen's consent, on behalf of the Crown, having been signified—
    Ordered,
    That Standing Order 205 (Notice of Third Reading) be suspended and that the Bill be now read the Third time.—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]
    Read the Third time. and passed.

    LLANELLI BOROUGH COUNCIL (RIVER LLIEDI) BILL [Lords] (By Order)
    Order for Second Reading read.
    Read a Second time, and committed.

Oral Answers to Questions
  ENVIRONMENT

    Subsidiarity
    Mr. Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the areas of environmental policy currently within the responsibility of the Commission of the European Community which it is his policy to seek to return to the responsibility of nation states alone.
    The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Michael Howard): As agreed at the Lisbon European Council, the Commission and the Council will be working urgently on the procedures and practical steps necessary to implement the principle of subsidiarity and will report to the next European Council in Edinburgh. We shall he looking closely at environmental policy in the context of this work.
    Mr. Wright: Is the Secretary of State aware that the proposals that he has just described are causing great dismay among all environmental organisations which, having seen us finally—under the impact of European directives—get rid of the tag of being the dirty man of Europe which the Government gave to us, are now seeing the Government, under the cloak of subsidiarity, planning to celebrate the British presidency of the Commission by trying to reinstate it?
    Mr. Howard: This country is not and never has been the dirty man of Europe. We have frequently and habitually taken the lead in persuading the rest of the Community to adopt high environmental standards and we have at the moment the best record in the Community for implementing European legislation. Subsidiarity does not mean and will not mean any weakening in our resolve to achieve the highest environmental standards.
    Sir Teddy Taylor: As article 130R of the Maastricht treaty appears to me, probably wrongly, to cover almost all the activities of my right hon. and learned Friend's Department and to transfer all our independence, will my right hon. and learned Friend assist the House in its educational process by publishing a list in the Library of those functions of his Department which he believes are still its exclusive territory?
    Mr. Howard: I shall give the most careful and earnest attention to my hon. Friend's request. I suspect that he will find an analysis that the effect of the Maastricht agreement is rather less fundamental in the respect than appears to him at first sight.
    Mrs. Ann Taylor: Who in this country supports the Secretary of State's moves to wreck the EC treaty on drinking and bathing waters? Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman under pressure from the newly privatised water companies, which recently donated so much to Conservative party funds? Having always dragged their feet on environmental protection, the Government have created the situation in which people have to look to Europe for the environmental protection that the Government have failed to deliver.
    Mr. Howard: The hon. Lady's capacity for rewriting history is unlimited. Her question is riddled with misapprehensions. The only people who were concerned about subsidiarity and who needed to look to the European Community to protect our environment were those who wanted a Labour Government elected on 9 April. They knew that they could have no hope of improving environmental standards at the hands of a Labour Government. Fortunately, this country was spared that prospect.
    Mr. James Hill: Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that some of the worst pollution ever known is to be found in the vicinity of the M3 and Winchester bypass? That issue touches not only on transport, for which my right hon. and learned Friend does not have a mandate, but the pollution caused by delay in finalising that much sought-after motorway. In wresting other parts of environmental policy away from the Commission, could not my right hon. and learned Friend return motorway policy to our national Government?
    Mr. Howard: I fully understand my hon. Friend's concern and those of his constituents, which he consistently seeks so assiduously to represent. We have complied with every relevant aspect of European law in respect of the M3. It was the subject of numerous public inquiries, which took into account to the fullest extent all environmental issues. I entirely sympathise with my hon. Friend's point.

    Urban Waste
    Ms. Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the Government's policy on urban waste management.
    The Minister for the Environment and Countryside (Mr. David Maclean): The Government will maintain tough controls on those who produce, handle, treat or dispose of waste, to minimise any detrimental impact on local communities.
    Ms. Eagle: More than half the non-fossil fuel offset capacity is used for waste incineration, which has been shown to account for at least one quarter of United Kingdom dioxin emissions. Does the Minister agree that dioxin is an extremely dangerous chemical, whose effects on the human body pass down generations? How can he justify the Government subsidising dioxin production in that way, and the proposal to build an incinerator at Bidston between Wallasey and Birkenhead in the same locality as 100 residential streets?
    Mr. Maclean: The proposal to build the incinerator to which the hon. Lady refers may be the subject of a planning appeal to my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State, so I cannot comment on it. Before Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution consents to any emissions into the atmosphere, it will need to satisfy itself that any and all incinerators, wherever they may be, are safe and that emissions are tightly controlled.
    Mr. Marlow: Will my hon. Friend the Minister remind my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State—who is not only a decent chap but a well-known Euro-sceptic and also a lawyer—[HON. MEMBERS: "Even worse."]—that under article 130R of the treaty that will
    1122
    bring about European union, European institutions will require competence over protecting human health? In future, therefore, such questions will be better answered in Strasbourg than in the House.
    Mr. Maclean: My right hon. and learned Friend made it very clear where the Government stand on subsidiarity when he answered the original question, and I have nothing to add.

    City Challenge, Deptford
    Ms. Ruddock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will report on the progress of the city challenge programme in Deptford.
    The Minister for Housing and Planning (Sir George Young): Deptford city challenge is now making good progress. Its recent achievements include the launch of the community safety programme on 13 July, and the schools routeways programme yesterday. We will be reviewing its progress with its action plan towards the end of the year.
    Ms. Ruddock: I share the Minister's satisfaction with the good start that has been made, especially with regard to training. But does he share the despair that I felt on learning that Siemens Plessey Controls, the flagship private sector partner of Deptford city challenge, has had to issue redundancy notices in respect of two thirds of its staff, including all eight apprentices? What action will he take, along with his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade—who set up the city challenge scheme—to protect existing manufacturing jobs and training in my constituency?
    Sir George Young: I am grateful for the kind words about the progress of city challenge with which the hon. Lady began her question. Yesterday, as she knows, I spoke to Dick Liddell, the Siemens Plessey site manager, and I understand that my hon. Friend the Minister for Trade has had a meeting with Mr. Beresford of Siemens. He has agreed to help the company to diversify. I also understand that the parent company has agreed to help the subsidiary in Deptford with some of its problems.
    One of the problems that face the hon. Lady's local firm is the high cost of the lease. The freeholder is the London borough of Lewisham. It may be possible for the company to renegotiate the lease, thereby bringing down the overheads and some of the running costs.
    Mr. Blunkett: In reaching a decision tomorrow about the winners and losers for the next round of city challenge projects, will the Minister take into account the difficulties that have been experienced in the Deptford programme, as outlined by my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms. Ruddock)? Does he acknowledge that the urban programme, which the Government have cut by £121 million since the mid-1980s—they have cut it by £14·5 million this year, and a further £50 million has been cut from specific housing projects—should form the basis of any sensible inner city regeneration policy, rather than city challenge schemes? Such schemes inevitably involve many losers as well as winners and they are taking vital moneys from the urban programme. Will the Minister confirm, at the end of the parliamentary session, that the urban programme will not be cut in the next two years, and will he give a guarantee to that effect as he has guaranteed that city challenge will not be cut next year?
    Sir George Young: I am slightly surprised that the hon. Gentleman should speak about city challenge in such terms. The response from local authorities—including those under Labour control—has been most encouraging and my colleagues and I have spent many days over the past month listening to submissions from authorities throughout the country.
    My own view is that city challenge has unlocked a fresh spirit of enterprise in the inner cities. We are seeing new partnerships between local authorities, the private sector and voluntary organisations, and I consider that a worthwhile extension of our inner-city policies. The hon. Gentleman will have to wait until tomorrow, when my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State will be announcing the round two winners.

    Household Waste
    Mr. Kirkwood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will estimate what proportion of household waste is currently recycled; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. Maclean: We estimate that some 5 per cent. of household waste was recycled in 1990.
    Mr. Kirkwood: Is the Minister confident that the Government's target of 25 per cent. of household waste being recycled by the end of the century is on course? Any progress in that direction is welcome, but does the Minister feel that the Department is doing enough to achieve its target? Will he consider specifically the fact that, although £15 million of supplementary credit approvals are available as hypothecated local expenditure in England and Wales, there is no money north of the border for Scottish local authorities to engage in projects? Some useful joint local authority and private schemes north of the border are failing as a result of the lack of finance.
    Mr. Maclean: I shall draw the hon. Gentleman's latter point to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. As for our target generally, yes I am confident that we shall meet it. We have a very good industrial waste recycling record. In the last few years, we have set a target for household waste recycling and we intend to meet it. I am keen on the recycling credits that we have recently introduced. Any group, from the smallest voluntary charity to the largest company, can participate in recycling. All the goods and materials that they prevent from going into landfill will qualify for 50 per cent. of the actual cost of landfill. That literally is cash for trash. I urge people to grab it with enthusiasm.
    Mr. Robert B. Jones: Does my hon. Friend agree that at least as important as the facilities provided by local authorities is the public attitude towards and awareness of recycling? Will he therefore ensure that there is maximum liaison with his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education, to ensure that public awareness starts with the very youngest so that this problem can be conquered once and for all?
    Mr. Maclean: I am greatly interested in what my hon. Friend says. I congratulate him on his election to the Chairmanship of the Select Committee and I look forward to hearing the advice of his Committee over the next few years. My hon. Friend is absolutely right on this point. We need to capture public enthusiasm for recycling and let the
    1124
    market take its course. If enough demand is generated to use recycled materials, industry will fill the gap by doing the collection and the recycling. However, recycling has to be led by the consumers. The market will then follow. We must not try to shove and dictate it from the top.
    Mr. A. Cecil Walker: May I encourage the Minister to take up with his opposite number the urgent need for recycling facilities in Northern Ireland?
    Mr. Maclean: Yes, I certainly shall. When I was at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Minister I visited the Province occasionally. I hope that I shall be able to do so in future. The hon. Gentleman has given me a convenient excuse.
    Mr. William O'Brien: In view of the targets set in the Government's White Paper "This Common Inheritance", does not the Minister feel that the Government should give a higher profile to waste recycling? The hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) referred to the shortage of capital to get schemes off the ground. What he said is mirrored in every local authority. Does not the Minister believe that the Government should provide local authorities with capital to get these schemes going? When do the Government intend to give waste recycling a higher profile?
    Mr. Maclean: The hon. Gentleman is obviously not aware of the facts. The Government have given waste recycling a very high profile. We set ourselves a high target in "This Common Inheritance." We have allocated £15 million in supplementary credit approvals for this year. We have launched the recycling credit scheme. By 1 August, all local authorities will have to produce their recycling plans. That, as well as the initiatives we have taken to heighten the importance of recycling, means that we shall meet our target. The hon. Gentleman should not assume that the only way to bring about recycling is to throw money at local councils. I want to capture the tremendous enthusiasm of ordinary people, and among the business community, for waste recycling.

    Housing Capital Receipts
    Mr. Hain: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give figures for the total in local authority housing capital receipt funds for England.
    Sir George Young: It is currently estimated that English local authorities held about £0·8 billion of usable capital receipts at the end of March 1992. In addition, authorities are estimated to hold over £5 billion of capital receipts which have been set aside as provision to meet credit liabilities. Housing receipts are not separately identifiable.
    Mr. Hain: But the Minister is dodging the issue. Does he have any sympathy at all for the tens of thousands of families who do not have their own homes and who are squeezed into the houses of relatives or friends? In my constituency, and in many others, there are examples of young parents sleeping with their babies on the floors of parlours and living rooms—and in garages, in some cases. Even worse, some young women are being advised to get pregnant in order to get a house. When will the Minister release all these billions of pounds of funds and enable local authorities to build council houses?
    Sir George Young: I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman listened to the first part of my answer. I made it quite clear that £0·8 billion of usable capital receipts were available at the end of March 1992. Last year, local authorities spent only 67 per cent. of the receipts that they were entitled to use. Before the hon. Gentleman develops his case for the use of further receipts that have been set aside, he should make sure that local authorities already spend the receipts that they are entitled to spend.
    Sir Anthony Durant: Does my hon. Friend agree with the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) who said that the Treasury rules for capital receipts were correct and sensible?
    Sir George Young: Yes, indeed. I was only disappointed that that sensible statement by the shadow Chancellor was not swiftly endorsed by the rest of the Opposition Front Bench. We look forward with interest to seeing how the Labour party's economic policies develop with a new leader.
    Mr. Madden: Does the Minister remember the promises made by Tory Ministers that when council homes were sold, the money raised would be spent on building new homes? How does he explain that in Bradford 12,000 council homes have been sold, yet not a new council house has been built in the past seven years because of a shortage of cash? Why is he not doing more to release the funds that have been locked up for years to enable people to have the new homes that they desperately need?
    Sir George Young: Bradford city council has been spending substantial sums of money on modernising and improving its existing stock. The new provision needed by people in Bradford is, as the hon. Gentleman knows, provided by housing associations, the budget for which is increasing substantially from £1 billion two years ago to £2 billion in two years' time. It is sensible to ask local authorties to concentrate their energy and money on improving their stock and to look to the housing associations, which make the nominations to the local authorities, to provide the new social housing that the country needs.
    Mr. Conway: Is it not the case that the sale of council houses and the receipts that come from them are still providing valuable housing stock? Will my hon. Friend confirm that there is no restriction upon local authorities to try to rescind some of their outstanding debts by the use of their capital receipts?
    Sir George Young: That is a valid point. The total debt of local authorities is £44 billion a year. Servicing that debt costs each adult in this country £140 a year. There are strong arguments for reducing that debt and the burden on ratepayers.
    Mr. Gould: Given that the £6 billion in capital receipts already exists—it does not have to be raised through taxation or borrowing—that there are many local authorities such as mine in Barking and Dagenham that are desperate to spend their money on meeting an urgent housing need and that there is no one in the housing world or construction industry who would not dearly like to see the money released to provide a stimulus to the industry, what common sense explanation can the Minister offer for
    1126
    the Government's policy? Will he use language that will be understood by the homeless in my constituency and elsewhere?
    Sir George Young: For a start, there is the comon sense of the hon. Gentleman's right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith). The hon. Gentleman must understand that the same money cannot be spent twice. When a local authority uses its receipts to redeem debt and reduce its borrowing, it enables my Department to increase the borrowing of another local authority that does not have those receipts. The same money cannot be spent twice without pushing up taxes or interest rates.
    Mr. Jenkin: Does the Minister agree that it is rather sad that councils such as Colchester and Tendring in my constituency do not do more to help themselves by transferring their housing to housing associations and releasing the capital to repay their debt so that they can invest more in housing?
    Sir George Young: My hon. Friend is right. He will have read in the manifesto that we remain committed to large-scale voluntary transfer. That is an option which many local authorities have endorsed, hut, sadly, so far no Labour authorities. It offers benefits to tenants when they transfer. It offers benefits to the local authority in terms of debt redemption and it enables the new housing association that is set up to make faster progress because the local authority can plough back part of the receipts from the sales. It is an important part of Conservative housing policy which I wish to see developed over the next few years.

    EC Presidency
    Mr. Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his priorities for the EC presidency.
    Mr. Howard: As president of the Environment Council, I intend to pursue three main themes—prompt and energetic follow-up to the Rio Earth summit, the integration of environmental considerations into all areas of Community policy, and proper implementation and enforcement of European environmental legislation throughout the Community. I shall pursue the application of the principle of subsidiarity to Community action. I shall continue to press for the early establishment of the European environment agency, but part of our strategy in Europe is to give a strong lead through domestic action.
    I can today announce that the Government have decided to establish a new independent environment agency in England and Wales to bring together in an integrated body all the functions of the National Rivers Authority and Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution, and the waste regulation functions of local authorities. We shall introduce legislation at the earliest opportunity.
    Mr. Bayley: As a first step, will the new and long overdue integrated environmental agency give a cast-iron guarantee, as other EC member states have, that our emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases will be cut to the 1990 level by the year 2000, even if the American Government do not agree to do so?
    Mr. Howard: The hon. Gentleman is a little behind the times. He needs to take into account the recent

    1127
    communique agreed at Munich by the Group of Seven countries, inviting other countries to join them in ratifying the climate change convention by the end of 1993. That convention was agreed at Rio, very significantly as a result of the efforts of the United Kingdom, so we can fairly claim to be in the lead on this matter.
    Mr. Lidington: Will my right hon. and learned Friend take the opportunity of his presidency to ensure that European directives on the environment are equally implemented and enforced throughout the Community to prevent what sometimes happens at the moment, whereby one or two of our partners make grand promises about what they will do but fail to live up to them in practice?
    Mr. Howard: I shall indeed. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. The one definition of subsidiarity to which I do not subscribe is the one which suggests that individual member states should be entitled to pick and choose whether to implement and enforce legislation which has been agreed at Community level. Where legislation has been agreed, it should be applied consistently across the Community.
    Mr. Simon Hughes: The Secretary of State said that two of his priorities are to follow up the Rio summit and to secure the implementation and enforcement of European Community environmental legislation, with the inspectorate and the new agency, which we welcome. Does he accept that, as Rio made abundantly clear, environmentalism and nationalism do not go well together? The logic of what he said, with which the House will agree, is that during its presidency the United Kingdom should ensure not only that other countries comply with environmental legislation but that we do so ourselves and do not, as we did on the first day of this month, put off a court case before the European Court to save embarrassment about our failure to comply with the laws with which we say that we agree?
    Mr. Howard: The hon. Gentleman may not be aware that the application to postpone the hearing was a joint application by the United Kingdom and the Commission. As he is so interested in enforcement—I welcome his interest—I would have expected him to give the Government some credit for being the only Government in the Community—with the exception of Portugal, to which most of the legislation does not apply—against which the court has not passed an adverse environmental judgment.
    Mr. Rupert Allason: I welcome my right hon. and learned Friend's domestic initiative, but will he turn his attention to another domestic issue—the correspondence between his Department and the Bletchley Park Trust? Would not that site, which is of enormous historic importance and is under threat, be a worthwhile monument to the British presidency of the European Community, and will he at least give an undertaking that he will ensure that there will be no demolition of an area which is of considerable significance to everyone who served this country and those who gave their lives in the second world war?
    Mr. Howard: I am sure that all relevant aspects of that site will be taken into account and given full and proper weight in the relevant decision-making process.
    Mr. Win Griffiths: I welcome the Secretary of State's announcement about the creation of an environmental
    1128
    protection agency, which has been long awaited and long supported by my party but which the Government explicitly rejected when we raised it during the passage of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. We are very pleased and hope to get the legislation through in the current Session, but will the Minister state categorically that, irrespective of an American commitment to meet the Rio declaration, we will stabilise our carbon dioxide emissions at the 1990 level by the year 2000?
    Mr. Howard: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his welcome for my announcement about the agency. I expect the announcement to be widely welcomed. As for the climate change convention which was agreed at Rio, the United States has declared that it intends to take early action to discharge its obligation under that convention and that it will call a meeting later this year to discuss the matter. Of course we attach great importance to the early ratification of the convention and we shall seek to encourage others to join us in ratifying it at an early date. We shall discharge our obligations under the treaty to the full.

    Local Authority Expenditure
    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how much local councils spend on average for each person in the country.
    The Minister for Local Government and Inner Cities (Mr. John Redwood): In each area, local councils are planning to spend on average £2,000 per adult this year in England.
    Mr. Greenway: Will my hon. Friend confirm that local government spending is now running at £43 billion per year, which gives the Government a legitimate and vital interest in controlling that expenditure? Is he aware that every citizen of Ealing has a debt of £2,000 around his or her neck left by the last Labour council, which increased rates by 65 per cent. in 1987 and trebled them in three years? Is not that typical of the Labour party in control of local government, and is it not awful?
    Mr. Redwood: My hon. Friend makes some powerful points. He is right to say that Labour councils often overspend and over-borrow and leave people up to their necks in debt. Around the country there is an average of more than £1,000 of debt for every adult as a result of borrowing plans, often by Labour authorities. My hon. Friend is right that revenue expenditure is now running at high levels. If one adds capital expenditure, the figure is even bigger, as I said in answer to the main question. Contrary to the opinion expressed by the Opposition, it also shows that there is a great deal of choice and discretion for local authorities in deciding how to spend those huge sums in the interests of local taxpayers.
    Mr. Hardy: Is the Minister aware that his answer to his hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Greenway) was almost contemptibly arrogant and irresponsible? Does he not accept that the overwhelming proportion of local government spending is in pursuit of the statutory obligations and duties placed on local authorities, and that only a very small proportion of local government spending is left to the liberty of the individual

    1129
    council? Would it not be more responsible for Ministers to persuade their hon. Friends that it is unreasonable to try to suggest that all local government spending is profligate?
    Mr. Redwood: My hon. Friend was not suggesting that. There are many fine Conservative-controlled councils spending well and wisely on good services for their local communities, but there are still profligate local authorities, sponsored by the Labour party and, yes, it is necessary for someone to stand up for the taxpayers in those areas. My reply was far from arrogant. I believe in local government and I want it to have choice and discretion, which is why we vote so much money for it to exercise that discretion.
    Mr. Butcher: Does my hon. Friend recall that during the changeover period from the rating system to the community charge, many local authorities used the time to increase expenditure faster than the rate of inflation? In the change from the community charge system to the new council tax system, will my hon. Friend use his capping powers combined with an RPI minus X formula to protect ratepayers and charge payers from the kind of chicanery that they endured three years ago?
    Mr. Redwood: Fortunately my right hon. and learned Friend has more extensive powers, and I am afraid that we shall have to use them if councils are irresponsible. However, I am hopeful that many councils will not be irresponsible next year and I am glad that there are more Tory councils as a result of recent local elections. That means that we shall have more sensible councils spending at prudent levels and providing their chargepayers and council taxpayers with very good value for money. It is interesting to note that most Tory authorities spend below the permitted levels and come in with much lower taxes than do Labour councils.

    Radioactive Waste
    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on progress made by UK Nirex Ltd. in establishing a storage or disposal route for radioactive waste since 1982.
    Mr. Howard: After widespread public consultations, Nirex is concentrating its investigations on an area adjacent to the British Nuclear Fuels site at Sellafield. The company is carrying out detailed geological investigations and is refining its design concept for the facility. I understand that Nirex expects to submit an application for planning permission before the end of 1993.
    Mr. Smith: As Nirex has ignored public protests and, in my opinion, has disregarded technical difficulties in its search for a site on which to dump its nuclear waste, would not it be wise for the Government to consider postponing the opening of the thermal oxide reprocessing plant at Sellafield, which has no way of dealing with the waste that is created?
    Mr. Howard: No, that raises entirely different issues. All the questions to which the hon. Gentleman has referred will, of course, be considered with great care at any planning inquiry following the planning application that Nirex is expected to submit.

    Bathing Water Directive
    Mr. Hanson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement about compliance with the EC bathing water directive.
    Mr. Maclean: Compliance has improved from 51 per cent. in 1986 to 76 per cent. last year. A £2 billion programme of improvements is under way to bring virtually all identified bathing waters up to standard by 1995.
    Mr. Hanson: With respect, is not the Minister being rather complacent? Can he confirm that the Government pressured the European Commission into postponing the hearing about British beaches, which would have coincided with the commencement of the British presidency of the Commission? Was not that simply because the Government wished to avoid the embarrassment of occupying the Commision presidency while avoiding the Commission's directives on bathing waters?
    Mr. Maclean: It is the hon. Gentleman who is avoiding the point. However, he cannot avoid the fact that we have a £2,000 million investment programme which will bring most of our beaches up to standard by 1995. The Commission has accepted that it would not be possible to accelerate that enormous programme further. The Opposition must make up their minds what they want. Do they wish to compain about the speed with which the progamme is being implemented or about the size of water bills? We are paying through our water bills, but most people want their beaches to be cleaned up—and rightly so.
    Mr. Harris: Does my hon. Friend accept that while that programme is not just desirable but essential, it is putting impossible burdens on the consumers of some water companies, particularly those of South West Water? Is he aware that, with colleagues from Cornwall and Devon, I had meetings today with the chairman and officers of South West Water, who are very concerned indeed about the financial impact of this capital programme and even more worried about what other measures will be imposed on water companies, not least by the National Rivers Authority, adding to the burden on hard-pressed consumers?
    Mr. Maclean: I have considerable sympathy with the points that my hon. Friend makes. In his latter question, he pointed up the trap into which some Opposition Members fall—the trap of automatically calling for ever tougher standards which might not be necessary in every circumstance. We have a huge investment programme, which in the case of the south-west has resulted in some large increases in water bills. However, the south-west is not unique; there are other parts of the country with particular problems, such as those associated with getting rid of nitrates in water and the £4,000 million programme to clean up the Mersey basin. I know that the Director-General of Water Services, Ian Byatt, will be looking at the K factor in his next review. Only through that mechanism may he be able to assist the south-west.
    Mrs. Ann Taylor: If the Government are so proud of their record, why—having been in power for 13 years—are they in breach of the directives so often? Is the Minister aware of suggestions being made in Brussels that the environment directorate, DG11, should be restructured

    1131
    and perhaps denied the opportunity to take legal action against member states? Will the Minister say clearly whether he supports continuation of the powers of DG11 to take legal action against member states when such action is in the interests of environmental protection throughout Europe?
    Mr. Maclean: I will not take lessons from the hon. Lady as her party slashed expenditure on our water industry when it was last in power and seems to gloat at every opportunity when Britain is subject to legal proceedings. Labour Members automatically make the assumption that Britain must be wrong. It is about time they stood up for Britain on occasions.
    I am not prepared to comment on rumours that the hon. Lady may care to quote about what may be happening in DG11. It is clear that we want to clean up our beaches. Even without the directive, we would want to make substantial progress in cleaning up our beaches and improving our water supply. The British Government will continue to do that, irrespective of pressure from whatever source.
    Mr. Knapman: As our private water companies have access to private capital, we shall comply with the directive, but what evidence does my hon. Friend have that our EC partners are making any real efforts to comply?
    Mr. Maclean: My hon. Friend makes a valid point. That is why we have continually stressed that it is vital that enforcement of whatever EC directives are agreed is carried out at European level. One of our priorities in our presidency will be to insist that enforcement is even throughout the EC. We shall seek to introduce measures to that effect. We should like to see an inspectorate of inspectorates to carry out that task. Certainly, we do not want any diminution of enforcement or repatriation of enforcement to national authorities.

    Sites of Special Scientific Interest
    Mr. Kevin Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the latest information he has available about damage to sites of special scientific interest.
    Mr. Olner: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the latest information he has available about damage to sites of special scientific interest.
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Tony Baldry): The latest available information on damage to SSSIs is contained in the final report of the former Nature Conservancy Council, a copy of which is in the Library. In the period 1 April 1990 to 31 March 1991, of the 3,536 SSSIs in England notified under the 1981 Act, 149 suffered some damage, and of that number 22 suffered damage from which the site could not recover in the short term.
    Mr. Hughes: Despite what the Minister has just said, damage appears to be continuing at an alarming rate on sites of special scientific interest. That is borne out in a recent report by Wildlife Link. When will the Minister and the Government cut out the political rhetoric and gesturing and do something positive to protect SSSIs, such
    1132
    as making resources available so that local authorities can revoke planning permission and put a stop to peat extraction on SSSIs?
    Mr. Baldry: We have a rich tapestry of protection for the countryside. The SSSI system is designed to identify land of scientific interest and provide a means of protecting such sites. Where we have seen any weakness in that protection, we have taken measures to strengthen it by legislation such as the Wildlife and Countryside (Amendment) Act 1991 and also by the removal of permitted development rights in respect of temporary uses of land. Later this year we shall produce planning policy guidance notes on nature conservation. All those measures are intended to enhance the SSSI protection system.
    Mr. Olner: Is the Minister aware of a site in my constituency called Ensors pool which is in great danger of being filled and used as a receptor for waste? Will he make a decision? Will he take note of what English Nature says in calling for the site to be classified as an SSSI? Will he ensure that the site is fully protected so that residents in my constituency can enjoy that part of the countryside which should be rightfully theirs? Will the Minister make a statement on that?
    Mr. Baldry: The notification of a site as an SSSI signals to the planning authorities the wildlife importance of the site. That is a material factor to be taken into account when considering any planning application that might affect the site. I am sure that that is what will happen with the site to which the hon. Gentleman draws attention.
    Mr. Ian Bruce: Does my hon. Friend agree that we must not be too inflexible about the use of SSSIs? Having alerted the Secretary of State to the problems of an area within an SSSI, it is more sensible to ensure that if a new road scheme or development is to affect a site, the flora and fauna from it will be protected in a different area. In south Dorset most SSSIs are on the sites of abandoned quarries.
    Mr. Baldry: The SSSI system is there to identify and protect land of scientific interest and was set up by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. It is a framework which works extremely well. Of course we keep the system continuously under review. Owners and occupiers of land must be consulted prior to the designation of any SSSI and that provides a good balance.
    Sir Anthony Grant: Will my hon. Friend consider carefully Brampton wood, which is in the constituency of our right hon. Friend the Prime Minister but is also enjoyed by my constituents? It contains sites of special scientific interest and is being sold by the Ministry of Defence. Will my hon. Friend have discussions with Ministers in that Department to ensure that the amenities of my constituents and those of the Prime Minister are duly protected?
    Mr. Baldry: My hon. Friend can be assured that any SSSI, in whichever constituency it lies, will be given proper protection.

    Poll Tax
    Mr. Canavan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what has been the cost to date of introducing, administering and collecting the poll tax, including the cost of Government-initiated relief schemes, broken down by year.
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Robin Squire): The cost of preparing for the community charge was about £270 million. The cost of administering and collecting the community charge each year has been about £500 million, or between £12 and £15 per charge payer. Relief schemes do not add to overall public expenditure. However, they have ensured that the burden of local taxation has been reduced to 15 per cent. of local government spending.
    Mr. Canavan: Will the Minister tell us the whole truth and admit that the Government had squandered more than £14 billion on the poll tax before eventually being forced to admit that it was all a terrible mistake? Does the Minister realise that if local government representatives were guilty of such irresponsible waste of public money they would undoubtedly be surcharged and banned from office for many years? Why not surcharge and ban from office all those Ministers who were responsible for the poll tax?
    Mr. Squire: The hon. Member makes a bogus and entirely false point. He has become something of a phaneromaniac when it comes to the poll tax. You will know, Madam Speaker, that that is someone who has a compulsion to keep picking at something and returning to it. If one leaves it alone, it sometimes gets better—and something better is coming in: it is called the council tax. Above all, the hon. Gentleman is not best placed to ask questions about the costs of administering the poll tax, given his early appearance as a poll tax rebel, which would have encouraged thousands of others to push up the cost of collecting that tax.
    Mr. Riddick: Does my hon. Friend agree that many of my constituents and many people in this country are thankful to the Government for introducing the relief schemes that have helped to reduce poll tax bills? Were not those relief schemes introduced as a direct response to the incompetence and profligacy of Labour councils throughout the nation?
    Mr. Squire: My hon. Friend is entirely right on both points.

    Carbon Dioxide Emissions
    Mrs. Roche: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement about the levels of reduction of carbon dioxide emissions he expects to achieve under current policies.
    Mr. Maclean: I refer the hon. Member to the copy of the "Report on UK National Programme for Limiting Carbon Dioxide Emissions", placed in the Library on 15 May, in answer to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall Green (Mr. Hargreaves).
    Mrs. Roche: On two separate occasions this afternoon, the Government have been given the opportunity to answer this question clearly, but each time they have
    1134
    refused to do so. Will the Government stabilise emissions by the year 2000, regardless of what other countries do—yes or no?
    Mr. Maclean: We have made our position clear. We made it clear at Rio, we made it clear in the European Community, and only last week we made it clear in the Munich communiqué. I have nothing to add to that.

    Rural Housing
    Mr. Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assistance is available to local authorities to tackle housing needs in rural areas.
    Mr. Baldry: We have taken a series of measures since 1988 to boost the supply of low-cost housing in rural areas through local authorities and housing associations. The Housing Corporation has a clear target for new social housing in villages through its special rural programme under which £80 million has been allocated to rural local authorities for 1991–92 and 1992–93 to produce new low-cost homes. New planning guidance permits the development of low-cost housing for local needs on small sites not otherwise designated for housing.
    Mr. Evans: Will my hon. Friend accept the thanks of my local authority, which is not a whingeing socialist local authority always complaining that it has no money for its housing needs? My local authority is working in close association with four housing associations to meet housing needs in our rural area. It has won bids for £4 million in grants for rural housing over three years. Much of that money has been paid to the housing associations because of their past effectiveness and not just because of needs. Will my hon. Friend give an assurance that money will be given to local authorities and to housing associations in future because of their past performance and not simply because of needs?
    Mr. Baldry: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I am glad to say that numerous housing associations are active in the Ribble valley. They are doing extremely good work in partnership with the local authority which is delivering well in its enabling role. I am glad to say that almost £2 million is being invested in new rural housing in the Ribble valley this year. That is very good news.
    Mr. Trimble: I was especially glad to hear the last part of the Minister's original reply, which referred to planning guidelines. Does the Minister agree that it is important to ensure that housing becomes available in rural areas for local people, and that for that reason it is essential that the cost be kept down? Does he agree that the best way to keep the cost down is to increase the supply significantly?
    Mr. Baldry: I entirely agree with the thrust of the hon. Gentleman's question. That is why we have clear planning policy guidance and why local authorities now have to bring forward development plans in which they have to identify clearly land for housing provision for the coming years.
    Mr. Nicholas Winterton: I fully support what my hon. Friend has said, but does he accept that the wealthier a rural area is, the greater are the problems among the lower paid in the area? Does he accept that there is a need for greater resources to be devoted to areas such as that

    1135
    covered by Macclesfield borough council to take account of the fact that many people in rural areas, especially young people, can no longer afford to live there?
    Mr. Baldry: I am always glad to have my hon. Friend's support. We have taken forward initiatives because we acknowledge that there are particular problems in rural areas. It is because we recognise that there are challenges that the Housing Corporation has a special rural programme and there is the potential for special capital allocations to rural local authorities for the reasons that my hon. Friend has outlined.
    Mr. Soley: When will the Government take seriously the voices of their Conservative local authorities, of the rural housing associations and, increasingly, of their own Back-Bench Members, such as the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton), who is not a whinger as the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) would have us believe? When will the Government listen to those voices and recognise that they are saying that the villages of Britain are dying on their feet because of a lack of affordable housing? As the hon. Member for Macclesfield said, the problem is especially serious for young people whose roots are in villages and country towns, but whose futures are in a housing queue which gets constantly longer.
    Mr. Baldry: This year we are investing £2 billion through the Housing Corporation for new, affordable social housing. We are committed to do that in the coming three years. A proportion of that money will go to rural areas. In addition, rural areas will have access to their own housing investment money. The Government are determined to ensure that every family has a decent home in which to live, whether in the town or in the countryside.
    Mr. Dunn: In the context of housing needs and preserving village life, will my hon. Friend assure the House that every effort will be made to prevent the illegal encroachment of traveller families in our villages?
    Mr. Baldry: As my hon. Friend knows, we are committed to reviewing the Caravan Sites Act 1968 and I hope that we shall be able to bring forward that review in the not-too-distant future.

    Social Housing
    Mr. Raynsford: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will publish estimates of the need for social housing in England.
    Sir George Young: We publish projections of future household numbers based on demographic trends. It is not practical to sub-divide that and make a single estimate of the need for social housing because of the subjective judgment involved in assessing who should have access to social housing and the volatility of some of the factors influencing any assessment, such as house prices, incomes and interest rates.
    Mr. Raynsford: Will the Minister reconsider his answer? Will he recognise that the Audit Commission not only made it perfectly clear in its recent report that it was possible and appropriate to carry out and publish such estimates, but its first recommendation said that the Government should publish estimates of housing needs. When will the Government take housing needs in this country seriously?
    Sir George Young: I have in front of me some relevant paragraphs from the Audit Commission, which support what I have just said:
    "Definitions of need are value judgments … The point on the spectrum at which the definition of need is drawn is a matter of judgment and is partly conditioned by available resources".
    It goes on to say that such forecasts are not easy. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept that there are imponderables which are difficult to forecast, some of which I have just listed.

Parcelforce
3.30 pm
The President of the Board of Trade and Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Michael Heseltine): I should like to make a statement about Parcelforce.
Parcelforce is the parcel delivery business of the Post Office. Formerly it was part of the Royal Mail, but it is now a free-standing unit with separate accounts. In a difficult, competitive market it has made a loss during the last two years. Through the determination of both management and staff, Parcelforce is making strenuous and encouraging efforts to turn itself round. I welcome this.
Parcelforce operates in a fully competitive market that has grown rapidly. Many of its competitors operate worldwide and are household names in this country. Thousands of other private sector companies also provide a parcel service, albeit on a smaller scale.
For the most lucrative sector of the parcel delivery business—the so-called "next day" market—Parcelforce now enjoys a market share of just 2 per cent. In the "later than next day" market, it has a 34 per cent. share. But the key point is that the vast majority of the work of Parcelforce is targeted at providing a service to business. Only 5 per cent. of the Parcelforce business deals with parcels sent from one person to another, while more than half the remainder consists of just a few large mail order contracts.
I can see no reason why Parcelforce should remain in public hands while operating in such a market. My intention is to privatise it.
At this stage, this is a statement of my intent; I have not yet asked the Post Office board to launch the sale process itself. I first wish to receive advice on the best way to transfer Parcelforce to the private sector. I shall, of course, want to involve the board of the Post Office fully in this.
In considering how privatisation might best be achieved, an essential requirement for the Government will be a continued universal parcel service at a uniform and affordable tariff. That is not negotiable.
What is constantly for consideration, however, is how those or any other services can best be delivered. The Parcelforce emloyees play a key role in this. I will therefore ask the Post Office to make available financial support to help the management and employees in putting together a bid for the business, should they wish to do so in competition with other potential bidders. The Government and the Post Office will of course wish to receive the best price possible for these public assets.
Parcelforce as a business will need to continue its recovery and maintain the confidence of its customers. I would expect any significant decisions on new investment to be left to the new owners.
My announcement today concerns only Parcelforce and not the Royal Mail or Counters. The Government are committeed to maintaining a nationwide letter service with delivery to every address in the United Kingdom, within a uniform structure of prices, and with a nationwide network of post offices. In the case of Parcelforce, our belief is that the essential requirements are best met in the private sector. I commend this view to the House.
Mr. Doug Henderson: In making this announcement, is not the President of the
1138
Board of Trade threatening to undermine more than 100 years of universal parcel delivery service to every home and business in the country? Is he not meddling in a market which he knows is already competitive and which has many operators providing a wide variety of services, at a time when all operators, including Parcelforce, face major difficulties largely caused by the difficult trading conditions of a recession which last week the President of the Board of Trade himself described as the worst recession since the 1930s?
On a point of detail, has £50 million of the planned £250 million investment to develop eight new sorting centres gone ahead? Will he confirm that the source of funding for that investment was the cash generated by the profits of Royal Mail and Post Office Counters? Is any more of the planned £250 million cash injection to be committed by the Post Office to Parcelforce before privatisation? Is not that cash injection and the merging of the profitable Datapost letter and document service into Parcelforce another blatant case of public sector profits fattening up a public sector asset before it is sold off to the private sector?
Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that, as a prelude to privatisation, the Government prevented the Post Office from linking Parcelforce in joint ventures with other carriers? Will the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge that that prevented Parcelforce from developing its business to meet new trading circumstances, especially the international market? Will he also confirm that many private carriers that currently cream off profits from more lucrative inter-city routes use Parcelforce to deliver their parcels to remote districts?
Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that, while part of Parcelforce operates as a commercially viable service, part operates as a vital public service to many regions of the country that desperately require it? Will he give a guarantee here and now that he will reject privatisation if a universal service obligation cannot be met now and in future?
Is this not a case of privatisation for privatisation's sake? If the right hon. Gentleman is so proud of the plans that he has unveiled today, why did not the Conservative party have the courage to include them in its manifesto three months ago so that the British people could vote on them? Is not the President of the Board of Trade hellbent on out-privatising his predecessors with a knack that will do nothing to improve any postal service to any business or home in any part of the country?
Is not this postal privatisation the height of political opportunism? It was furtively announced at the butt end of the parliamentary Session. The country does not need postal privatisation to help the Tories' friends in the City; it needs postal modernisation to secure quality services for the people.
Mr. Heseltine: I think that the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne (Mr. Henderson) rather overstates his case. We brought forward the announcement, which otherwise might have come during the recess, as we thought it was good news in which hon. Members would like to share before they went on their summer holidays. I think that it probably enabled Opposition Members to psyche up each other's doctrinal obsessions, which were so decisively rejected at the last general election.
The hon. Gentleman asked me to reflect on the results of that election. To be fair, I should say that the overwhelming vote of confidence that the Government

1139
received then encouraged them to look again at the rate of progress that could be made on Parcelforce—the electorate's support was an important part of the Government's thinking in making the announcement today. It will do the hon. Gentleman no good to indulge in the customary scare tactics with which the Labour party tries to hide its doctrinal and obsessional opposition to privatisation. As I said several times in my statement, the universality of the service is not negotiable. The only issue is who provides the service.
Anyone who has looked generally and widely at Post Office services is fully aware that the Post Office has a whole range of private sector activities to provide what the hon. Gentleman rightly describes as vital public services. Post Office Counters has 1,000 Crown offices and about 19,500 sub-post offices, many of them in the private sector, all providing a vital public service.
Mr. Richard Page: I welcome my right hon. Friend's announcement. Does he agree that the object is to introduce the culture and ethos of private enterprise into this improving but still loss-making operation and into an area in which competitors are making a great deal of money? Who or what will be responsible for the fixing of the universal tariff so that operations are carried out on a level playing field?
Mr. Heseltine: I wholly agree with my hon. Friend's view about the need to inject the culture of the private sector, which will include—as I think the House and, certainly, my hon. Friends will broadly welcome—the opportunity for managers and people who work in the industry potentially to become part owners of it, a concept which has proved so successful elsewhere. The definition of affordability is bound to remain a public sector ministerial responsibility.
Mr. Malcolm Bruce: When Parcelforce is privatised, will there be a uniform parcel tariff so that a parcel from Truro to Aberdeenshire or Shetland can be sent at a flat rate, because there are surcharges now? Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there has been a deterioration in the service in preparation for privatisation, with only one delivery attempted? If that delivery is unsuccessful, the recipient is required to go to a collection point, which may be 30 miles away. That is not an improving service but a deteriorating one.
I welcome the suggestion that the employees might be given an opportunity to buy the business. Will the right hon. Gentleman assure us that it will not be sold to a competitor, and will he reaffirm without equivocation that the Government intend to keep their sticky fingers off the Royal Mail?
Mr. Heseltine: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman missed what I said about the universality of the service. I made it as clear as possible that these matters are not negotiable—I think that those were the words I used—and were the subject of a clear manifesto commitment at the last. election. I unhesitatingly reaffirm the Government's policy.
The hon. Gentleman suggested that the service has deteriorated in anticipation of privatisation. That is unlikely because I discussed the form of privatisation with the chairman of the Post Office board only within the past few days, and it is unlikely that that has filtered through to cause a deteriorating service in the meantime.
1140
Of course I cannot give an undertaking about the ultimate purchaser of Parcelforce. We must market it and secure the best possible deal in the taxpayers' interests.
Mr. Alan Duncan: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the employees of Parcelforce should look upon his announcement as a great opportunity? Does he further agree that their prospects would be ill served by listening to the backward-looking advice of the Opposition?
Mr. Heseltine: My hon. Friend is right. He is drawing on the experience of privatisation because, despite all the endeavours of the Opposition, it has created one of the greatest share-owning democracies in the world. In support of my hon. Friend, I hope that the Opposition will continue to yammer away in this rather obsessional fashion because it will keep them on the Opposition Benches.
Mr. John McWilliam: Does the President of the Board of Trade agree that the staff of Parcelforce have co-operated magnificently with the changes that have been introduced over the past few years? Does he also agree that his offer to them of a universal service into which they can buy and a universal price does not seem to make economic sense? There must be real worry, particularly among people in rural areas, because they rely on Parcelforce, on the old Royal Mail parcel services, for essential services. In general, such people are very badly paid and do not have the means to pay for an economic service.
Mr. Heseltine: The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. Let me clarify one aspect of what he had to say. I did not say that Parcelforce will have to provide a universal service. What I am saying is that the Government will ensure that there is a universal service. I draw the attention of the House to something that most people will already know, and that is that the Royal Mail already provides a support service for Parcelforce in many parts of the country. Therefore, it is perfectly possible to distinguish between the two.
The other point that the hon. Gentleman makes about rewarding the employees of Parcelforce is also of concern to me. There has been a considerable growing market in many of the services, but the growth of the market has not been one in which the Post Office has shared to the scale that it might. One of the opportunities of setting this part of the Post Office free is that it might be able to expand into directions at home and overseas which, characteristically, publicly owned industries have been precluded from doing.
Mr. John Marshall: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that Parcelforce has lost more than £150 million in the past two years? In view of that, and the fact that it has only 2 per cent. of the next-day parcel market, is not the choice facing Parcelforce clear—either to wither in the public sector or to expand in the private sector? Does my right hon. Friend agree that every industry that has been privatised has increased investment, increased productivity and improved the service, and that that is what Parcelforce will do?
Mr. Heseltine: Sadly, my hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the scale of the losses. The figure for the past two years is £155 million, although it is fair to say that the loss last year was significantly less than that for the year

1141
before. It is because we wish to give the company the opportunity to trade in the private sector and to seize the opportunities of what has been an exciting market for many companies but not for Parcelforce that we seek to take the decisions that we are taking today.
Mr. Tony Benn: Is the Minister aware that what he is setting aside today is the culture of public service that was established by Rowland Hill and has been followed by every Postmaster-General, Conservative, Labour and Liberal, for more than 100 years, based on the clear understanding that it is much more expensive to deliver letters and parcels in remote areas than it is in urban areas? When the admission was drawn from the Minister that there would no longer be a requirement for Parcelforce to meet the needs of the rural areas, he was explaining the loss that it has suffered in recent years because it has had to meet that requirement. Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as President of the Board of Trade, he is presiding over another piece of loot and plunder of the public services in the interests of his grubby little business friends who financed his election success?
Mr. Heseltine: The right hon. Gentleman has much experience, as I believe that he presided over part of the organisation during his long ministerial career. One reason why the losses of the past two years were discovered was that it was realised that there was an accounting error in the way in which the overheads were allocated in the system. It was nothing to do with the cultural change. But if we are talking about culture—I should be happy to do so in this context—let us face the fact that the most eloquent example of the quality of the culture is that Parcelforce has 2 per cent. of the next-day delivery and 34 per cent. of the later-than-next-day delivery. That shows that the customer has decided that the culture in the public sector is not good enough.
Mr. Phillip Oppenheim: At a time when Governments all over the world are privatising rather than nationalising, including even socialist Governments in Australia, Spain and France, why does my right hon. Friend think that our own dear old Labour party persists in burying its head in the sand and parroting the tired old dogma of the forties, fifties and sixties in wanting to keep in public ownership a loss-making operation, losses which under private ownership could be made up and put into essential areas of public spending, such as health and education, rather than poured down the drain of a loss-making, state-owned industry?
Mr. Heseltine: My hon. Friend may feel that, if the Labour party talks the language it does, the most eloquent thing it can do is to bury its head in the sand.
Mr. Peter Hain: Surely the President of the Board of Trade blew the gaff on his commitment to maintain a universal service when he dumped it back on the public sector, in the form of the Royal Mail. What guarantee can he give Parcelforce employees that their pension rights will be protected, given that the Post Office pension fund will be dominated by the public sector Post Office? By surreptitiously stripping the Royal Mail prefix from the Parcelforce title, has not the right hon. Gentleman indulged in sharp practice? Not least, he has
1142
avoided direct conflict with an important person who has declared her opposition to postal privatisation—the Queen.
Mr. Heseltine: It is with some regret that I tell the hon. Gentleman that I did not even know until yesterday that the Royal Mail prefix had been dropped from Parcelforce. If that is seen as some great constitutional lacuna in my performance, let me explain to the House——
Mr. Hain: The right hon. Gentleman answered a question from me on that matter only three days ago.
Mr. Heseltine: What is two or three days? I will give the hon. Gentleman the explanation as I understand it—which is more bizarre than the truth. Some old vans were repainted and in the course of that work the words "Royal Mail" were not signwritten, only the word "Parcelforce". If the hon. Gentleman can see a sinister plot in that, I admire his ingenuity but I do not share it.
The hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Hain) raised a serious point to which I will give a serious answer. There is now wide experience of protecting the rights of public sector pensioners as they transfer into the private sector. I give the House my assurance that the same diligence will apply in this case.
Several Hon. Members rose——
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): I would like to call all hon. Members who have risen in their places, but I make a plea for succinct questions.
Mr. Andrew Mitchell: Is my right hon. Friend aware that his announcement has been awaited by millions of customers of Parcelforce who want to see skill, innovation and entrepreneurial flair brought to this important market? Is it not richly ironic that, at a time when Labour is seeking to change its leader in a futile attempt to attract the electorate, it cannot change the economic policies that have shackled Opposition Members to the Benches opposite and ensured that they do not emerge into the modern economic world?
Mr. Heseltine: I thought that my hon. Friend was about to suggest that Parcelforce should conduct the retiring leader of the Labour party to some unknown destination. My hon. Friend is right when he says that our decision is a reflection of customer choice. We believe that there will be improving opportunities for those working in Parcelforce, and for customers to enjoy a more sophisticated service.
Mr. Alun Michael: Does the President of the Board of Trade accept that today's announcement justifies the worst fears of the staff and public in recent years? As privatisation has invariably led to increased prices—usually affecting the most vulnerable people—will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that his universal service will be available at a price that is affordable to all, including those living in remote parts of the country as well as those in the cities?
Mr. Heseltine: I thought that I had made that clear, but as the hon. Gentleman raises an important point I will repeat my remarks because I do not want him to be in any doubt. By universality, we mean that the service will apply from one end of the country to the other; we mean that there will be a standard rate applying from one end of the

1143
country to the other; and we mean that the rate—which will be at ministerial discretion and therefore accountable to the House—will he judged as affordable.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin: I welcome in particular my right hon. Friend's assurance that the Post Office will assist management and employees in their potential bid for a management buy-out, but will he ensure that management have free access to advice and to investors, and that management and investors can talk freely to the vendors? That would avoid the situation that arose in previous privatisations when management were starved of access to free advice and so did not get a fair crack of the whip.
Mr. Heseltine: My hon. Friend raises a most important point. It is one that I have discussed with the chairman of the Post Office, who is supportive of my announcement today. I shall ensure that my hon. Friend's views are conveyed to him, because they coincide very much with my own.
Mr. Tam Dalyell: As a distinguished gardener, the Secretary of State may obtain his gardening sweaters from Mr. Tulloch of Shetland and his bulbs from the Scilly isles. He said in his statement that a universal parcel service would continue to operate at a uniform and affordable tariff. By what mechanism will that be ensured for the islands and other remote areas? How will it be done?
Mr. Heseltine: It will be done in much the same way as it is done today. Ministers and the Post Office make decisions about what constitutes an affordable cost in the light of the evidence, the economics and the service that they must provide. That can be debated in the House, and, as the Minister responsible, I would take a personal interest in ensuring that a realistic price was part of the structure of any new system that we devised, having regard to what people could afford.
Mr. Graham Riddick: Does my right hon. Friend agree that Parcelforce is operating in a highly competitive market, and that it is wholly inappropriate for a state-owned firm to operate in such a market in which there is a danger of cross-subsidy from the letters monopoly? Was not the "nationalisation at any price" mentality that we have observed in Opposition Members a significant contributory factor to Labour's defeat in the general election?
Mr. Heseltine: My hon. Friend has made an important point. There are, of course, separate accounts for Parcelforce, which revealed the £155 million loss to which I referred. The funds to meet those losses, however, have come from other Post Office revenue, and to that extent Parcelforce is indeed the beneficiary of cross-fertilisation.
My hon. Friend also made an important point by reminding us that Parcelforce is competing in a very competitive market. My experience leads me to believe that it will be able to compete more freely and responsively in the private sector.
Mr. Graham Allen: Does the President of the Board of Trade admit that he has literally been caught playing pass the parcel, in that the loss-making parts of Parcelforce will be handed on to the Royal Mail? What will happen when the music stops? Will Royal Mail be next on the right hon. Gentleman's list?
1144
Will he also tell the House and those who work for Parcelforce how many redundancies will result from his proposals?
Mr. Heseltine: The hon. Gentleman is well aware that I cannot anticipate the market trends of this or any other industry. No Government have been able to shelter the employees of public or private-sector companies from redundancies caused by changing market trends; it is naive to pretend that one has that ability, or would want it.
The hon. Gentleman seems to ignore the fact that Parcelforce is losing money. The privatisation will not deprive the Exchequer of a positive cash flow. Parcelforce is losing money, and it is being cross-subsidised. The only issue is whether the public will obtain better value for money, whether the employees will have a better opportunity and whether the marketplace will enjoy greater competition. What is not at stake is the responsibility to deliver a universal service at an affordable tariff.
Mr. Geoffrey Dickens: Does my right hon. Friend agree that a company in the private sector must be efficient, produce competitive prices and deliver on time if it is to survive and grow? If a textile mill in my constituency, on the outskirts of Oldham and Rochdale, required a component, it would need to be able to rely on the delivery time: that would he critical. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is better and more efficient for commerce, trade and industry to allow Parcelforce to compete and fight to survive and grow, thus giving a better service to my constituents?
Mr. Heseltine: The people of Littleborough and Saddleworth are undoubtedly a vital part of the make-up of the marketplace to which our new privatised Parcelforce will wish to direct its attention. I shall ensure that my hon. Friend's views are transmitted to them.
Mr. Andrew Faulds: If all this is in the general interest of taxpayers, how does it equate with an efficient and universal parcel delivery service?
Mr. Heseltine: The hon. Gentleman will understand that by means of the competitive process we can often obtain a cheaper price in the private sector for delivering a public service.
Mr. John Whittingdale: Is my right hon. Friend aware that all those businesses that require, indeed insist upon, a reliable and affordable next-day parcel delivery service will welcome the increased opportunity for competition that his announcement provides? Does he not agree that Parcelforce will stand a much better chance of increasing its present puny share of the market once it is in the private sector?
Mr. Heseltine: My hon. Friend touches on a wider issue. It is important to recognise the extent to which in recent years the private sector has eroded a great deal of the new market in delivery services. One of the exciting opportunities to which employees of Parcelforce will respond is that now they will be able to compete effectively in that growth market without the constraints that previously held them back.
Mr. Bob Cryer: It appears from the Minister's comments that it is ministerial assurances that

1145
will ensure the maintenance of universal delivery at a standard charge. Does the right hon. Gentleman recall going on television many months ago and giving numerous assurances about not standing against the then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher? In view of the varying positions he has taken on many issues, would it not be better if we had legislation to guarantee the universal service at a standard charge? If not, will not people on low incomes, such as pensioners, face a massive increase in charges, while the only people to benefit will be the fat cats in the City who contributed to Tory finances at the last general election?
Mr. Heseltine: The hon. Gentleman has his own obsessions, which I understand full well. It is because they are obsessions peculiar to him that they have so little appeal outside this House.
Mr. Peter Thurnham: While I welcome my right hon. Friend's excellent statement, may I ask him to bear in mind the outstanding performance of Document Interlink Ltd. in my constituency, which has built up a successful organisation that specialises in next-day guaranteed delivery of letters?
Mr. Heseltine: My hon. Friend encourages me in what I do. I shall certainly bear in mind the excellent example that he has drawn to the attention of the House.
Mr. David Winnick: Is it not of some interest that this statement has been made just before the House goes into the long summer recess, a decision based on sheer political dogma, and that we are not being told what is to be done about the growing and deepening economic crisis and the fear of higher interest rates? Would not that have been a far more relevant statement to make today than this nonsense which has just been announced by the Secretary of State?
Mr. Heseltine: I thought that the case of those who sit on the Opposition Front Bench was that I should have made the announcement earlier. Now, apparently, it should not have been made at all and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have been here to tell the House that we are pursuing the only sensible policies upon which economic recovery depends.
Mr. Nigel Evans: Does my right hon. Friend agree that some of the scare stories that we now hear from Opposition Members were excctly the same stories as we heard when British Telecom was privatised, particularly about public telephone boxes in rural areas? Is it not a fact that since privatisation there are more public telephone boxes in rural areas and that far more of them are working than ever before?
Mr. Heseltine: My hon. Friend draws the attention of the House to the tragedy of the Labour party. The longer the Opposition go on clinging to their outdated ideas and peddling their prejudices, the less credible they are with the electorate. If there is one distinction to be drawn between the privatisation of British Telecom and the privatisation of Parcelforce, it is simply that the Labour party's arguments today are even less credible than they were when British Telecom was in its sights.
Mr. Nigel Spearing: The President of the Board of Trade has referred to the opportunities for the employees of Parcelforce, of whom, as he may know, there are 1,000 in the West Ham area of Newham, in my constituency. Does not the competition that he is now introducing mean, however, that other people will have the opportunity to make my constituents redundant? As to universality, if it is not necessarily to be Parcelforce, who will be responsible for it? The removal of "Royal Mail" from the Parcelforce title is a means, is it not, of getting round the guarantee given by Lady Thatcher that Royal Mail would not be privatised?
Mr. Heseltine: The hon. Gentleman has not been listening closely to what I have been saying to the House. We are not discussing abandoning the pledge of universality. That remains a public commitment. It is a Government policy which was in our election manifesto and I have repeated several times that we do not intend to prejudice that position. We are not concerned about whether there will be universality, uniformity or a standard tariff, because we are determined to preserve all those things. The only issue being dealt with in this case—the same question can be asked in other cases—is how to implement the commitments. It is apparent to anyone studying the Post Office that in many cases the policy commitments which may be those of the Government, are being implemented in the private sector. I gave the clear example of sub-post offices. There are far more of those in the private sector than there are Crown post offices in the public sector.
Mr. John Bowis: Is my right hon. Friend aware how long the world has been awaiting his statement? When setting up his postal service, Rowland Hill indicated that in due course he expected it to be run by the private sector. "In due course" has been a long time in coming. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that letter postal services are not too far behind, if not in privatisation, at least in opening up the service to competition?
Mr. Heseltine: I understand that Rowland Hill made that commitment 150 years ago. I can only apologise to the House for having taken so long to make this announcement.
Mr. Harry Barnes: Will not the privatisation of Parcelforce take away another area of parliamentary questioning? There have been many privatisations in energy which have resulted in getting rid of a Department and many agencies have been established about which we cannot ask questions. Is it not a fact that the Government's ideological programme attacks partliamentary democracy?
Mr. Heseltine: I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman has ever questioned his obsession with parliamentary questioning about this service. What is the point of being able to question Ministers about 2 per cent. of the next-day service when one cannot question the 98 per cent. of the service in the private sector? What is the point of thinking that one exercises any effective control over quality of service if in the later-than-next-day service one can talk about 34 per cent. with Parcelforce but not about the 66 per cent. in the private sector?
Sir Michael Grylls: Will my right hon. Friend accept that his statement will be warmly

1147
welcomed, not least because of the extra competition it will bring that will be in everybody's interest? When carrying out the privatisation, will he use his influence to try to ensure that the employees in Parcelforce have an opportunity of owning the business? He could perhaps take as his role model the huge success of the National Freight Consortium, which has a great deal of employee ownership. Will he do everything he can to help Parcelforce to succeed in the same way as the NFC did?
Mr. Heseltine: I understand my hon. Friend's concern, which I share, for encouraging employees to become owners in the businesses for which they work. I have discussed the idea with the chairman of the Post Office and he has readily agreed that the Post Office will make funds available to help employees and managers to prepare a bid if they should so wish. However, it is not a responsibility of the Government to make up the minds of employees or managers about the nature of the commercial decision that they may choose to take. Our task is to ensure that they have an opportunity to take it, not to take it for them.
Mr. Chris Smith: The President of the Board of Trade has said that he is not proposing today to privatise, in whole or in part, the Royal Mail letters service or counter service. However, he has conspicuously failed to rule out privatisation in principle. Will he now do so?
Mr. Heseltine: The hon. Gentleman was not listening to what I said. He asked about Post Office Counters and whether I will rule out privatisation. Of the 18,500 post offices in Britain. 17,500 are privatised and 1,000 of them are Crown Offices. A year ago, instead of the 1,000 Crown Offices, there were 1,150. Therefore many have been transferred into the private sector in the past 12 months. It is outside the experience of any hon. Member that I should say that this is all a public-sector-provided service. It is a public service in terms of universality, uniformity and affordability, but the delivery mechanism is spread widely in the private sector.

Points of Order
4.10 pm
Mr. Max Madden: On a point of order Mr. Deputy Speaker. In addition to your duties in the House, you are a constituency Member. In that spirit, will you deprecate a decision of Customs and Excise, which is due to be announced on Friday, to close an office in my constituency with the loss of more than 100 jobs and to transfer it to Leeds? That announcement will he made without——
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): Order. I do not think that I can anticipate anything that might happen in the future.
Mr. Tony Marlow: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You will be aware of the European Commission's outrageous suggestion that the United Kingdom's budget rebate should be reduced by 25 per cent. Not content with taking the powers of the House, it is taking our constituents' money and our privilege over supply. We are about to begin the recess, but this matter has grave implications.
May I, through your offices, Mr. Deputy Speaker, ask the Government to make an urgent statement on the issue? My understanding has always been that we must have unanimity for any change in the budget. If so, why is the Commission making this outrageous suggestion now? It must know that——
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman said that it is a suggestion. The Leader of the House is on the Front Bench and will have heard his submission.
Mr. Andrew Miller: May I raise a matter of which I gave Madam Speaker and the Chancellor of the Exchequer's office notice? I received yesterday representations from staff of the National Economic Development Office about the implementation of the Chancellor's statement on 16 June. Although Labour Members disagreed with the intention behind the statement, there was consensus about the Chancellor's praise for the staff and director-general of the office. In his statement, the Chancellor gave commitments regarding employment opportunities in the Board of Trade.
The solemn undertaking that was given to the House has been acted on in part, but in a memo dated 7 July some of the staff were given only six days to apply and two days for interviews. Some have not been invited at all. I should be grateful, recognising that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are not responsible for Government statements, if you would use your good offices to bring this matter to the Chancellor's attention and ask him to ensure that it is clarified and that the spirit of the statement is met in full.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Madam Speaker was grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving her prior notice. Ministers on the Front Bench will have heard the hon. Member's submission. It is not a matter for the Chair.
Mr. John McAllion: We have just heard a statement from a senior Minister that he described as a statement of the Government's intent to privatise a nationalised industry. On 7 February 1985 we had a statement about the Government's intent to privatise the nationalised water industry in England and Wales. On both occasions, the Government have recognised their

1149
responsibility to keep the House informed before making any other public statement about their intentions. Yet, all this week, without making a statement to Members, Scottish Office Ministers have been trumpeting in the press their intention to privatise Scottish water services. As this is supposed to be a unitary Parliament, how can the House force Scottish Office Ministers to show it the same respect as Ministers in English and Welsh Departments have shown?
Mr. Dennis Canavan: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it on the same point?
Mr. Canavan: Yes. I wish to support the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) legitimately made.
It is part of our parliamentary tradition that, if a Government seek to change the ownership of a major industry or service, they seek a mandate from the people by including it in their manifesto. In neither the English nor Scottish manifesto was there mention of the privatisation of the Scottish water service, which is owned and administered by local authorities. I have raised the matter in written parliamentary questions, but I have received very little information compared with what is being almost deliberately leaked to the press. Initially, Ministers denied any possibility of privatising Scottish water but then started making encouraging, positive noises to welcome such a proposal. It seems that members of the press are better informed than Parliament about the issue.
The Government have no mandate—certainly not from the people of Scotland—to privatise Scottish water. Indeed, even by British standards they have no mandate to do so. If they are intending to privatise Scottish water we should have a statement from the Minister before the House goes into recess.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Both hon. Gentlemen know that I have no responsibility for Government statements. They have made their point and I am sure that it has been heard by the Leader of the House.
Mr. Madden: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Another point of order?
Mr. Madden: I am sorry to press you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I was in no way——
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it on the same issue?
Mr. Madden: May I make the point that I wanted to make——
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it on the same issue that was raised before—yes or no?
Mr. Madden: It was to urge you——
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I understand entirely the point that the hon. Gentleman raised before and I gave a ruling.
Mr. Bob Cryer: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. As tomorrow consists of timed Adjournment debates, could you give us notice of any application that might have been made for a statement tomorrow? We need to know today, if possible. Have you received any application for a statement about the wretched, appalling proposal to close the Customs and Excise revenue office in Bradford?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: No, I have had no application, but I shall be here at 9.30 am tomorrow.
Mr. McAllion rose——
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it a new point of order?
Mr. McAllion: It is to support——
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The point of order does not need any support. I gave a very clear answer.

Airports (Town and Country Planning)
4.16 pm
Mr. John Denham: I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to bring the operation of certain categories of civil airports and aerodromes within the scope of planning legislation; and for connected purposes.
There is a revolutionary expansion in air travel. Far more people are flying in far more aircraft to far more destinations. Good air links, especially to Europe and within the United Kingdom, are increasingly and rightly seen as an essential element of regional economic development. However, there is a down side to the benefits. More and more airports, many long-neglected, are being pressed into greater use. Those who live under their flight paths see not benefits, but only more noise and more pollution.
Southampton Eastleigh airport is set to expand from 400,000 passengers to 1 million passengers a year. There will be many benefits throughout South Hampshire, but thousands of my constituents in Townhill Park, Bitterne Park, and Midanbury fear that their lives, already disrupted, will become a misery. Living on a rising hillside a mile or so from the runway, they anticipate a future of aircraft flying low overhead from the early hours of the morning until late at night, of unusable gardens on summer afternoons and of noise and air pollution.
Naturally, they expect the planning system and their local council to be able to protect them and to balance their real losses against the potential gains. However, the planning system at present is woefully deficient. Local councils do hot have the necessary powers. Indeed, they have more powers to control the noise from model aircraft than noise from the real thing.
The Government's consultation paper "Control of Aircraft Noise" set out the admirable principle that
"those responsible for causing noise should be responsible for keeping it to a minimum arid for incurring the costs of doing so. They should also be accountable to local people."
Sadly, that is not how the system works.
The system is a lottery. If developments take place on the ground—for example, new terminals—there may be some controls over expansion but not if expansion uses existing facilities. The powers which do exist lie with the local authority where the airport is situated but not, as in Southampton, where those most affected live.
Many powers that exist or which might be created—to force the Civil Aviation Authority to take environmental factors into account, to require the soundproofing of buildings or to require airports to agree a statutory noise abatement plan with local councils—are exercised at the whim of the Secretary of State for Transport. Most have never been used and apparently never will be used except for the largest international airports.
Local councils do not have explicit powers to control expanding airport operations. At Southampton Eastleigh, planners have instead negotiated a planning agreement that contains some significant controls. I believe that, within its limited powers, the Eastleigh council, in consultation with the city council, has done a good job, but the agreement falls well short of local aspirations. In any
1152
case, planning agreements are always a murky, unsatisfactory process. They lack the transparency and openness that good, accountable planning requires.
The Southampton agreement has yet to be signed. Its most crucial element—a limited ban on night flights—has been postponed for 12 months already. Because the agreement is linked to an airport business park development, there must be some doubt whether it will ever be signed while this recession lasts.
My Bill will give local authorities the explicit right to control directly the expansion of airport operations. These powers would be triggered by any significant expansion in operations, whether sudden or incremental. The powers will cover the times of use, the number and types of aircraft movements and, subject to the proper role of the CAA, the routing of aircraft into and out of the airport. Councils will gain explicit powers to enforce noise control measures and to require monitoring and remedial action for noise, air pollution and vortex damage. Where two or more local authorities are significantly affected they will be required to exercise these powers collectively.
Any local planning system would be subject to appeal and to the balancing of regional and national interests with purely local interests. But my Bill will bring about a much-needed shift in power to local people and their elected representatives. Airports are probably the last major polluters, largely free of pollution control and not subject to rights of redress for individual citizens. Of the 250 airfields in the United Kingdom, only three currently come under the full force of existing powers. It is time that this situation was ended, and that is the purpose of the Bill.
4.21 pm
Mr. James Hill: May I say a few words?
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Morris): Is the hon. Member opposing the Bill?
Mr. Hill: Yes, I am. I am opposing it because it does not go far enough. This has been a problem in Southampton for many years.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman has been in the House for many years, and he knows that that is not a negative. It is not acceptable, and I ask the hon. Gentleman to resume his seat.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. John Denham, Mr. Neil Gerrard, Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours, Mr. Mike Hall, Mr. Terry Davis, Ms. Estelle Morris, Mr. Jamie Cann, Mr. Clive Betts, Mr. Nigel Spearing, Mr. John Garrett, Mr. Kevin Barron and Mr. Ron Davies.

Airports (Town and Country Planning)
  AIRPORTS (TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING)
  Mr. John Denham accordingly presented a Bill to bring the operation of certain categories of civil airports and aerodromes within the scope of planning legislation; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 4 December and to be printed. [Bill 61.]
Orders of the Day

  Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Disclosure of Information) Bill [Lords]
  Order for Second Reading read.
  4.23 pm
  The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Mr. Tom Sackville): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
  This is a technical, but very necessary Bill, which seeks to put right certain unforeseen consequences of the section of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 which dealt with confidentiality. The Bill is very narrowly defined. It seeks only to relax the restrictions on disclosure of information by people to whom a licence applies or to whom directions have been given, as contained in section 35(5) of the 1990 Act. Hon. Members may find it helpful if I explain the background to this matter and then briefly describe the Bill.
  Information obtained during treatment for infertility can be extremely personal and private. Parliament recognised this in deciding that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 should impose a stronger duty of confidentiality than existed under the common law in relation to such information.
  The 1990 Act therefore introduces a criminal sanction for breaches of the confidentiality provisions in section 33 of the Act. The criminal sanction in relation to section 33(5) of the 1990 Act applies only to the licensed person who initially discloses the confidential information. Breach of that provision is a criminal offence punishable by up to two years imprisonment, or a fine, or both. That sanction is in addition to the existing common law which protects confidential information.
  Since the 1990 Act came into force, practical experience has shown that the provisions on the disclosure of information by licensed clinicians were in some respects too tightly drawn. They have led to unintended risks and difficulties. As it stands, the 1990 Act prohibits licensed clinicians, with some specified exceptions, from disclosing identifying information about a patient's treatment to anyone except the patient herself. They are prohibited from disclosing it to members and employees of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority or other people covered by a licence for the purpose of licensed activities. The practical effect has been found to be that the doctor cannot pass on identifying information, even with the patient's consent, for example to the patient's general practitioner.
  The intention was that patients should have maximum control over the information about their treatment. However, it has become clear that the restrictions imposed by the Act in certain instances went too far. The following example illustrates this point. In rare cases, the ovaries of a woman may be hyperstimulated as a result of super-ovulatory drugs. This could result in a dangerous, possibly life-threatening condition which may go unrecognised because a doctor other than a licensed clinician who treats her cannot be given details about her infertility treatment. If clinicians were to do all that they might wish to do to protect the health of their patients,
  1154
  they would—under the Act—have to break the law. Clearly, it is not right that they should be put in that position.
  Another example of the unintentionally over-restrictive nature of section 33 of the Act is that it prevents the disclosure of information for legal purposes. This means that a licensed person may not be able to defend him or herself if sued by a patient. If a doctor or other person to whom a licence applies is sued by a patient who has undergone treatment, he or she cannot give his or her legal adviser information about treatment given for an identifiable individual. The doctor would therefore be left in an unfair and untenable position in relation to the patient by whom he or she is sued, who is subject to no constraints under the Act.
  When the disclosure provisions in section 33 of the 1990 Act were debated, this House and another place both decided that the person to whom the confidential information relates should retain as much control over the dissemination of that information as possible. The Government's view remains that this is right, but it was not the intention that the consequences that I have described should result.
  I turn now to the detail. The Bill seeks to make certain specified relaxations in the restrictions on the disclosure of information by licensed clinicians imposed by section 33 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Section 33(6) of the Act contains exceptions to the general restrictions. The Bill adds further exceptions, removing the criminal sanction from disclosure in specified circumstances and for particular purposes.
  Clause 1(2) inserts three new paragraphs into section 33(6) of the 1990 Act. Paragraph (f) relates to the necessary—I repeat, necessary—disclosure of information before or in connection with proceedings, including legal proceedings and procedures for dealing with complaints. This will deal with the problem that I have just described of the clinician being unable to pass identifying information to his or her solicitor. Access to necessary identifying information in connection with complaints procedures, which is also prevented under the existing provisions, will be permitted under paragraph (f).
  Paragraph (g) applies to one narrow aspect of treatment involving a surrogate mother. It enables a licensed clinician to confirm, for the purposes only of an application for a parental order under section 30 of the Act, that the gametes of a particular person were used in treatment services which involved the child being carried by a woman other than the wife of the couple seeking the parental order. Without that provision, the couple seeking the parental order—that is, the couple who commissioned the surrogate mother—might have to prove their genetic relationship to the child through DNA testing, which is time-consuming, and an unnecessary imposition. The provision seeks to simplify such proceedings.
  Paragraph (h) deals with inconsistencies between the 1990 Act and the Access to Health Records Act 1990. The latter gives rights of access to records in a number of cases and, in particular, access by specified persons to the records of patients who have become incapable or who have died. The inconsistency arises because the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act does not allow access in those circumstances—in cases where infertility treatment has been given. That provision will make it possible for the personal representatives, or for a person appointed by a

  1155
  court to manage the affairs of a patient, to pursue claims where the death or incapacity is alleged to have resulted from infertility treatment.
  Subsection (3) of the Bill inserts seven subsections, (6A) to (6G). Taking those subsections in order, (6A) prevents the disclosure of the identity of a third party whose gametes were used for the purposes of treatment services when revealing information in connection with proceedings provided for by new paragraph (f). Subsections (6B), (6C) and (6D) allow for information to be given with the consent of the individual or individuals receiving treatment.
  I stress that consent is an essential feature of those provisions. The subsections will enable a licensed clinician, with the patient's consent, to pass information about treatment to the GP or to others associated with the treatment, or to anyone specifically authorised by the patient. They will also allow—again, subject to consent—access to certain information for the purposes of clinical and financial audit. Subsection (6E) permits the disclosure of information about an individual's treatment without the patient's consent, in the event of a medical emergency involving that person. Such disclosure can take place only when it is not reasonably practicable to obtain the patient's consent.
  Subsection (6G) contains an affirmative regulation-making power to provide for further exceptions to section 33(5) of the 1990 Act. The provisions in the Bill deal with the specific difficulties which have come to our attention. However, we cannot be sure that further practical experience will not identify new situations which could create difficulty. Therefore, it seems sensible to anticipate such an event by including in the Bill a limited regulation-making power, subject to the affirmative procedure, enabling provision to be made for future exceptions. This means that further exceptions, should they be necessary, can be provided for and debated in this House without the need for another Bill.
  Subsection 5 of clause 1 makes it clear that the provisions in the Bill will apply to information obtained before as well as after the legislation comes into force.
  Finally, clause 2 provides for the short title, and for the extension of the Bill to Northern Ireland and to the Channel islands. The Bill has no implications for public funds.
  The Government would not be seeking the measure if satisfactory alternative ways of resolving the problems which have come to light were available. In conclusion, I emphasise that the circumstances in which disclosure would be permitted are closely defined in the Bill and, except in specified circumstances, the patient's consent will be required before any identifying information can be disclosed. I commend the Bill to the House.
  4.33 pm
  Ms. Harriet Harman: I thank the Minister for his full explanation of the Bill. As he knows, it was discussed fully by their Lordships, and several matters which might have needed clarification were explained in another place.
  As you will know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the last time the House debated this issue we were discussing the parent legislation, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. This is not the occasion to rehearse the arguments of principle in that Bill—the continuation of embryology
  1156
  research. However, since that Bill was enacted there have been two developments for which we had all hoped and which bear out the fact that the House was correct to pass it. There have been great advances in research into identifying and increasing our understanding of genetically transmitted disorders.
  Mr. Malcolm Chisholm: Does my hon. Friend think that infertile couples can still get infertility treatment under the national health service now that hospitals are opting out?
  Ms. Harman: I thank my hon. Friend for making that point. As it is the responsibility of GP budget holders and district health authorities to purchase services for people who are on their patients lists or who are within the district health authority area, there has been much concern that in vitro fertilisation and other specialist services for people with infertility problems will not be available under the NHS. I take this opportunity to ask the Minister to reassure us that he will monitor the purchasing patterns of GP budget holders and of district health authorities and to confirm that he sees a place for infertility services in the NHS.
  The importance of the 1990 Act was that it regulated research and the treatment of infertility. We want to be sure that treatment is not only regulated but available under the NHS, and not just to those who can pay for it. The intervention by my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Chisholm) gives me the opportunity to put that point to the Minister.
  Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman: The hon. Lady referred to advances in research into genetically transmitted disorders as an important development. There is no evidence that that research could not have been carried out on tissue from babies who, unfortunately, were stillborn or on tissue from naturally aborted foetuses, without the breeding of embryos on which to make experiments.
  Ms. Harman: The clear view of people who are engaged in research is that it simply would not be possible to make advances in our understanding of genetically transmitted disorders or to further the treatment of infertility in the way that the hon. Lady suggests. It is wrong to suggest that there is a hidden agenda and that researchers are saying that advances could not be made without human embryology when they could be. There is a clear consensus in the research and medical community that such research would not be possible without the use of human embryos. There are a few people on the margins who believe that it would be possible, but they do not carry their colleagues with them.
  Those of us who support the programme for improving treatment for infertility and the programme for discovering more about genetic disorders would not be prepared to sacrifice the great advances on the basis that other methods might be possible. There is no evidence to support that view. I have led the hon. Member for Lancaster (Dame. E. Kellett-Bowman) astray by raising the principles of the 1990 Act. I am sure that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, would say that she and I were out of order for raising the matter.
  I take this opportunity to congratulate the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority on its work, which has been well described in its first annual report. I

  1157
  am glad to have the opportunity to draw the attention of the House to that report. It is extremely well laid out and informative. It contains much information that professionals and those who may be embarking on infertility treatment may want to see. It is especially important that the report is accessible to the public, because many people who are embarking on infertility treatment feel that they are vulnerable to the blandishments of the private sector about what they could be offered if only they would hand over their money.
  The authority will have an increasingly important role to play in providing people who have been offered all sorts of services in the private sector, and for whom all sorts of claims are being made, with an opportunity to consult it. People will have an official body with whom they can discuss the situation in practice. The authority says that one of its responsibilities is
  "giving information and advice to donors and prospective donors, to people seeking treatment or storage, or to people considering whether to do so."
  I congratulate the authority on its excellent report. What help will the Minister's Department give to ensure that it is widely circulated among the medical profession and people who may want to look at it? My only minor criticism is that the report does not contain the authority's phone number or address. Many people reading the report and seeing the pictures of all those nice people working in the authority will want to ring them up or write to them for further information. Members of Parliament receive many reports and most of them are unreadable, but this is a good example and the authority has obviously done important work.
  Human embryology is a rapidly changing field. When we discussed the parent Act, it was impossible to predict the problems that would emerge, which is why it is useful for the authority to identify the problems and discuss them openly in consultation. One issue flagged up was whether the success rates of different clinics should be published. It is important that that is discussed further and I look forward to seeing what the authority decides. Where the authority can iron out problems, we can be confident that it will do so. Its report identifies a problem with the confidentiality clauses in the Act which it cannot sort out by guidance or in any other way, which is why we are required to legislate.
  We are dealing only with the extent of criminal law in this matter. Clearly, no one wants the criminal law to extend to such a degree that criminal sanctions could apply to the passing of information between doctors in the interests of patients. Doctors should not face disciplinary charges for seeking to provide information relating to treatment that is being questioned. The Bill should not change the general duty of confidence which doctors owe their patients. General practitioners have no criminal sanctions hanging over their heads if they provide information, but we all know and expect them not to do that. So we can reassure people that the Bill deals simply with the extent of the criminal law and the normal expectation of confidence between doctor and patient would hold true.
  I expect that, if that professional duty of confidence were breached, it would be monitored by the General
  1158
  Medical Council, so although the criminal law will be withdrawn slightly from that area, people's eyes will not be taken off it.
  I hope that the fact that we are considering the Bill will encourage those who have doubts that, once it is enacted, everybody will forget about it and get on with what they felt was necessary and expedient at the time. The Bill shows that there is an expectation that the letter of the law will be obeyed, even if it makes no sense. We must change the letter of the law, because we do not want practices to develop outside the law. I hope that the fact that we have returned to consider this issue today and change the legislation will encourage those who are worried that, when people are given an inch, they will take a mile.
  I thank the Minister for his clear introduction of the Bill. We recognise that we need the legislation and shall support it. I hope that he will deal with the points that I have raised.
  4.44 pm
  Dame Jill Knight: It is strange that, although we have been debating this small Bill for about half an hour, no one so far has mentioned the children born as a result of this so-called scientific advance. Since the introduction of the parent Act, some hon. Members on both sides of the House have been concerned about the position of the child.
  Will my hon. Friend the Minister say clearly whether the Bill improves or changes the position of those children? When children are born naturally and normally, possibly as the result of a brief affair. it may not be possible to find out health details of the parents, particularly the father. A child may have only one parent—a mother—and if she does not know the child's father well, the child may never know those health details.
  We are considering the position of children who have been deliberately brought into the world by a scientific procedure. Some of us believe that that puts a special responsibility on the law, and on the medical profession which has brought the child into the world through somewhat unusual and unnatural means. If a child is adopted, the law gives it a right of access to information. It is often important for doctors to know, for instance, whether there is a family history of heart disease or some other health problem; it is much easier to treat a patient if the parental background is known.
  It is less than fair to a child born deliberately in that way to withhold from the child information which is on file and known.
  If an adopted child can have access to such information, those children should have the same right. Few people will speak up for children born as a result of such procedures, but this is an occasion on which to do so, because we want the Bill to give those children a better deal than they have had hitherto.
  During the Committee stage of the parent Act, I sought to have the same conditions apply to those children as apply to adopted children. In law, it is absolutely clear that the interests of the child are paramount, but in these circumstances the interests of the child are not paramount but secondary to the interests of the mother or father. In many cases where children are born as a result of this procedure, the father and mother will be known—although the procedure is unusual, they will be the genuine father and mother—but I am talking about the many

  1159
  children born as a result of the procedure where the father is not known. That is to say, he may not be known to the mother, but he will certainly he known to those who keep the hospital records. It is in that narrow context that I wish to speak up once again for the rights of children who come into the world as a result of procedures that we in the House have, rightly or wrongly, blessed.
  4.50 pm
  Mr. Dafydd Wigley: I am glad to support the Bill. Many of us present today were involved in the protracted and sometimes heated debates on the original Act. Although we may have had differences of opinion about the original Act, I suspect that there is more agreement on the Bill's provisions, which meet some of the weaknesses that have become apparent in the original legislation. We are debating narrow points, not the broad issue covered by the original Act.
  There are two reasons for welcoming the relaxation of the provisions. First, it is important to establish communications between clinicians. I accept the argument of the hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight), although I take a different view from her on the general issue. We must strike a balance between the different interests—including those of the child that we must safeguard.
  There are times when there should be better communication between clinicians than is allowed under the narrow interpretation of the original legislation. In an attempt to protect the confidentiality of those receiving treatment to assist conception, the original Act unwittingly outlawed the direct communication between doctors which can be necessary in clinical emergencies.
  For example, a rare complication which can occur in the ovulatory stimulation preceding in vitro fertilisation can result in collapse. At present, if a patient collapses in the street, the licensed IVF centre could be barred from informing the casualty department of the hospital where the patient is taken of the ovulatory stimulation treatment. That problem must be addressed and overcome. It is in the interests of the patient and everyone else that legislation should allow prompt and appropriate medical treatment in such circumstances, even though they are rare.
  Legislative changes are also needed in respect of legal defence. One of the unintended consequences of the original Act was that it could deprive licensed practitioners of the ability to defend themselves in legal proceedings. Clinicians who provide such treatment may be sued for negligence and may be unable to obtain legal advice or representation, or submit a defence in a court of law without the risk of prosecution under the rules of confidentiality. The original legislation was not intended to create such circumstances.
  Whatever our far-reaching differences over the original legislation, we should secure as much agreement in this House on the objective of this limited Bill as was achieved in another Chamber. I hope that we can make rapid progress.
  4.53 pm
  Mr. David Wilshire: I have waited just over five years to prove to the House that I can voluntarily make a short speech, so I shall try not to speak for too
  1160
  long. My interest in the Bill arises from the fact that I too, served in Committee in 1990 and have followed subsequent developments with considerable interest.
  I support the Bill and am delighted that the Government have realised that more people need to know about the treatment—a battle that I fought and lost in 1990. I have only one reservation about the Bill: it does not go far enough. That is why I have tabled amendments, but I shall leave my comments on them until the appropriate time.
  I remain as supportive of research and treatment now as I was in 1990, and I have no quarrel with the principle. However, I will not adopt the approach of the hon. Member for Peckham (Ms. Harman) and risk reopening the debate. Now, as then, the strands of support and opposition for the legislation go backwards and forwards across the House as the debate continues. Like the hon. Member for Peckham, I am delighted that experience has shown that the 1990 Act appears to be working well. I hope that it will continue to do so.
  4.55 pm
  Ms. Liz Lynne: I endorse what has been said and I approve of the Act, but I have one or two worries about the Bill. Will there be any kind of monitoring? Can the Minister assure us that if the rules are relaxed the operation of the Bill will be monitored? Perhaps in two years' time there could he a review of all the law on the subject.
  4.56 pm
  Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman: The 1990 Act is a bad Act and it is not surprising that it has caused trouble. If the opening speech of my hon. Friend the Minister is to be believed, it may cause further trouble, as the matter has been left open.
  I strongly oppose what is inappropriately known as the parent Act—the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990—because I believe that life begins at conception and is sacred. That is why I have consistently opposed abortion, and continue to do so.
  I do not oppose—indeed, I support—in vitro fertilisation where the embryo is fertilised by the patient's husband and then reimplanted in the womb, but it is absolutely unforgivable to breed embryos for the purpose of experimentation. As I said to the hon. Member for Peckham (Ms. Harman), sadly there is quite enough foetal material created by accident—by spontaneous abortions and stillbirths—to make it unnecessary to experiment on live foetuses.
  The Bill slightly improves an appallingly bad Act. It would improve it still further if the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight) were taken up, her amendment accepted and more consideration given to the children.
  4.57 pm
  Mrs. Ann Winterton: As hon. Members may imagine, any legislation containing the phrase "human fertilisation and embryology" conjures up for me painful memories of the passage of the original Act bearing that name. The nights of 23 and 24 April 1990 will go down in the history of the House as a time when some of the most momentous decisions affecting human life were taken.

  1161
  On 23 April, hon. Members decided to allow research on embryonic human life that involved destruction of that life. On 24 April, the House decided to change the law on abortion to allow the termination of the life of an unborn child up to birth. Those of us who talked then of abortion up to birth were accused of scaremongering. However, a parliamentary written answer in column 437 of Hansard on 29 June states that the number of abortions after 24 weeks has doubled since the Act came into force, and abortions have taken place up to 36 weeks. As someone who has had the privilege of seeing the scanned pictures of her grandchildren at about 16 weeks, I cannot imagine how abortions could be done at 36 weeks in a civilised country, unless there was a good reason such as the mother's life being in danger, which is rare.
  I have deliberately strayed from the Bill to stress the momentous decisions that are being taken under the original Act and the fact that we are already reaping the results of the seeds that we sowed two years ago. I fully accept that the Bill is a technical measure. I cannot recall seeing a Bill of so few pages that was more complicated than this one. I do not object to the Bill's principle: to sort out some of the problems relating to the disclosure of information. I understand that, as the Minister and the hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley) said, a woman's health may be put at risk because the existing Act prevents some information being passed on to those treating her.
  I have no desire to stand in the way of such a proposal. However, I should like to highlight two matters. First, why is the Bill so technical? I think that there is a simple reason. The 1990 Act allowed treatment involving the donation of egg and sperm. It would be quite legal under that Act for a man to donate sperm, a woman to donate an egg, for fertilisation to take place in the laboratory and for the resulting egg to be implanted in a second woman who would carry a baby and eventually pass that child to other parents.
  Although that is an extreme case, once we allow life to be created by other than natural means and, in particular, provide for the donation of gametes, we inevitably bring on ourselves a whole range of consequences in relation to what information different people can have. It is a very sensitive matter for individuals to receive the kind of treatments that are allowed under the 1990 Act. Having decided to go down that road, we have brought on ourselves the need to devise complicated legislation. The Bill is a warning to us all of the implications of tampering with the natural means of reproduction.
  The other matter that I want to highlight also concerns my hon. Friends the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) and for Birmingham, Edgbaston, (Dame J. Knight). It is that the Bill makes no mention of disclosing information to the one group of people most affected by treatment—children born as a result of licensed treatment. That is a sad omission, and I am surprised that the Government have not said anything about it throughout the passage of the Bill. I hope that the Minister will clarify the Government's position when we discuss the matter in Committee.
  5.1 pm
  Mr. Peter Thurnham: I congratulate the Minister on this necessary Bill. It will correct a technical defect, of which we were not aware when the original Bill was passed. Events since the passing of the 1990 Act have proved its importance and success. I pay tribute to the British doctors who have made advances even greater than any that we expected at the time. The hon. Member for Peckham (Ms. Harman) spoke about that. Those advances are attributed to British scientists, who lead the world, and they would not have been possible without the freedom given by the Act. My hon. Friends the Members for Lancaster (Dame. E. Kellett-Bowman) and for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton) who opposed the Act should visit Hampstead hospital to see the work carried out by Dr. Bob Winston to help couples who suffer from genetic disorders and give them the chance to have a healthy child.
  One of the disturbing features about Enoch Powell's opposition to such legislation in the 1983 Parliament was his preparedness to sacrifice the interests of couples who suffer from genetic disorders in the name of fears that have proved groundless. The Act paved the way for Britain to continue to lead the world, and set an example for legislation and for science.
  Some doctors have spoken to me about their concerns over the defects in the 1990 Act. I am glad that the Government have not hesitated to introduce the Bill and to make provision through regulations for changes that might be required. We do not need to concern ourselves with any other corrections to the Act. It is right to maintain the anonymity of donors, an issue that is addressed by an amendment. I agree with the hon. Member for Peckham, who spoke about controlling the costs of the authority. Everybody was dissatisfied with the workings of the 1990 Act.
  5.4 pm
  Mr. Sackville: With the leave of the House, I should like to respond to the points made by hon. Members. I thank all those who have taken part, especially the hon. Members for Peckham (Ms. Harman) and for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Chisholm). The hon. Lady spoke about the principle of the Bill and the availability of infertility services, especially in vitro fertilisation. We have always made it clear that purchasing authorities, the district health authorities, have to decide, in the light of their knowledge of local priorities and needs, what treatment to provide. That is the current situation.
  I thank the hon. Lady for her congratulations to the authority, which I know it will welcome. She is probably unaware of the fact that I spoke at the authority's first conference recently, on the day that the annual report was published. I shall certainly raise with the authority the issue of distribution. The authority can be contacted at Paxton house, 30 Artillery lane, London E1 7LS.
  My hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight) and for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton) spoke about the position of the child. The Bill does not change in any way the right to information of a child born as a result of treatment. It is limited to narrow circumstances, such as—
  Mrs. Ann Winterton: Surely the crux of the matter is that an adopted child has the right to know its natural

  1163
  parents and its background, for reasons of health if for no other. Why have the Government not seen fit to do the decent thing and allow children born by artificial means to have the same rights?
  Mr. Sackville: That touches on the wider issue of comparisons between adoption law and the Bill's provisions. As my hon. Friend knows, the original Act left a regulation-making power, so that Parliament could later bring in rights to information on, for example, the health of genetic parents. The matter may be raised later in the Bill's passage.
  Dame Jill Knight: Would not the Bill be a perfect vehicle for doing exactly that? The Minister said that there should be no amendments or improvements and then he said that the matter could be raised later. Is there a chink of light there?
  Mr. Sackville: As I said, legislation allows for such regulations, but they must be discussed thoughtfully and at length. There are considerable ramifications attached to any change. Perhaps we can discuss that later.
  The hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley) has taken a great interest in the subject. I am grateful for the benefit of his expertise and his welcome for the Bill. My hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire), another leading expert on the subject—I have read some of his previous contributions—welcomed the Bill.
  Mr. Wilshire: I am always anxious that Hansard should be accurate. I am flattered to be called an expert. I might be an interested layman, but I would not lay claim to being an expert.
  Mr. Sackville: The hon. Member for Rochdale (Ms. Lynne) referred to monitoring. As the hon. Lady knows, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has statutory duties to monitor all the work and will deal with any new matters of concern in its annual report. If the hon. Lady wishes to contact me on any particular, my door is open. We look to the authority to monitor all the work and to be responsible for any changes and advances in techniques that may take place.
  I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster (Dame E. Kellett-Bowman) welcomed the Bill in principle despite her considerable doubts about the embryology aspects, of which we are aware. I am glad to hear that she approves of the principle of in vitro fertilisation as a method of fertility treatment.
  Lastly, I welcome the remarks made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham) who has taken a great interest in the subject. I hope that his interest will continue. His contributions are always welcome.
  The Bill seeks to relax the impact of section 35(5) of the 1990 Act without departing from the general principle that the person to whom the information relates should retain as much control over the dissemination of that information as possible. It seeks to redress the balance between necessary and appropriate access to identifying information and the sensitivities and wishes of the individual concerned.
  Mr. Thurnham: Is my hon. Friend aware of some of the advances that have been made at St. Mary's hospital, Manchester? I hope that he will have an opportunity to visit that hospital to see the work done there by Dr. Brian
  1164
  Lieberman, among others, which shows that advances arc being made not only in London but elsewhere in the country, particularly in the north-west.
  Mr. Sackville: I am aware of Dr. Lieberman's work. He is one of the leaders in the field and I hope that I will be able to visit in the future.
  The Bill will benefit patients and clinicians alike. It is a reasonable and much-needed measure, as many who have contributed to the debate have said. I commend the Bill to the House.
  Question put and agreed to.
  Bill accordingly read a Second time.
  Bill committed to a Committee of the whole House.—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]
  Bill immediately considered in Committee.

  Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Disclosure of Information) Bill [Lords]
    Clause 1

      RELAXATION OF SECTION 33(5) OF THE HUMAN FERTILISATION AND EMBRYOLOGY ACT 1990
      5.11 pm
      Dame Jill Knight: I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 1. line 21, leave out 'or'.
      The Chairman of Ways and Means (Mr. Michael Morris): With this it will be convenient to take amendment No. 2, in page 1, line 23, at end insert
      ',or
      (i) to a person who was born as a result of any treatment covered by a licence.'.
      Mr. Dafydd Wigley: On a point of order, Mr. Morris. I do not raise thisin a disruptive manner, and it can possibly be dealt with by a manuscript amendment. Amendment No. I seeks to leave out "or" in line 21, but the word "or" appears twice in that line.
      The Chairman: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. The word "second" should be included in the amendment.
      Dame Jill Knight: As I have already spoken, I have no intention of delaying the House. I simply give my hon. Friend the Minister notice that if what we are doing today merely benefits the patients, and if there is a thus far undiscovered loophole somewhere which may benefit the children, we shall seek to find that loophole and to use it because the rights of the children are clear in our minds.
      Mr. David Wilshire: I apologise for the last-minute decision to ask my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight) to move the amendment standing in my name. For the record, it should be made clear that my attention was drawn to the fact that in "Guidance to Ministers", now a public document, it states that Parliamentary Private Secretaries cannot move amendments to Government Bills. I apologise for any confusion which may have arisen. I can, however, speak to the amendments and I intend to do so.
      The amendments are all about who a person is and whether or not he or she has a right to know that. If the genetic parents are different from one's social parents, both sets of parents are an essential part of the child. That is an issue which I and a number of my hon. Friends raised first in 1990, and I make no apology for raising it again. Now, as then, the matter is one of conscience. These are matters of deeply held personal belief. The amendments are not anti-Government, aimed at driving a hole in a

      1165
      central plank of Government policy, and I hope that now, as in 1990, we can approach the debate on a non-party-political basis.
      The issue which was fundamental in 1990 and which we are discussing now is simply whether, if you, Mr. Morris, or I or anyone else were born as a result of egg or sperm donation, we ought to have the right to know who the donor or donors were. Let us be clear about this. Over the years, as treatment becomes more and more successful, more than a few people will discover that they were born as a result of such treatment. It may be that their social parents tell them. I hope that they will. It may be that people will find out by accident. With all the good will in the world, with all the safeguards and all the criminal sanctions, people will find out. Therefore, we must have an answer to whether people who discover that they have been born as a result of treatment have the right to know who the donors were. My view remains as it was in 1990—that people have the right to know.
      From time to time, people will realise that they were born as a result of treatment and some of them will take steps to try to find out who the donors were. They will quickly discover that others hold files containing the answer to the question that they are asking. They will readily realise that someone somewhere knows the identity of their genetic parents—information which they will be refused. They will not be allowed to know their genetic origins. If that happened to me, my response would be: how dare this system, or any system, refuse to tell me what others know about my basic origins?
      My conviction is deeply held and subjective, but there is another, calmer justification for the approach that I ask the Government to consider carefully. Refusing such information to people born as a result of treatment flies in the face of the spirit of the age. A short list of recent legislation shows that we have discussed access to information and have legislated for the rights of people, particularly in areas of local government, to know certain things that they did not know before. The Data Protection Act 1984 gave people the right to know what is held on file about them. Patients have the right to look at their medical records. Dare I suggest that even the citizens charter is all about the rights of the individual? All those matters, and many more, address the issue of people's rights to know all that there is to know about themselves.
      Then there is the argument put forward by my hon. Friends the Members for Edgbaston and for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton) of the precedent set by adopted children having the right to know who their parents are. I accept that few of them use it, but some do. To the best of my knowledge—I am happy to be corrected—there is no evidence that an adopted child's right to know its parents has done any harm.
      It would be foolish of me not to acknowledge the case against. It is argued that it would harm a child to know the identity of its genetic parents, but the adoptive child experience suggests that that is not so. Even if one accepts that argument, the truth will out sooner or later. Some people would find out, despite all efforts to prevent them from doing so. The only way to prevent the alleged harm would be to end all such treatment—and I would not support that.
      1166
      Another argument is that, if the child were given the right to know, the supply of donors would end, but there is evidence to the contrary. I cite the experience of King's College hospital, London, based on 100 people who inquired whether they could donate either eggs or sperm. When the 30 who were accepted as donors were asked whether or not they were willing to have their identities revealed, 12 said yes, eight said that they wanted to give the matter further thought, and only 10 said no. Only one third said that disclosure would put them off helping in that way.
      Even if the right to know served to reduce or to eliminate the supply of donors, that is not a good reason to block disclosure. If those willing to donate are so worried about their identity becoming known to the child. one questions their reasons for volunteering. Do they simply want the money, but not the responsibility? Do they want to wash their hands of their participation? Are they ashamed of their involvement, or afraid of being embarrassed 20 years later by someone knocking on their door and saying, "Hi, mum," or "Hi, dad"? If donors cannot entertain that possibility, they should not donate. The creation of life and the principle that I support carry responsibilities. Those who cannot face up to those responsibilities should not become involved.
      Mr. Wigley: The hon. Gentleman used the word "eliminate". Would he really be prepared to see the ending of such treatment as a consequence of the amendment?
      Mr. Wilshire: I most certainly would. If people are not willing to take responsibility and to participate in the full knowledge of the implications and of the effect on the child, that is the price that we would have to pay. We should not cover up the truth or deny an individual his or her fundamental rights as a matter of convenience or to ensure the supply of donors. I would regret that consequence, but we must confront the reality of the argument.
      Another argument made against disclosure is that prospective social parents would object and that, if the child could discover the identity of his genetic parents, fewer people would seek treatment. I would be desperately sorry if we started to close the door on the people who seek such help, but if would-be social parents cannot face their children knowing the truth, what are they ashamed of? I cannot think of any better definition of the love for a child or of wanting a child than that a couple should go to such extremes to have one. There is no reason why any person seeking treatment should worry about disclosure. It should be a matter of pride and commitment that one has allowed one's child to the identity of his or her genetic parents.
      Sooner or later, and despite the wishes of their social parents, children will discover the identity of their genetic parents. If the social parents do not tell their children the truth, the children will come to realise that they have been living a lie. That would do more harm than making it impossible to attract donors or having fewer people receiving treatment.
      Who matters most? On Second Reading my hon. Friend the Minister said that the original Bill intended to give patients maximum control. The House will understand that it is not just a question of the parents. At least three groups of people are involved—donors, treatment seekers, and the resulting children. They all

      1167
      matter. We cannot exclude any one of them. I argue now, as I did in 1990, that we should not seek to deny the rights and the interests of the resulting child.
      We cannot duck the issue by saying, "It is better to leave matters as they are; the system works well." Donors have a choice: either they donate or they do not. Patients have a choice: either they seek treatment or they do not. The resulting child has no choice. He or she comes into this world as a result of the decisions of others. If I must choose between those who have a choice and the child who does not, I will come down on the side of the child and do my level best to defend it.
      I suspect that it is not a question of the Government refusing to accept the amendments but of their being unable to do so. The amendments were not drafted by lawyers, and I shudder to think what complications they might create. I have made the point that I am not an expert, and I cannot profess to have played a part in drafting something that is legally watertight.
      I shall be grateful if my hon. Friend the Minister will clarify one point, so that we may be absolutely clear. Would the regulations allow the Government, after mature thought and having taken the advice of lawyers, to make it possible for children to learn the identity of their genetic parents? If so, the argument of principle has been won and I can leave for my summer holidays deeply satisfied and very reassured. The Government may not like the arguments, however, and they may prefer to come down on the side of withholding information. I can only say that that is democracy.
      Democracy is all very well, but this issue will not go away. Those who raise it whenever an excuse is made are labelled the awkward squad on the Government Back Benches. We are reasonable people, and we understand the score, but we shall take every opportunity to pursue the matter. I suspect, however, that sooner rather than later our battle will be joined for real by a child who demands to know its genetic origins. When that happens, it will not be the awkward squad but the people of this country and the media who will be asking how the system, under whichever Government, the medical profession, and those who speak in the name of science and progress can dare to deny a child his or her absolute right to know his or her origins. That will ultimately force the Government of the day to act, and the sooner that happens, the better.
      Mrs. Ann Winterton: It is appropriate that one of the awkward squad should have caught your eye, Mr. Lofthouse, and follow in the footsteps of my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire), who made a powerful and impassioned speech. It is extraordinary in this day and age that, on a non-party political issue of conscience and belief, a Parliamentary Private Secretary should be debarred from tabling an amendment. I was delighted to put my name to an amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight) to deal with the problem, because this small amendment again focuses attention on the group of people most affected by the treatment provided under the 1990 Act.
      My hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne was very active during the passage of that legislation, especially in Committee. He succeeded, for instance, in putting a child's need for a father on the statute book. He worked extremely hard to do that, and he should be congratulated on his tenacity.
      1168
      5.30 pm
      Children born as a result of in vitro fertilisation, artificial insemination or egg donation are not protected in the same way as other children, and many of us want that to be put right. As the 1990 Act currently stands, individuals born as a result of treatment can discover from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority only whether they were indeed born as a result of it, and whether a named person may be related to them in some way. No information that might identify the true genetic parents of such individuals can be released.
      As has already been shown, the Bill makes no change in those arrangements. Instead, it extends the number of people who can have access to information about those involved in treatment, whether they are donors or recipients. It allows information to be provided in court proceedings and it allows doctors involved in the treatment to be provided with such information. Any doctor is allowed access to identifying information, as are servants of the authority, but children horn as a result of fertility treatment are not allowed such access. My hon. Friend's amendment seeks to rectify that omission; as I said earlier to my hon. Friend the Minister, for some years adopted children have been able, at the appropriate time, to try to discover the identity of their true parents.
      As my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne said many times, this is one of those issues that will not go away. It will be raised in the House of Commons time and again, because an injustice is being perpetrated. That injustice should be put right, and the sooner the Government recognise it, the better.
      During the Committee stage of the 1990 Act, the then Minister of State for Health—now Secretary of State for Health—said that the Government intended to keep under review the kind of information that should be given to individuals born as a result of treatment. She stressed that regulations could be made under section 31 of the Act to allow identifying information to be provided. Two years have passed. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has been established—we have referred to its report today—yet no word has been forthcoming about regulations on the matter, or even about consultation.
      I hope that the Minister will tell us precisely what the Government believe and will assure us that they have not forgotten that many people—both inside and outside the House of Commons—are anxious that children should not grow up in the dark, but should be able to obtain appropriate information about their origins. Children who are born as a result of fertility treatment are treated as second-class citizens in comparison with adopted children and those who are born to their parents in the natural way.
      I am happy to support my hon. Friend's amendment.
      Mr. John Bowis: Let me complete the process that began with the great, proceeded to what we now know as the expert and then reached the awkward squad. I am not sure where that leaves me in the resulting Conservative quartet, but I am happy to be categorised if my hon. Friends insist on it.
      My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton) need not fear for my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire). We are seeking not to introduce a measure that is opposed to Government policy but to clarify that policy and, indeed, to extend

      1169
      Government commitments in the earlier legislation. It was said then that the matter would be kept under review; we are seeking that review now.
      I want to highlight the practical realities to which the amendment relates. It is not simply a case of "Wouldn't it be nice to know where I came from?", although that may justify the provision of a right to information. My hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne used the phrase "living a lie". We must be careful about using such terms in this place; I think that my hon. Friend meant "living a life in which it is impossible to be truthful"—impossible, that is, if the person concerned does not know the facts. That is what concerns me. If a person does not have the right to know his parents, who created him—even if he was born from the womb of a third party—he will not be able to tell the truth about his origins.
      Decades after his birth, that person may suffer from a disease that requires the doctors to know his medical history. If he is asked whether there is a record of heart disease in his family, all that he will be able to say is, "I do not know"—or, worse, he may assume that the people who brought him up are blood relations, and give a false picture on that basis.
      The individual has a right not just to know, but to be told. If, long after his birth, one of his real parents was found to have contracted a disease such as AIDS, how would it be possible to ensure that he was aware of it? The disease could have passed into the next generation through the bloodstream, unbeknown to the real parents, the adoptive parents and the child. The child would then be unable to protect himself, because he would have no right to be told of the development in his blood line.
      There is another consideration. In a sense, it is much less serious, but it might be important to a young adult who took out insurance against, for instance, having twins. Insurance companies providing such cover must be told of the family history and informed whether twins have been produced regularly. The person whom we are discussing would not know that, or might think that he knew, although he would be thinking of the wrong family. He would be unable to tell the truth, or, at best, he would be discriminated against: if he could only say, "I do not know," he would be excluded from insurance benefit.
      I want such children to be able to live the truth rather than a lie. I want them to live without the fear that something unknown to them may have happened and to live without discrimination. For those reasons, I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will give careful consideration to the reasoned arguments presented by Conservative Members. They have a purpose beyond the desirability of knowing the facts: they relate to problems that will face people in later life if they are deprived of the right to know.
      Ms. Harriet HarmanMay I say to those on the Tory Back Benches who describe themselves as the awkward squad that we are not prepared to accept the implication that they care about the children and that we care only about the parents. That is unacceptable. We have to look at the question from all sides.
      Mr. Wilshire: If the hon. Lady drew that implication from what I said, I apologise to her. When I spoke in the debate, that point was the furthest from my mind.
      Ms. Harman: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his clarification. We can therefore proceed on the basis that we all have an equal interest in the future of children who are born in these circumstances and that the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues are concerned about the position in which parents find themselves.
      On the anonymity of donors, the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) referred to what I believe to be the key issue: would donors come forward if they felt that at a later date somebody would come knocking on their door and say, "Hi, Dad, I'm your son"? We do not want to jeopardise the artificial insemination by donor programme because people are worried that if they donate sperm they will be identified at a later date.
      The hon. Member for Spelthorne said, in a kind of menacing way, "We'll keep bringing up this issue and bringing it back to the House of Commons." Of course it needs to be raised regularly. I do not doubt that the Government want it to be discussed regularly. The authority says in its report that it wants the issue to be discussed. The awkward squad need not therefore feel that they are beleaguered champions and that, were it not for them, nobody else would raise the issue. The authority highlights on page 27 of its report the fact that the Government are concerned about the issue. It also voices its own concern.
      I hope that there will be more research into whether it might be possible to identify donors without deterring them from becoming donors. If the Government get it wrong and require donors to be prepared to be identified and the result is that donors do not come forward, an informal process will come into existence. It is easy to practise artificial insemination by donor. The awkward squad might not know that, but in fact it is very easy and——
      Mrs. Ann Winterton: What the hon. Lady says is an insult to anybody's intelligence. First and foremost, not all my hon. Friends are members of the awkward squad. I am, unashamedly, a member of the awkward squad and I shall continue to be a member of it for as long as the good electors of Congleton are prepared to return me to this place to be as bloody-minded as I want to be.
      Nobody believes what the hon. Lady says about her interest in children, because she supports abortion up to birth. No one who does that, for social reasons, can have a genuine interest in children. Nevertheless, some of my hon. Friends agree with the hon. Lady and not with me.
      I am the first to admit that a very delicate and sensitive balance has to be achieved when it comes to the rights of a child who is born as a result of one of the infertility processes and the rights of a child who is conceived in the ordinary way. The hon. Lady has not yet, however, mentioned the rights of the child. She has referred to the rights of the donor, the feelings of the donor and the feelings of the parents. Has the child no rights at all?
      Ms. Harman: When I said that I was not prepared to accept what had been implied by at least two of the self-styled members of the Tory Back-Bench awkward squad—that I am concerned only about the interests of the parents and that they are the custodians of the true interests of the child—the hon. Member for Spelthorne got up and asked me how on earth I could have got that idea. We know the answer now from the hon. Member for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton). I shall not respond, however,

      1171
      to her point about abortion. I want to deal with my concerns about the amendment. [Interruption.] I am afraid that I missed the point of the heckling by Conservative Members, so I shall proceed with my speech.
      If the Government require donors to be prepared to be identified after they have donated sperm and the result is that people do not come forward to donate sperm, that will not kill the demand for artificial insemination by donors. It will simply drive it away from medical supervision. It will result in informal artificial insemination by donor. That will he far more risky when it comes to the health of the child. It is far better for artificial insemination by donor to be carried out under medical supervision.
      5.45 pm
      I hope that the debate about identification of donors will proceed. I am confident that it will. I hope, too, that there will be more research. However, this is a complex issue and, when we address it, we have to be sophisticated and intelligent. If we do not talk in terms of tabloid headlines, we may make progress. I take it that the hon. Member for Spelthorne intends to withdraw the amendment, but I look forward to debating the issue on future occasions. I am sure that I shall agree with what the Minister is about to say.
      The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Mr. Tom Sackville): That may be something that I shall not hear very often, Mr. Lofthouse, so I shall enjoy it.
      This extremely lively debate has highlighted many of the issues that surround this extraordinarily difficult topic. The amendment, so charmingly moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight), was developed by my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire). The arguments that he put on both sides amounted to a veritable tour de force, although he put the arguments on one side more effectively, perhaps, than on the other. My hon. Friend asked whether the Bill provides for the formulation of regulations to achieve what he wants. It does not do so. However, the 1900 Act makes provision for a regulation-making power. That provision is still available.
      My hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Mr. Bowis) referred to a number of ethical concerns. All donors are screened for HIV. As my hon. Friend may be aware, no one with a history of genetic disease would easily be accepted as a donor of gametes.
      Mr. Bowis: I am absolutely aware of that. My hon. Friend will also be aware that HIV could be contracted at a later stage, long after the donation had been made. It is at that stage that there appears to be no means of notifying the child, who might be affected through the bloodstream.
      Mr. Sackville: I take that point.
      We also heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton). Her views are well known and she put them eloquently.
      I was warned off mentioning any of the technical defects in the amendment, of which there are several. There are, however, substantial objections to it. The main one that springs to mind is that the 1990 Act already contains a provision that would allow part of what my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne wants to be brought into being. If any moves were to be made down this road, they would have to be considered carefully. They
      1172
      would have to be the subject of wide consultation and debate in the House of Commons. Views on the subject differ widely.
      My hon. Friend's amendment is defective in the sense that it appears to give clinicians the right to pass on this information. In effect, the HFEA would be charged with handling the information. Many other compromises could be considered along the route, such as the provision of information on physical characteristics, family background or whatever, stopping short of actual identification. All those matters would need to be debated at some length.
      I do not believe that it would be easy to achieve a consensus. Perhaps that is why Parliament left the matter open, to be decided by affirmative resolution in the future. There are widely differing and passionately held views on both sides of the Committee, some of which have been aired today. In an ideal world, no child would be without an identifiable father or a chance to live in a proper family unit. We are all aware of that. In reality, there are infertile couples, and they have rights, too. It is thought by clinicians and many others that, if we were to identify donors, we would put enormous pressure on infertility treatment. That must be taken into account.
      This is a difficult subject and I can only tell the Committee that it will be kept under review by the Government. I am aware of the passionately held feelings on the subject, but I do not believe that the amendment is the way forward. A more appropriate mechanism for disclosure of information already exists in the 1990 Act and, for that and other reasons, I cannot recommend to the Committee.
      Dame Jill Knight: Many of us were a little disappointed to hear one or two of the remarks by the Minister, especially the fact that nothing in the Bill would improve the status of the child. That is a matter of great concern. While listening to the debate, I was thinking about the sort of people who would object to having it known that they had been involved in this procedure. We have already mentioned a man who might object to someone coming up to him and calling him dad. I suppose there is also the issue of a wealthy man who might be afraid that a child might at some point ask for a share of his money. I do not have any sympathy for a man who does not wish to be identified for that reason.
      It is a matter of balance—the rights of the child as against the rights of the donors or mothers. I can understand, in certain circumstances, the feelings of a woman who might want to have a child in this way and have it remain a secret. However, I cannot entirely accept that her feelings are more important than the child's rights. There are some women who do not want to have a husband. I can understand that in some circumstances, but I cannot accept that such a woman's rights are greater than those of the child she wishes to bear. [Interruption.] Opposition Members seem to find amusing the idea that children have rights too.
      Ms. Harman: Will the hon. Lady give way?
      Dame Jill Knight: No, I will not.
      In the light of what the Minister has said, we have no alternative but to withdraw the amendment, bearing in mind that he has said that he understands that this matter will come up again and can be rectified under existing law. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
      Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
      Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
      Bill reported, without amendment; considered.
      Bill read the Third time, and passed, without amendment.

  Education (Assisted Places)
  5.55 pm
  The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Mr. Eric Forth): I beg to move,
  That the draft Education (Assisted Places) (Amendment) Regulations 1992, which were laid before this House on 3rd July, be approved.
  The draft regulations are quite specific in their purpose in that they amend the principal regulations, which are the Education (Assisted Places) Regulations 1989. The amending regulations provide for the uprating of the parental contribution tables which set out how much parents must pay towards their child's assisted place, together with certain other technical amendments.
  As hon. Members will know, the assisted places scheme was established in 1981 for the prime purpose of opening up educational opportunities for able children from less well-off families. It provides their parents with assistance towards the fees at some of the best independent schools in the country. That assistance is on a sliding scale based on gross parental income, and the principal changes embodied in the amending regulations are concerned with the routine revision of those scales.
  There are, of necessity, several other technical amendments in order to keep the definition of "total parental income" for the purposes of the scheme in line with tax legislation and to update the working of the regulations to reflect current practice and circumstances. I am sure that right hon. and hon. Members will find that the amendments that I shall describe are quite straightforward.
  Regulation 1 of the draft regulations deals with citation, commencement, application and interpretation. The regulations are to come into force on 28 August 1992. Regulation 2 is a technical amendment, necessary to ensure that the assisted places regulations remain up to date in relation to those with refugee status.
  Regulations 3 and 5 update the provisions of regulations 7 and 12 of the principal regulations. A school is prohibited from awarding an assisted place if the whole of the child's first year fees are required to be paid under a court order. Schools must also take into account fees required to be paid under a court order when assessing the amount of fee remission for existing assisted place pupils. The amendments will require the schools in such circumstances also to take into account fees required to be paid by virtue of a deed of separation and corrects an existing anomaly.
  Regulation 4 increases the allowance made when calculating parents' total relevant income for each dependent child, other than the assisted place holder. The amount is raised from £1,065 to £1,105—by the same percentage which applies to the uprating of the parental contribution scales, to which I shall address myself in a moment. This allowance is helpful to parents with large families, and uprating it will ensure that their position is not worsened.
  Regulation 6 is consequential on the Finance Act 1991. Relevant parental income for the purposes of the assisted places scheme is total taxable income, gross of all allowances. Each year we make any necessary amendments to nullify the effects of specific new allowances introduced in tax legislation to keep the definition of income constant for the purposes of determining income

  1175
  under the scheme. This year the Inland Revenue has confirmed that sections 32 and 33 of the Finance Act 1991 provide for tax relief on the costs of vocational training. Therefore, a small technical amendment to remove the effect of such allowances is required.
  I now come to the main purpose of setting the regulations before the House today. Regulation 7 sets out the income bands used for assessing parents' contributions towards fees. These bands have been uprated to take account of the movement in the retail price index to April this year—that is, by 4 per cent. The threshold at or below which parents pay nothing towards fees is raised from £8,714 to £9,056, with corresponding increases in the thresholds for higher percentage contributions from income. The effect of this amendment is that parents will not be asked to increase contributions above the rate of inflation; they will continue to contribute roughly the same proportion of their income as they did last year. I believe that the House will find this an equitable measure, taking into account the fact that, on average, parents in the scheme earn considerably less than the national average income.
  Assistance under the scheme follows the principle that the lower the income is, the greater Government assistance should be. The threshold for full remission of fees, to which I have just referred, is set deliberately low so that the least well-off families benefit most. The scale then rises sharply so that better-off families get reduced assistance and finally no assistance. I believe that to be right and in keeping with the aims of the scheme; to open doors of opportunity to those who would otherwise never be able to contemplate paying fees.
  Even so, participating schools have made representations to us that they should be allowed greater freedom in the use of their own scholarship and bursary funds for the benefit of assisted pupils. Under existing regulations, schools are effectively prohibited from using such funds to reduce the parental contribution to fees—for example, in cases of sudden hardship or where the school wishes to give a merit award or to retain a particularly promising pupil. Regulation 7 provides for parents' residual liability for fees to be reduced or extinguished by a bursary or scholarship awarded by the school in such cases, and we hope that this small amendment will enable schools to use scholarship funds in the most beneficial way and to have flexibility to assist those in most need of help if and when the need arises.
  As we reiterated in our election manifesto, the Government believe firmly in the principle that parents in every part of the country should have access to the opportunities offered by a scheme such as this. The assisted places scheme is now in its 11th year. The Government have supported and will continue to support the scheme as part of our policy of widening educational choice and opportunity. With many parents throughout the country, we are immensely encouraged to see the successes—in music, the arts and sport, as well as in academic subjects—which assisted pupils have recorded. Over the years since this excellent scheme was introduced, more than 55,000 children have benefited from education at some of the best independent schools in the country. There are now more than 27,600 pupils in the scheme, well over a third of whom are enjoying totally free education at those schools.
  The provisions and amendments that I have described are necessary technicalities to ensure the continued smooth
  1176
  running of the assisted places scheme and to continue to provide for a realistic contribution both from the Government and from parents. I trust that they will find favour with hon. Members.
  6.1 pm
  Ms. Hilary Armstrong: This is the fourth year in which I, on behalf of the official Opposition, have opposed such an order. In that spirit, I welcome the Minister to the debate. On each occasion, I have faced a different Minister, which says something about the short time that they have spent in education. I hope that the present Minister and other Education Ministers will stay longer, and that that will show the Government's determination to take education seriously and to recognise that it needs a little continuity and stability.
  Mr. Forth: Perhaps the hon. Lady should tell the Prime Minister that.
  Ms. Armstrong: I shall come to the Prime Minister later.
  We oppose the order, once again, because it fails to meet the objectives that Ministers set when they introduced the scheme under the Education Act 1980. We oppose it because it does not ensure value for money and because it fails to apply the criteria established in the citizens and parents charter for this aspect of public spending. We oppose it because it prevents attention from being focused on improving the overall quality of work and on raising standards generally. And we oppose it mainly because it puts ideological dogma before educational opportunity and achievement.
  In the parents charter, the Government state that standards will be raised by improving information on and inspection of schools. We had many debates on the philosophy which underlies that when we considered the Education (Amendment) Bill earlier this year, but, remarkably, the assumptions which underlie the order are that the brightest children, whom the scheme is supposed to support, will be excluded from those aims.
  Unless the independent sector deals with special needs, it is excluded from the provisions of the parents charter. Despite the increasing amount of public money spent on the scheme, on which the Government based their education philosophy in their election manifesto, that sector is excluded. During the passage of the Education (Amendment) Bill, we moved amendments to make the inspection of and information on schools in the independent sector——
  Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Order. The hon. Lady is straying rather wide of the regulations, which apply to the financing of the scheme, as I am sure that she appreciates. It would be helpful if she would keep her remarks to the financing of the scheme.
  Ms. Armstrong: I am trying to relate the principle of the assisted places scheme to expenditure. The order specifically increases expenditure, but I will try to ensure that I do not stray outside your instructions. You know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I would be the last person to seek to do that.

  1177
  It is important that the Government's aims are examined by the Opposition. The Government are trying to get away with double standards, and it is the job of the Opposition to point out where double standards apply.
  There is no accountability for expenditure on the assisted places scheme. There is no inspection of or information about independent schools and whether they provide the most effective education opportunities for children who benefit from or participate in the scheme. I am sure that the Minister would not expect me to speak without mentioning the inspectors' report on the education of very able children in maintained schools. The report says:
  "It should be possible to cater for the majority of very able pupils within the context of the normal school curriculum if proper consideration is given to their particular special needs and some flexibility is introduced into both organisational and teaching strategies … Evidence suggests that those schools which focus sharply on what very able pupils might reasonably achieve are likely to be more successful in improving the overall quality and raising standards generally."
  We have contended for many years that it is the responsibility of the education system to raise standards generally and to open up opportunity for all children. The report makes it clear that one of the most effective ways of doing so is to teach very able children in normal schools. The Government are rejecting that idea through the underlying philosophy of the order and of the scheme to which the order grants money. The programme carries with it the assumption that adequate education for very able children can be achieved only by taking them out of the maintained system and putting them into the private sector. Her Majesty's inspectorate of schools does not agree, and nor do we: not only can the needs of the very able be catered for within the maintained sector, but the overall quality of work is thereby improved and standards generally are raised. That is what we are supposed to be trying to achieve.
  The scheme also fails to secure value for money. There was something of a crisis following the order last year. A sum of money was granted and the Audit Commission was called in to examine how the money was being spent by the Department of Education and Science. In preparation for the citizens charter—which is why I consider this point to be relevant—the Audit Commission discovered that the assisted places scheme was about £3 million overspent, even though it was not achieving its target in terms of the numbers that the House had intended the money to cover. There was an overspend of about £3 million, and the Minister had to cap the amount of money that public or private schools were able to claim through the order.
  Schools had been able to set their own fee limits and increase their fees without reference to Government. In the middle of last year, the Minister had to state that fees could be increased only by 12 per cent. I need hardly remind the House that the cap set for the maintained sector was substantially lower, at 7 per cent. Even though the cap was set at 12 per cent. in the independent sector—substantially higher than in the maintained sector—it had great difficulty in keeping to it and, indeed, some girls' public schools were increasing their fees by up to 15 per cent. or 18 per cent. and boys' schools by as much as 30 per cent. It is clear that the scheme does not offer value for
  1178
  money. What does the Minister intend to do this year to ensure that the scheme does not run into similar problems? What level of increase will he set for fees?
  All the research and HM inspectorate's report show that the assisted places scheme plays no part in raising overall standards or ensuring that the system for which the House is responsible is able to provide improvements. Research into the programme has shown forcefully that the scheme fails to secure the number of children from poor schools whom it was originally established to recruit. Yet, despite all the evidence from HM inspectorate and others, the Government continue and expand the scheme and put more money into it. One can only conclude that the Government do so because of ideological dogma.
  These days, expert opinion in education does not seem to mean anything to the Government. Indeed, the Government seem to think that flying in the face of such opinion is somehow clever, and that the less anyone knows about education the better. I am afraid that we have seen some evidence of that from the Prime Minister in recent days.
  I hope that Ministers will begin to deal with the facts, with the need to raise standards and to ensure that all our energy is committed to that aim rather than to narrow, divisive schemes fuelled only by ideological dogma.
  6.14 pm
  Mr. Bob Dunn: I shall be brief. I enjoyed the style and elegance of the speech of the hon. Member for Durham, North-West (Ms. Armstrong), but it contained very little with which I could agree.
  The Minister said that this is the 11th year of uprating under the regulations. For five of those years, I performed the ritual that he has performed so ably today. I do not accept the notions advanced by the hon. Member for Durham, North-West, for reasons that I have already stated. I welcome the changes in the regulations relating to the use of scholarships and bursaries because it is wise to enable schools to have greater flexibility in the application of their funds.
  I listened with some interest to the hon. Lady's reference to Her Majesty's inspectorate's advice and its comments on the passage and work of the scheme. I have always disregarded that advice. I always thought that Her Majesty's inspectorate was a creature of the 1960s and, indeed, of the Labour party. Nothing it has ever said has given me any reason to change my mind.
  The hon. Lady talked about children being "put into schools", as if there were a mechanism by which the state took hold of children from a variety of backgrounds and forced 55,000 people and the 27,000 currently benefiting from the scheme to enter good, well-respected private schools. In fact, it is the parents themselves who, for their children, elect to take advantage of the opportunities available in the private sector through the agency of the regulations.
  I also welcome the uprating details, as they relate to the numbers of parents on low or benefit-related income. The scheme always aimed to give an opportunity to parents for whom the state and local comprehensive school were the only available choice. For that reason, the House should support the proposals.
  The hon. Lady referred to an issue of which the Minister could perhaps take note for the future. Under the regulations, there is a strong case in time for widening the

  1179
  application of choice to parents whose children perhaps do not have the same academic ability as their peers. The hon. Lady's point about special needs children should be considered. Why should the parents of special needs children be denied the same opportunity as parents with normal, mainstream, high calibre children? In that sense, the hon. Lady has a point. If her argument were accepted, perhaps her objection to the regulations would diminish.
  The regulations are worthy of consideration on an annual basis because that gives us the opportunity to emphasise the philosophical divide between the Conservative and Labour Benches. The hon. Lady talked about compulsion, ideology and doctrinaire stances. I have never adopted a stance that was not ideological or doctrinaire because I pursue my beliefs. I share a philosophy. If I did not folow my philosophy, I would be on the Labour Benches, where philosophy, ideology and doctrine are now things of the past, according to the new-style Labour party.
  I firmly believe in parental choice. I believe that parents who do not have the financial means of richer parents should have the same opportunities as richer parents to exercise choice for their children if they so desire. The point of the regulations is that they give parents the opportunity to choose. It is not an enforced choice—parents elect to send their children to private sector schools.
  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Minister on his delivery today, and I wholly support the regulations, as amended.
  6.19 pm
  Mr. Stephen Byers: I wish, first, to reply very quickly to the points that were made by the hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn). This scheme is not about parental choice; it is about schools choosing their pupils, which is exactly what happens when an application is made under the assisted places scheme. Often, a pupil has to sit an examination set by the school that his parents wish him to attend; thus it is the school that does the selecting. There is a political and philosophical difference between the Opposition and the Government. We believe that high-quality education opportunities should be available to all children, not just a minority. The regulations are another example of the way in which a minority of schoolchildren are given an advantage over the majority. It is for that very basic reason that we shall oppose the regulations.
  The assisted places scheme has been in operation for more than a decade. Since 1981, £500 million of public money has been spent on it. At the time of its introduction, the Government's stated aim was very clear—to assist children from less well-off backgrounds to attend high-quality independent schools. I submit that, even in the Government's own terms, the scheme has been a failure. Do the children come from less well-off backgrounds? The Minister said that only one third qualified for full remission of fees. He could have gone further and told the House that more than one third of the parents receiving support under the regulations are on incomes above the national average. This is not a scheme that benefits the less well-off but one that benefits people on incomes above the national average.
  Mr. Forth: I am no statistician, but I should point out that if one third of those parents are on incomes above the
  1180
  national average, two thirds are on incomes below the national average. Inexorably the scheme benefits the less well-off.
  Mr. Byers: The Minister leads me to my next point. I want to look at the backgrounds of those parents who are less well-off. The assisted places scheme is helping people from middle-class backgrounds who have fallen on hard times as a result of the Government's recession. The figures show clearly that 61 per cent. of the mothers and more than half the fathers of children who receive assisted places were themselves at either independent schools or selective schools. That is the reality. The Independent Schools Information Service has itself admitted that only 16 per cent. of people whose children receive assisted places are from unskilled or semi-skilled backgrounds.
  The Government's stated aim—that those from less well-off backgrounds should be helped—is not being fulfilled. The Government intend, under the regulations, to spend slightly more than £70 million on the assisted places scheme in the coming academic year. Will that public money buy high-quality education? In many respects it is difficult to judge.
  As my hon. Friend the Member for Durham, North-West (Ms. Armstrong) said, these schools are not subject to inspection. We do not have the right to inspect the quality of education that the young people in them receive. They do not have to follow the national curriculum, and there are no league tables of comparative examination results in the independent sector. Indeed, the independent sector heads have expressed strong resistance to the establishment of such league tables. But this autumn the Department of Education, at a cost of more than £650,000, will publish league tables for the state schools.
  It is interesting to note which schools have opted out of the assisted places scheme or have never opted in—schools like Eton and Harrow. There is no evidence that a child who has been given an assisted place does any better than he would have done had he gone to a state school. The Audit Commission, which looked into this issue, has said that the evidence suggests that the children who are assisted into the private sector do not receive a measurably greater added value from their schooling as a result.
  The message is quite clear. The regulations throw a financial lifeline to the private schools that are suffering because of the recession. The independent sector itself recognises that at present there is a record number of bankruptcies among private schools. It is for that reason that we have witnessed a dramatic increase in the fees charged under the assisted places scheme. In 1989, the average was £2,364; just two years later it went up to £3,100—an increase of more than 30 per cent. in an amount coming out of the public purse.
  The right hon.Member for Brent, North (Sir R. Boyson) said that in his view the scheme was a rescue operation for distressed gentlefolk. I agree, but it is becoming increasingly clear that it is also a rescue operation for the financially distressed and failing private schools. The regulations represent a misuse of public money to subsidise a private industry. It is a public subsidy on a massive scale. If the regulations are approved, at least one school will receive more than £1·5 million of public money in the next academic year through the assisted places scheme, and many will receive more than £1 million.

  1181
  They call themselves independent schools. What an absolute misnomer. Those schools are totally dependent on state subsidies for their very survival.
  There has been no attempt to see whether we are getting value for the expenditure of public money. Some schools charge fees of more than £7,000 a year, others less than £2,000. Is any attempt made to see whether schools that charge more than three times as much as others in the independent sector provide real value for money? Will the Minister say that he intends to cap fee increases that can be charged to the public purse? If so, will the capping be at the current inflation rate of 3·9 per cent.? The House deserves answers to those questions.
  The regulations will commit about £70 million of public money under the assisted places scheme. With a view to identifying the Government's priorities, it is worth reflecting on where else the Department is spending money. During the period to which the £70 million relates, only £14 million will be spent on teacher appraisal, although that is a vital initiative to improve the quality of the teaching force; reading recovery, which was announced in the full glare of publicity earlier this year, will get a grand total of £3 million to assist primary schoolchildren; governor training—so vital at present—will get the grand sum of £10 million. That is a clear sign of the Government's priorities. The sum to be spent on the assisted places scheme could employ an additional 3,500 teachers in the maintained sector. That could be a vital first step in reducing the ever-increasing class sizes in our schools. But, instead, the money is being used for the assisted places scheme.
  The regulations are deeply damaging to the Government. They are an admission that, after 13 years of Tory rule, the condition of our public sector education is so poor that 30,000 of our most able pupils must be given an escape route. There can be no clearer condemnation of the failure of the Government's education policies than the fact that we are debating the regulations this evening.
  The assisted places scheme is deeply flawed and divisive. It was born of dogma and it continues through prejudice. Even at this late stage, the Government should think again and redirect resources to benefit all our children.
  6.30 pm
  Mr. Peter Griffiths: The hon. Member for Wallsend (Mr. Byers) started in fine style. I assumed that I would be able to agree with him because he said that the objective was to obtain high-quality education for every child. The trouble was that he seemed to assume that he and his party colleagues should define high-quality education. The point is that the definition is surely open to discussion. As there is no agreement between us on what sort of education is most suited to each child, it is a case for parental choice.
  The Opposition would apparently deny parental choice of an independent school to those who could not afford the full fees. But some parents who are not well off wish to choose the independent sector. I do not know why the hon. Gentleman did not wish to help those who had fallen on harder times during the recession. In my view, they are
  1182
  particularly worthy of assistance. Some parents cannot afford to take the choices that are available to those with higher incomes.
  It is essential that parents who are convinced that their child would be best educated in an independent school have an opportunity to take that route. After all, as the hon. Members for Wallsend and for Durham, North-West (Ms. Armstrong) said, although one third of the parents of children on the scheme receive full remission of fees, the parents of the remaining two thirds make contributions out of their own pockets to the fees of the school that they have chosen. There is no need for the hon. Member for Wallsend to decide whether the school that costs £7,000 or the one that costs £2,000 a year is better. The parents should choose.
  Ms. Armstrong: Does the hon. Gentleman support our call for more information about what is happening in the independent schools? If the Education (Schools) Act 1992 is to mean anything in the maintained sector, it should also apply in the independent sector.
  Mr. Griffiths: My answer to the hon. Lady's first question is yes, but my answer to her second question is no. Certainly, information should be available so that parents can make informed choices.
  Mr. Michael Stern: Will my hon. Friend give way on that point?
  Mr. Griffiths: Let me finish the paragraph. Information should be available. I have not yet heard of an independent school which hides its light under a bushel. Equally, in legislation we have ensured that the state schools provide information so that parents can make an informed choice.
  Mr. Stern: Does my hon. Friend agree that organisations such as the Independent Schools Information Service have set standards in the provision of full, comprehensible, comprehensive information about independent schools which we have wished for many years the state sector would match?
  Mr. Griffiths: I am grateful for my hon. Friend's intervention. There is a mechanism whereby independent schools make information available. They are open to questions and visits long before parents decide to invest their own funds in the education of their children, having already paid for the education of those same children within the state system; so the information that the hon. Member for Durham, North-West wants is definitely made available.
  I take issue with my hon. Friend the Minister, if he will not be unhappy at my doing that. Towards the end of his speech, he said that the regulations were technicalities. I am aware that he means that they are technical changes to an existing structure, but the fact that the regulations have been introduced, changes have been made and we are having this debate will be an encouragement and comfort to many parents.
  During the events just before 9 April, the same comment was made to me time and time again in Portsmouth, which is not a city marked by individual wealth—it is a working-class city like any other great city in Britain. People said that they were worried about the effect of a change of political control on education

  1183
  opportunities for children whose parents could not afford full fees in independent schools. That was a genuine and serious worry.
  If the hon. Member for Durham, North-West is keen to know about independent schools, she should visit some in places such as Portsmouth. Some of the parents are bus drivers. A nurse who is a single parent provides for her daughter in an independent school. We should encourage such parents. They make an investment and decide for themselves.
  When one comments on previous speeches in the debate, one often feels constrained to say that misleading points were made. I hope that the hon. Member for Wallsend accepts that his comments about Eton and Harrow showed an utter lack of knowledge about those schools. He is surely aware that, for at least the whole of this century, both schools have sought gradually to widen the range of the backgrounds from which their pupils come. Bursaries and scholarships are available to children who need them.
  Eton and Harrow reject the Government's assisted places scheme, not because they do not want a wide social background of parents but because they are sufficiently well endowed from the past to offer those facilities themselves, but schools in cities such as Portsmouth need Government assistance.
  Mr. Byers: I welcome the fact that Eton and Harrow make their own arrangements and do not rely on public subsidy. My point was that those schools are well known for the quality of education that they deliver. We cannot say the same for the 295 schools that are part of the assisted places scheme. As my hon. Friend the Member for Durham, North-West (Ms Armstrong) said, there is no way of judging the performance of the schools which are part of the assisted places scheme.
  Mr. Dunn: Is that a reason to abolish the lot?
  Mr. Griffiths: Of course it is not a reason to abolish the lot. It is not possible to say that every independent school is a perfect educational institution. Four institutions in the city of Portsmouth receive assistance under the Government's scheme. They are all first class, and the parents who send their children there are grateful for the opportunity that they have been given.
  I realise that this is a short debate and I shall merely mention a few further matters to my hon. Friend the Minister. I am sure that parents will welcome the flexibility allowed by the regulations. From time to time, it is essential for us to ensure that we relate our assistance to new problems that may emerge. If schools offer small bursaries and scholarships to children with ability in certain subjects—for example, the arts—it is important that the receipt of such a small sum does not prevent the parents of a child on the assisted places scheme from receiving any financial benefit. The advantage of the amendment to the regulations is that if children on the assisted places scheme receive a small financial award from a school, they will benefit from it, as will children whose parents can afford the full fees. Surely the Opposition will welcome that and will want less well-off children to be able to take advantage of such awards.
  The Opposition have made much play of the fact that not as many children benefit from the assisted places
  1184
  scheme as we should like. If the Government return to the House to seek further funds to ensure that that target is met, I shall certainly give them my enthusiastic support.
  6.41 pm
  Mr. Don Foster: In view of the way in which the debate has ranged widely, it is important to state that Liberal Democrats have no antipathy per se to the independent sector. We are more than willing to discuss ways in which the state and independent sectors could work together. I was interested to hear what the hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn) said about the possibility of the independent sector making a contribution by providing support for children with special educational needs. Those issues could be debated.
  Today we are debating the assisted places scheme, and it is vital to find out what the order will do. Figures which show how much the assisted places scheme is costing have been mentioned. I should be grateful if the Minister would confirm in his winding-up speech the information that I have obtained from his Department, which suggests that in the current financial year approximately £76 million will be spent on the assisted places scheme, but it is estimated that next year, in 1992–93, spending will rise to £87 million. That is an increase of £11 million which, by my calculations, is 15 per cent. in cash terms and 10 per cent. in real terms. I should be grateful for confirmation of those figures.
  Mr. Forth: Yes.
  Mr. Foster: I am grateful to the Minister. We have heard it already.
  In view of the fact that we are expected to support the large real terms increase contained in the order, it seems perfectly proper before we do so to question whether the scheme has been successful, according to the conditions originally laid down for it, and whether it has provided value for money.
  As other hon. Members have said, when the scheme was initiated in 1980, it was clearly stated that the aim was to provide assisted places to bright children from less well-off backgrounds at high-quality independent schools. In last year's debate on the order, the then Under-Secretary of State, Mr. Fallon, said that the scheme was for "parents of humble means". Since the scheme's inception, there has been much research on the matter, and some hon. Members have referred to it. About a year ago, the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) quoted research suggesting that only about 10 per cent. of children on the assisted places scheme were from families of manual workers. That was contradicted by research for the Independent Schools Information Service, conducted by MORI, which suggested that 38 per cent. of children helped were from working-class backgrounds.
  As I was confused by that conflicting research, I asked the research division of the House of Commons Library for its opinion, having collated all the relevant information on such research, and was told:
  "Much of the research on the operation of the scheme has suggested that it has failed in its prime aim of giving good education to children from relatively poor backgrounds and is mainly subsidising middle class parents."
  I should be interested to hear whether the Minister agrees with that assessment and, if not, what evidence he has to substantiate his claim that the scheme is a success.

  1185
  Secondly, there is the question whether the scheme is providing value for money. Other hon. Members have referred to that, but I hope that when the Minister responds we shall find out how he believes that it is providing value for money and value for the increase that he is asking us to support through the order.
  The question of value for money was raised last year, when the then Under-Secretary of State said:
  "The value for money that is obtained from expenditure on the assisted places scheme is beyond question."—[Official Report, 17 July 1991; Vol. 195, c. 459.]
  He justified that value for money in two ways: first, because of what he described as the "breadth and quality" of the curriculum offered within the independent schools. Presumably that was something of a slap in the face for state schools, which are constrained by the national curriculum, unlike independent schools which are allowed to do things better and to produce a "breadth and quality" not allowed to state schools.
  Examination results were the only other justification that the Under-Secretary of State could find, and he quoted some figures for pupils on assisted places schemes. One would certainly expect such pupils to get good examination results. After all, they have been selected for their high level of ability, so that can hardly be a justification in its own right. We need clear evidence that the scheme is giving added value for pupils who take up the places offered. As hon. Members have already said, there is no evidence that the scheme is giving value for money, or to justify our support for the increased money in the order.
  Mr. Stern: If the hon. Gentleman is looking for added value for the money being spent, why does he not consider every parent who, by choice and without constraint, sends his or her child to such a school on an assisted place basis? Why does he think that they do it if they do not think that they are getting added value?
  Mr. Foster: I am grateful for the intervention because it suggests that the hon. Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. Stern) does not support many of the detailed schemes that the Government have introduced. The Government have told us that the only way to assess success in schools is through a complex testing and reporting of results procedure. Clearly the hon. Gentleman does not support his Front-Bench colleagues in that respect.
  I was referring to added value. I suggest that no one has given—I hope that the Minister will in his winding-up speech—any evidence of added value being provided by the scheme. There is no evidence of value for money.
  Other hon. Members have referred to the Audit Commission having suggested that no added value was being provided. On 28 February, The Times—hardly a supporter of the Opposition—went further in its comments on the Audit Commission report and said:
  "The Assisted Places Scheme is a misuse of public money to subsidise a private industry."
  In seeking more money for a scheme that neither meets its own criteria nor provides value for money, the Minister will have to put forward some very convincing arguments.
  The Liberal Democrats do not seek to damage the education of pupils who are already on the assisted places scheme. However, we see no justification for continuing the scheme. It provides no value for money and it is not
  1186
  beneficial to the education of the 93 per cent. of children who are in the state sector about whom we should be concerned. We should far prefer the energy of the Minister and of the Secretary of State, whom I see in his place, being directed to providing improvements in the state education system which has been so badly neglected in recent years. There are crumbling schools and teacher morale is low. Many concerns have been expressed not only by members of the teaching profession, by governors and by parents, but by Opposition Members. We will not support the regulations.
  6.50 pm
  Mr. David Lidington: I am grateful for the opportunity to make a few remarks in support of the regulations. I confess that I was not surprised to hear the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Foster) attack the assisted places scheme and the regulations. The continuing hostility of his party is not a cause for amazement. I had the opportunity of a council free place at a direct grant school. I remember that Mrs. Shirley Williams, the then Secretary of State for Education and Science and the spiritual and philosophical grandmother of the Front-Bench spokesmen of the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties, put the knife into the direct grant scheme in the 1970s. As with so many of the education reforms introduced by the Labour Government, she kicked away the ladders of opportunity up which so many Opposition Members had managed to ascend.
  I am delighted to speak in support of the order. There are three reasons why the House should give the order its wholehearted support. First, as my hon. Friend the Minister mentioned, the assisted places scheme increases the choice of education available to parents on middling and low incomes. As has been mentioned, approximately one third of parents whose children receive assisted places get those places free. MORI research shows that the average income of the typical family benefiting from the assisted places scheme is about £10,000 per year. The average family benefiting from the scheme gains about two thirds of the average national household income. There is firm evidence that the scheme benefits the families and children for whom it was designed.
  Secondly, in the context of the Government's broader schools policy, the assisted places scheme adds to the diversity of educational provision within the state sector. It provides an element of competition which we should welcome and not condemn. When Opposition Members complain because parents choose to send their children to independent schools through the assisted places scheme, they ask the wrong questions.
  The question that the House should ask and the question which should be posed to local education authorities, to head teachers and to other members of the teaching profession, is why individual parents opt for places under the scheme rather than for the places available to them in neighbourhood schools.
  I have the good fortune to live in and to represent part of Buckinghamshire. I know that our system, in which we still have both grammar and upper schools, formerly secondary modern schools—[Laughter.]—is such that on the whole we produce schools of fine quality to which parents wish to send their children. In response to the laughter from Opposition Members, I should point out that I meet parents who explain to me that not only the

  1187
  grammar schools in Buckinghamshire, but the good upper schools are over-subscribed and have a queue of parents waiting to send their children to them. If one has a good, dedicated teaching force and a supportive local education authority rather than one which seeks to import once modish and now outdated education philosophies, one can produce in grammar and upper schools alike a quality of education from which parents will be pleased for their children to benefit.
  Thirdly, the assisted places scheme helps to break down the barriers of class and social background. I should have thought that all hon. Members would have that objective in common. I am especially pleased that regulation 7 improves and strengthens the scheme to make it easier for schools to give help to parents of relatively modest means so that the independent schools taking part in the scheme can continue their work of reaching out beyond the category of parents who can afford to pay the full fees.
  I find it surprising that the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats continually snipe at the independent sector for its alleged exclusivity.
  Mr. Don Foster indicated dissent.
  Mr. Lidington: I am delighted to see the hon. Member for Bath shaking his head. I should be delighted if the Liberal Democrats are gradually coming towards the Conservative party's position. Only a short time ago, the Liberal Democrats said that the charitable status of independent schools needed to be thoroughly and critically reviewed. In my constituency, the Liberal Democrats at local level still display hostility not only to the assisted places scheme, but to any selection within the state system of secondary education, even if their national spokespeople now choose to keep quiet about that objective.
  The assisted places scheme promotes opportunity. I hope that the Government will take on board the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn) about encouraging public schools further to get involved in the provision of education opportunities for people other than the academically gifted. My hon. Friend's suggestion about children with special educational needs was valuable and I trust that the Government will take it on board.
  I do not pretend that the scheme of itself provides a complete or anywhere near complete answer to the challenges facing our education sytem. However, I believe that it is a valuable contribution to the promotion of excellence and quality in our system of state education. The regulations will have my wholehearted support.
  6.58 pm
  Mr. Bill Etherington: Many hon. Members have spoken with great knowledge of the education system. Many hon. Members have been teachers or administrators of the education system. I will turn to the parents' viewpoint of education. I do not pretend to be an expert on education, but I know quite a lot about being a parent. Many jibes are thrown at the Opposition about the Labour party being opposed to the independent sector, but it is not true. The Labour party is opposed to the subsidisation of the independent sector, whether through favourable taxation or the assisted places scheme.
  It is all very well the Government talking about choice, free enterprise and competition. I had no choice as a parent in 1983 when my 13-year-old daughter was
  1188
  prevented from going to the split-site comprehensive school that she was attending because it had to close due to lack of resources. At a time when school governors have to decide whether to replace a teacher or repair the fabric of the building, it does not bode well to be told that the Government can spare £80 million to prop up the private sector.
  I am a great believer in parents being able to choose to send their children to a private school if they can afford it. That applies to only a small percentage of the population. What I find objectionable is that those who are less well off have to subsidise the better-off through taxation so that they latter can send their children to private schools.
  If we are to talk about competition and free market forces, let us see independent schools operate under that stricture. Let us see the end of tax relief and of the assisted places scheme. If there is money to spare, I assure everyone concerned that it is badly needed in the state sector. If the Government do not believe that, they should get out and talk to some of the poorer parents who do not want to send their children to private schools but to decent state schools. It is the Government's duty to provide the greatest good for the greatest number and to start putting resources into those schools.
  7.2 pm
  Mr. Forth: Listening to this brief debate, one would have thought that we had not just had a general election in which page 18 of the Conservative manifesto said:
  "We will maintain the assisted places scheme, which gives access to independent education to many families who could not otherwise afford it."
  That was a clear statement by the party that won the election.
  It is sad that so many hon. Members should have taken this occasion to re-run the tired Opposition arguments to which we have had to listen and to which, no doubt, my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn) had to listen in the distinguished years in which he occupied my present position.
  The assisted places scheme is now established. As my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North (Mr. Griffiths) pointed out, many parents of modest means throughout the land, in his constituency and others, look to such a scheme to give their children opportunities that would otherwise be denied to them. The whole spirit in which Conservative Members have approached the debate is so different from that of the Opposition that it epitomises the differences in attitude. The Opposition's attitude is carping and bitter whereas we constantly emphasise choice and diversity and the desire, through a relatively modest scheme, to give the maximum number of parents an opportunity to have access to schools to which they would like their children to go.
  The hon. Member for Wallsend (Mr. Byers) seemed to be mystified about how any sensible parents would want their child to go to such a school or how they could make that choice without information. He then answered his own question by revealing that a large proportion of parents whose children go to assisted places scheme schools had gone to schools in the independent sector. What better recommendation could there be than that people with first-hand experience of the benefits of the independent sector should want their children to go—in this case, through the assisted places scheme—to similar schools? The hon. Gentleman provided the answer to his

  1189
  own question. If he studies his speech in Hansard tomorrow, as is traditional, he will see that what I say is correct.
  Two or three Opposition Members asked me what limit we have set on the fees increase for this year. The figure is 7·5 per cent., which is based on the increase that the maintained sector will receive this year. We want parity of treatment and I hope that that meets with the approval of the Opposition. It is straightforward.
  I was asked several times how we can ensure quality in that sector. There are a number of ways of doing so. I have already suggested endorsement by parents. Others might be the examination results that those schools achieve, despite the fact that—I do not conceal it or dissent from it—the schools select in any case. Nevertheless, they then produce such consistently good and outstanding examination results that that in itself shows the sector's success.
  Ms Armstrong indicated dissent.
  Mr. Forth: If the hon. Lady does not believe me, I shall send her some figures that will illustrate the point extremely well.
  My hon. Friend the Member for Dartford asked an important question about children with special educational needs. There are encouraging signs that many independent schools are now providing facilities for children with dyslexia or other special educational needs. Provision is growing. That shows that the independent sector is keen to play a full and rounded part in our education system and that it does not wish to be perceived as elitist, as many Opposition Members still portray it. The sector still has not gone far enough, but it is showing good signs, which we wish to encourage.
  My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North asked whether we expected to give further funds to the scheme. It is true that we are already making further funds available. We must strike a balance, as must any
  1190
  Government Department in that matter. Part of the increase is accounted for by the fees increase to which I referred, although we have effectively capped that. An important element of the increase is our desire to see more and more children having access, through the scheme, to the independent education of their choice. That was endorsed in the election on the basis of our manifesto, and it is enjoying increasing support through parents' choice.
  The hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Foster) cannot have it both ways. I should think that his constituents will be interested to hear his apparent opposition to and doubts about the scheme. I suspect that they may also be interested in his views about grant-maintained schools, to which I gather he is also hostile. How he squares that with the great former Liberal principles of maximum choice for the individual in society is for him to answer. Somehow, the move from Liberal to Liberal Democrat seems to have removed almost all the classical elements of liberalism at its best and introduced something more akin to latter-day socialism, which we used to associate with the good old Labour party. That, too, seems to have got lost, but I shall leave it to Opposition Members to sort it out among themselves.
  This is an important annual occasion for the House to consider whether this well established scheme, so recently endorsed by the electorate again, and explicitly so, as a result of our manifesto commitment, should be given modest but realistic additional resources to enable an increasing number of parents and children to have the choice and diversity that it provides. We are convinced that it was right to introduce the scheme, that it is well founded and properly funded. We are pledged to continue that. The regulations endorse that, and I ask the House to support them.
  Question put and agreed to.
  Resolved,
  That the draft Education (Assisted Places) (Amendment) Regulations 1992, which were laid before this House on 3rd July, be approved.

  Value Added Tax (Cars)
  7.8 pm
  The Paymaster General (Sir John Cope): I beg to move,
  That the Value Added Tax (Cars) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 1992 (S.I., 1992, No. 1654), dated 9th July 1992, a copy of which was laid before this House on 9th July, be approved.
  As the first motion on value added tax is of smaller account than the second, it will be helpful to the House to take them separately.
  The House will know that, in general, cars are not allowable as VAT inputs by businesses. However, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in his Budget that, from 1 August, private taxi operators, car hire firms and driving schools will be able to recover VAT on their purchases of new cars. That was provided for in the Value Added Tax (Cars) (Amendment) Order, SI 627.
  That order provided the new relief for those taxi firms and driving schools operated by self-employed drivers and instructors, because otherwise they would have been unfairly penalised. It granted relief on cars to be let on hire on condition that they were used as taxis, or for self-drive hire or driving school cars. It did not extend relief to purchases by leasing companies. Since the order was made, we have learnt that some leasing businesses intend to execute leasing arrangements, including a clause restricting the use of leased cars to one of the uses that qualify for relief, thereby, in their view, entitling them to recover input tax. Such terms would not have commercial validity or rationale, and the lessors would have no interest in enforcing the restrictions or any way in which to do so.
  We therefore thought it right to introduce the order to clarify the previous one, thus avoiding uncertainty. The order makes it clear that such a scheme would not succeed in avoiding tax. I support the order and commend it to the House.
  7.12 pm
  Dr. John Marek: I welcome the Paymaster General's explanation of why SI 627 has been superseded by SI 1654, and in general I agree with what he said.
  Sir John Cope: Not superseded, but supplemented.
  Dr. Marek: Yes, supplemented. I was looking at SI 1654, which states:
  "Article 2(a) of the Value Added Tax (Cars) (Amendment) Order 1992 is hereby revoked"—
  but it is then re-enacted in the provisions. How much will the original order and the new omnibus order cost the Revenue? It would be useful if the Paymaster General could give us an estimate.
  There is a lesson to be learned on how to legislate. The Government should not table statutory instruments and then find that they have faults. I am not saying that the Government are not acting properly but, as a result of consultation, they often realise that the original order is insufficient or flawed, and so have to table another one. The more openness in government—especially on non-controversial issues such as the order—the better.
  I would welcome it if, when the Government were tabling such orders, they could be made available for consultation in the House or published by the Government, as the Government did with the new value added tax regulations in anticipation of our entry into the single market in 1993. Much of the relevant draft legislation was published in advance of the Finance Bill.
  1192
  The Opposition support the order, but it would be useful if the Paymaster General could tell us the cost. I see that a paper is being brandished, so I shall stay on my feet for another 10 seconds to allow it to reach the Paymaster General.
  7.15 pm
  Mr. Bob Cryer: When it examined the statutory instrument, the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments thought that the explanatory memorandum provided by the Department was useful, and better than that on the original one. It was a much longer memorandum and we printed it in our third report, House of Commons Paper No. 52 for the 1992–93 Session. Apendix 1 contains the full explanatory memorandum, which I hope will be of use to the House and users of the instrument.
  We should remember that such legislation has to be applied by the user and has the force of law. The number of orders and instruments produced by the Government is now approaching 3,000 a year. We hope that the memorandum will assist in clarifying the instrument.
  SI 1654 blocks a loophole that the Revenue did not realise existed, and it is only a short order. The tatty draft order that we have does not give a price. Is the order replacing the previous one to be issued free of charge? The Government are partly responsible for ensuring that an order is as comprehensive as they want it to be. I do not blame the draftsman for the loophole as there are always smart alicks looking for such defects. That is why provisions sometimes have to be drafted in a complex way.
  However, the Government do bear some responsibility and, as it is such a short order, it would be helpful if the Government issued it free rather than charging an additional sum. It should certainly he free to purchasers of the original 1992 order, which was an amending order, as was SI 959 which, in 1989, amended the original statutory instrument of 1980. As there are now three amending statutory instruments, will the Department consider producing a consolidated order? It may be of help to the user to have all the amendments in one document instead of having to purchase several at a time.
  It should be the primary concern of both the Government and the House to make legislation as clear and succinct as possible. I know that it is difficult, for the reasons that I mentioned. The Government should consider a consolidation provision at some stage. I hope that they will do so sooner rather than later.
  Sir John Cope: The hon. Member for Wrexham (Dr. Marek) asked me about the cost of the order. The legislation stops a loophole and, as far as we know, there will be no extra cost. Indeed, it may save us money that we might otherwise have had to pay had the order not meant what we thought the original order meant. SI 1654 is for clarification.
  The original order, SI 627, cost £50 million to produce. The hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer) explained that the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments had issued an explanatory memorandum. He was right to say that it would be useful to users of the order. He asked if we were to give away the order. That is most unlikely. It is a matter for the Stationery Office to decide, and it has to recover its costs. The original order cost only 65p, so it is not expensive, and we should recover the cost of producing such documents.
  Mr. Cryer: When the fault clearly lies with the Government, it is usual for them to issue a replacement order to purchasers of the original order. While it may not be fair to ascribe all blame to the Government, they should bear at least some of it. As the Paymaster General seems reluctant to show concern for the user from the Dispatch Box, perhaps he will consider the matter further after the debate. When the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments finds that an instrument has to be amended as something is seriously wrong, it is common for the Government to issue a free replacement. Will the Paymaster General give consideration to the matter?
  Sir John Cope: I shall consider the issue outlined by the hon. Member for Bradford, South. We do not consider that the original order, SI 627, did not fulfil our intentions. However, it seemed that there might be a challenge in the form of an avoidance scheme and, by issuing the clarifying order before either of them took effect, we avoid time and trouble for the Government and for others. The hon. Gentleman asked whether we had thought of producing a consolidating order. We are paying attention to that and will probably produce some VAT consolidating orders. However, we have not yet decided to do so. The hon. Gentleman's recommendation is sensible and we shall certainly consider it.
  Question put and agreed to.

  Value Added Tax (Payments on Account)
  7.20 pm
  The Paymaster General (Sir John Cope: I beg to move,
  That the Value Added Tax (Payments on Account) (No. 2) Order 1992 (S.I., 1992, No. 1668), dated 13th July 1992, a copy of which was laid before the House on 13th July, be approved.
  The order introduces a scheme of VAT payments on account for the largest VAT payers from later this year. Commissioners regulations will also be necessary, giving a little further detail on the operation of the scheme.
  As the House knows, the instrument has had a long gestation period. In October 1991, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that postponed accounting was to be reintroduced on goods received from the rest of the European Community. About 90,000 businesses will gain a cash flow advantage from that change in 1992–93. To prevent an increase in the public sector borrowing requirement, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor decided that the largest VAT payers should account for VAT monthly, as happens in most of the Community, rather than quarterly. About 1,600 businesses will be affected, and they are those with a VAT liability in excess of £2 million in the year ending 31 March 1991.
  Following wide consultation with representative bodies, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor announced in the Budget just before the election that he had decided to modify the original proposal so as to require monthly payments on account instead of monthly returns from the largest VAT payers. The traders will continue to submit VAT returns quarterly and their liability will be adjusted by the amount that they have paid on account in the two previous months. That will minimise the admistrative burden on businesses and avoid exposing them to extra penalties while still protecting the PSBR.
  Customs and Excise issued a draft leaflet on Budget day and invited comments. As a result, we have made some changes which should be helpful to businesses. First, we intend to exclude from the scheme businesses for which, although the VAT liability in 1990–91 exceeded the £2 million threshold, the figure for the year immediately preceding and the year immediately following were below that level. That is intended to take account of exceptional transactions arising in 1990–91 which might otherwise mean that a smaller business would be unjustly caught in the net.
  Secondly, we have allowed for payments to be reduced if the VAT liability falls to less than 80 per cent. of that in the reference year used to calculate the payments. That is more generous than the two thirds originally proposed by the Chancellor. A short time ago, I was able to announce that the selection criteria for inclusion in the scheme will be reviewed when some experience has been gained of its operation.
  As hon. Members will be aware, there have been representations from several bodies to the effect that it was unfair to put the burden of payments on account on the largest VAT payers. They said that it would be fairer to target the businesses that would benefit most from the new postponed accounting arrangements, that is, those who import goods from Community member states. We have carefully considered that but have concluded that such a scheme would run an unacceptably high risk of challenge in the European Court. Accordingly, the Chancellor was unable to accept those proposals.

  1195
  In each VAT quarter, payments on account will be due by the last day of the second month and the last day of the third month and subsequently adjusted to the correct quarterly amount when the VAT return is sent in. Each payment will be one twelfth of the total VAT due, excluding the VAT on goods imported other than from member states in the reference year. For the first year, the reference year will be based on the 12 months ending in March, April or May 1992, depending on the VAT return cycle for the business in question. Provision is made for VAT periods of other than three months.
  I am glad that in Committee the hon. Member for Wrexham (Dr. Marek) and the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) gave some support to the changes that we have made since the Budget. However, the Chancellor has made it clear that it would be wrong for the Government and the taxpayer to stand the cost of the postponed accounting arrangements on the PSBR for this year. In response to issues raised by business in the consultation exercise carried out by Customs and Excise, the scheme allows substantial easement of the original terms proposed in October 1991.
  When the first version of the order was considered by the Statutory Instruments Committee, it thought, as hon. Members may have noted from the Committee's report, that some aspects of the order might be outside the vires provided. Therefore, last week we thought it right not to move the first order and to replace it with the second order, which the Statutory Instruments Committee considered yesterday. That is all documented in the Committee's report, and the order had been revised to take account of the Committee's comments.
  7.26 pm
  Dr. John Marek: The order results from the Budget proposals in March. It replaces the original order No. 1510, and I again question this apparent waste of paper, time and money. I shall be interested to hear what my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer) has to say about the Joint Committee's findings. Not much time was allowed for comments because people were given until the end of March following the Budget. It is unsatisfactory once again to have two orders, the first of which is not being proceeded with although it has been laid on the Table.
  The instrument takes account of changes in the VAT rules which are to be implemented on 1 January 1993. The Opposition do not quibble with that, and will not force a Division. The order is clearly the result of protracted discussion with interested parties in various industries and in the House. It proposes that large traders with a VAT liability of more than £2 million in the year to 1 April 1991 would have to make monthly payments on account from, I think, the end of November. I am told that there are about 16,000 large companies to which the order will apply. Normal quarterly returns would be made. The on account figure is to be calculated by reference to actual payments in the year to March, April or May 1992, depending on the exact time of the quarterly return.
  However, there are likely to be some problems. Traders over the £2 million limit might suddenly, as a result of the recession or some other unforeseen, or even foreseen, circumstance, fall below that threshold, thereby falling outside the scheme. But they will have to persuade
  1196
  Customs and Excise that they should come off the scheme. The original statutory instrument, 1510, paragraph 4, headed
  "Persons to whom this Order applies",
  said:
  "Save as the Commissioners may otherwise allow, a taxable person falls within this article if …"
  I shall not read the whole paragraph. The important phrase was
  "Save as the Commissioners may otherwise allow".
  That seemed to allow the commissioners some discretion about whether a person should be taxable under the scheme.
  The new statutory instrument, 1668, does not have those words. It is completely rewritten. My hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, South may wish to comment on that in due course. Has the ability of Customs to decide whether someone should be in the scheme disappeared as a result of the new statutory instrument?
  If the percentage of VAT due is down to 80 per cent. or less, adjustments can be made to the monthly payments. That provision has been carried forward from the old statutory instrument to the new one. Paragraph 11 of statutory instrument 1668 says:
  "with effect from the date of the written approval by the Commissioners of a written application by the taxable person to that effect, the lesser amount shall be substituted for the greater amount and the amount of each payment on account beginning with the first payment on account which falls to be made after the date of that approval shall, subject to article 10 above, equal one twelfth of that lesser amount."
  But Customs has to be satisfied that the total amount of tax due is less than 80 per cent. There could be delays. If there are delays, can the Minister assure the House that they will be kept to a minimum and that the commissioners will act as expeditiously as possible? It clearly cannot be right for the commissioners to wait a month, perhaps because they are snowed up with other work, and to insist on certain traders paying sums on account which are clearly well above the sums that they would be paying if an up-do-date view were to be taken of their trading activities. That is a problem on which the House requires assurance.
  As the Paymaster General said, domestic traders will be affected rather than traders who import and export, who will be able to take account of the postponed accounting system. The Paymaster General also said that there will be a review of the criteria for selection for inclusion in the scheme. Can he give some idea of the timing of that review? Clearly the sooner the consultation is undertaken and the decisions made by the Government, the better. One year, a trader may be above the £2 million threshold, and the next below it. The Government might want to increase the threshold to take account of inflation from time to time. That can lead to uncertainty for a trader which cannot be good for his business.
  Therefore, I make a plea to the Government to get on with the review. No doubt it is right that there should be some experience of how the present system works, but it should not take a day longer than necessary. After that, I hope that, as a result of the review, there will be a generally accepted view of how the system should operate.
  A further problem may arise as a result of the related rules on groups for companies that can be sold out of a large group. There seems to be an inability to leave the club. Will the commissioners have any power to ensure that such difficulties do not develop? That could easily be an important issue, particularly as the original statutory instrument seemed to give the commissioners the power to

  1197
  take a particular trader out of the scheme without having to give any reason, which is not the case in the new statutory instrument.
  A problem arises as a result of traders whose liability last year exceeded their liability this year. They will have an adverse cash flow to bear as a result of the proposal. Paragraph 11 provides that taxpayers may apply for a reduced payment if their total tax is likely to be below 80 per cent., but no other situation is covered.
  I have dealt with some of the difficulties that traders may have with regard to the 80 per cent. rule and the fact that there is no immediate way of ensuring that a trader falls out of the scheme's remit, except perhaps by waiting a year in order to demonstrate to the commissioners that his total tax revenue is below £2 million. That is too crude and it needs to be refined. It is a bit hard on traders, particularly domestic traders, for example in the service industries, who will not receive any corresponding cash flow benefits from the new intra-EC rules.
  Will the Paymaster General think ahead to 1996–97? If there is such an adverse effect on domestic traders when we move to an origin-based VAT system, can the situation be redressed in any way? For the sake of equity, there should be such redress. Will the Government bear in mind that domestic traders will have to bear extra costs as a result of this statutory instrument and any new legislation leading up to 1996–97, and if possible to redress the cost?
  I am also advised that the Customs leaflet issued in 1992—I have not seen it so I could be wrong; I usually check everything, but I have not been able to obtain the leaflet—contained some ambiguous statements. The statutory instrument will affect it and it will need to be rewritten and reprinted. Has the Paymaster General or his Department had any representations on that? If so, I hope that he will take them on board and will print a new and unambiguous leaflet so that traders know their position exactly.
  I am concerned about the validity of the Government's proposals. This could be a serious point, depending on the Government's legal view. There is the problem that the Government have conceded the practical difficulties of submitting monthly returns, but the relative provisions of the sixth directive, article 22(5), may be read as restricting the ability of member states to deviate from the rule requiring payments one month after the VAT return period to the case where interim payments are required for every taxpayer.
  Are the Government satisfied that that proposal and the statutory instrument are permitted by the fifth directive? If they are not, will they seek an appropriate derogation? Article 22(5) of the sixth directive states:
  "Every taxable person shall pay the net amount of the value added tax when submitting the regular return. Member States may, however, set a different date for the payment of that amount or may demand an interim payment."
  If that provision applies to some, does it apply to all?
  I hope that the Paymaster General can say that there is no risk of infraction proceedings, or whatever, initiating in Brussels as a result of the statutory instrument. With those reservations, I hope that the order will be passed this evening.
  7.40 pm
  Mr. Michael Stern: I commend my right hon. Friend the Paymaster General for his courage in introducing this statutory instrument today. I appreciate that there may be budgetary reasons for doing so before the summer recess, but I refer to my right hon. Friend's courage because the scheme that the measure introduces has come under considerable attack—and will continue to do so.
  Some time ago, representatives of the 1,600 companies most affected were assured by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer that, if an alternative were submitted, it would be considered. In his opening remarks, my right hon. Friend the Paymaster General dealt effectively with one alternative—to load the burden of the new impost on to importers. He did not refer, however, to a suggestion made by the companies most adversely affected by the order. I refer to the so-called Danish solution, which would negative at least part of the resultant adverse cash flow that companies fear will result from the order. Perhaps my right hon. Friend will explain why the Government decided to reject the Danish solution.
  A more serious concern was touched on by the hon. Member for Wrexham (Dr. Marek)—the relationship between the order, the treaty of Rome, and the European Court. My right hon. Friend is aware that a legal opinion is winging its way to the Treasury, where it is expected to arrive on Friday—from Maître Waelbroeck, who is regarded as an expert—to the effect that there is a serious risk that the order will provoke infraction proceedings under article 1 of the treaty on the grounds that it will distort competition, introduce tax neutrality, and discriminate against importers.
  I have neither the knowledge nor the foresight to say whether that opinion has any validity, but given that copies will reach the Treasury as soon as they are available, it is legitimate to question my right hon. Friend as to the robustness of the Government's opinion that there is no risk of infraction proceedings under article 101. I shall be grateful if my right hon. Friend can provide reassurance on that point.
  7.44 pm
  Mr. A. J. Beith: This change will affect 1,600 large businesses. It seems harsh that the firms which will be adversely affected by the requirement for monthly payments will often be domestic concerns trading at home, whereas the businesses which may benefit from the windfall advantages will in many cases be companies which import goods into this country. I appreciate that we cannot devise a procedure that will have the reverse effect, because that would be contrary to Community law, but that unfortunate feature strengthens the case for examining the grievances of those large companies on their merits.
  Value added tax is not the property of the businesses which collect it from their customers; it is handed over to Customs and Excise. Nevertheless, the realities of life are such that many businesses will not have collected on VAT invoices to their customers by the time they are required to remit their monthly VAT payments on account. They therefore make an interest-free loan to the Government.
  That is a significant burden, particularly at a time of recession. Once a company is included in the monthly

  1199
  payment scheme, it incurs a significant cost. That is relevant to the timetable issue and to the selection criteria for inclusion in the monthly payment scheme. Whether or not a company is in the scheme could make a significant difference, arid might adversely affect its competitive position.
  The hon. Member for Wrexham (Dr. Marek) pointed out that the potential move to an origin-based system in 1997 or later could bring a complete change and result in additional Government revenue. The businesses concerned wonder whether there will be alleviation at that stage for firms which have been adversely affected.
  The businesses which will be most affected by the order have gone to considerable lengths to make alternative proposals. They share the feeling that they are not being fairly treated, but that they are being unjustly used to make up a hole in the Government's finances, being singled out merely by size. That is the kind of thing that people often describe as rough justice, but in my experience it is really injustice incorrectly described.
  Customs and Excise may take the view that the largest firms have the broadest backs, on which such an injustice can more easily be laid, but in these recessionary times few large firms can easily bear unreasonable and additional burdens, or make tax payments for which they may not be liable and which amount to interest-free loans to the Government.
  7.48 pm
  Mr. Bob Cryer: The front page of the statutory instrument states:
  "This Order supersedes S.I. 1992/1510 published on 2nd July 1992 and is being issued free of charge to all known recipients of that Statutory Instrument."
  That demonstrates a point that I made in respect of the previous order. The cost to the public of this legislation is absolutely outrageous. A couple of sheets of printing costs 55p, and a 50-page document can cost £10, £12 or £15. It is no excuse to advance the argument that a copy of legislation was too expensive to purchase. The Government do not allow any exemption because of cost.
  The order has had a chequered career. It was originally tabled for debate on 7 July. On that day, the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments was also due to consider it. Hon. Members probably do not know that the Committee has a duty to report to the House whether a Minister is making unusual use of his powers, whether the order that he is presenting is within his powers or is ultra vires, whether the order is ambiguous and whether certain other criteria have been observed. The House, not the Committee, lays down those criteria. If the Committee is to report an instrument, the Department concerned must have an opportunity to defend its position.
  It was clear that, if the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments decided, for instance, to take evidence and not to report the incident to the House on 7 July, the statutory instrument would, in effect, slide through. However, the Committee determined that, because certain parts of the original order were ultra vires, it should be reported to the House. Fortunately, we had a memorandum, and we decided not to take evidence.
  Because the Government are producing so many statutory instruments, they are turning the House into a sausage machine. They are not allowing the Select and Joint Committees on Statutory Instruments adequate time in which to do their job properly and report fully to the
  1200
  House. I am pleased to say, however, that, because of the Select Committee's report, the Government decided to withdraw the original order. My hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Dr. Marek) alluded to the reasons for the report.
  Articles 4, 5, 6, 11 and 14 of the original order were all prefaced by the words
  "save as the Commissioners [of Customs and Excise] may otherwise allow".
  Nothing in the parent legislation allowed the commissioners that discretion. It was clearly a powerful discretion, for it allowed the commissioners to decide whether a person was subject to all the powers set out in those five articles; and it was not contained in the primary legislation. The Committee's view was that the discretions were ultra vires—that is, that they were not within the powers of the Minister.
  Following advice from counsel, the Committee decided that another section of the order was ultra vires. The order imposed a duty to make advance payments on divisions of a corporate body; the primary legislation allowed such impositions to be made only on a corporate body—and divisions of a corporate body do not constitute corporate bodies. We considered that to be outside the Minister's powers, and accordingly reported it to be ultra vires.
  I am pleased to tell the House that—as can be seen from the report that we have placed in the Vote Office—the order that we are debating has removed that discretion from the commissioners, thus conforming with the Value Added Tax Act 1983. Taxable persons are now regarded as corporate bodies, rather than as divisions of a corporate body: that, too, brings the order within the vires set out in the primary legislation.
  On that occasion the Government behaved very sensibly, but that is not always the case. On other occasions, after the Committee has claimed that elements of similar orders were ultra vires, those orders have been tabled for discussion. In such instances, I have raised points of order, asking the Government to withdraw the orders and defer debate so that they could be examined with a view to tabling correct versions. The Government have simply pushed the instruments through the sausage machine, which is not good enough.
  The Minister must accept the commendations of the House—although he may feel uncomfortable about doing so—for his sensible withdrawal of the order, and its retabling in a correct form. That should happen more often. If the Select and Joint Committees on Statutory Instruments are able to identify a vires point—a point relating to the powers of Ministers—there should be an automatic requirement for the House to see the Committee's report before any order is debated. In my view, nothing less than that will do. Sometimes, however, the Government simply press ahead when the Committee is about to report on a vires point, ignoring the work that it has done.
  Let me add that the Select and Joint Committees are not the most televised parliamentary Committees. They are not a focus of great publicity; their business is a fairly dull routine, which is carried out in the public interest. That may sound precious, but it is true. I think that the Committees' work at least merits recognition by the House.
  Dr. Marek: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Difficulties are likely to be caused for traders, however, by

  1201
  the withdrawal of that phrase from the order. I am beginning to wonder whether we should not proceed with the statutory instrument, and whether the original wording should be reintroduced. That could be done as part of our proceedings on next year's Finance Bill. I should be interested to know what my hon. Friend and the Minister think of that proposal.
  Mr. Cryer: Delegated powers are conferred by primary legislation. If the primary legislation does not contain powers for the Minister to award discretion to the commissioners, he cannot award that discretion. If discretion is needed—this is a particularly onerous system, requiring advance payments; as has already been said, 1,600 companies will be affected—it is a requirement for primary legislation.
  The Select and Joint Committees do not examine instruments on their merits—which, incidentally, makes it even more iniquitous that the Government should, at times, ignore the views of the Select Committee, which has a Conservative majority. It is not as though its members were seeking to undermine a Government policy on merit; they are simply carrying out the task allotted to them by Parliament, which specifically excludes debate on merit. My hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham has made a perfectly fair point, to which the Minister must reply. We must establish whether further primary legislation is required.
  Customs and Excise has provided the explanation given to the Select Committee. It sets out the position fairly, explaining the original faults in the instrument, their recognition and their replacement by the new Value Added Tax (Payments on Account) (No. 2) Order, which takes those faults into account and—as far as the Committee is concerned—remedies them.
  On the question of merit, if the order leads to companies having difficulty in making advance payments, the Government must take that into account. We are in the middle of a deep and, alas, deepening recession. I emphasise the dangers of making decisions about value added tax or other tax payments in the middle of a recession that would further exacerbate the recession.
  I hope that other Government Departments will follow the example set by the Minister and his Department and make sure that the recommendations of the Select and Joint Committees on Statutory Instruments are taken into account before a debate is held. About 1,600 companies will be affected by the order. I repeat that the legislation that affects the vast majority of the British people is not primary legislation. That goes through the House in dramatic circumstances, with a crowded House for the Report stage and with great interest shown in the Standing Committee proceedings. The debates are lengthy. Delegated legislation generally goes through the House in an hour and a half.
  We are not considering the majority of instruments—negative procedure instruments—that are not even debated yet frequently contain criminal sanctions. On this occasion we are, fortunately, able to deal with a corrected instrument, but on many occasions faulty legislation that was delegated to Ministers and their Departments to draft goes through the House without examination. That is an imposition on the British people. They have to implement the legislation, but they are often inhibited from going to
  1202
  court for a clarifying decision because of the expense. It is our fault if defective legislation leaves this place. It is not the fault of the people outside who have to implement it. Mercifully, on this occasion we have corrected the legislation.
  I hope that the Minister will not mind my few words of approbation. His political career will, no doubt, suffer as a result. Other Ministers had better look out, therefore, for if I crucify them with praise they will have to look towards a dreaded occasion—unless they wish to avoid it by taking similar corrective action.
  8.6 pm
  Sir John Cope: The hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer) commended me both at the beginning and at the end of his speech. He need have no hesitation in doing so. I am delighted to accept any commendations from him that are on offer, because I know that he would condemn me if he thought that I was not doing the right thing at any point. He need not worry about my political career. I know that Whips have very short memories. I do not believe that there will be any difficulty in that respect, whatever happens to my career.
  The debate provides me with the opportunity sincerely to commend the work of the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments. When I was in the Whips Office I came to know a little about its proceedings and how hard the hon. Gentleman in particular and his colleagues on the Committee work on behalf of the House. We had an exciting debate earlier this week about membership of some of the more glamorous Select Committees. I know, however, how difficult it sometimes is to get Members to serve on some of the less glamorous Committees, such as the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments, which does extremely important work on behalf of the House.
  I agree with what the hon. Member for Wrexham (Dr. Marek) said—that in some respects it was unsatisfactory not to proceed with the first order. However, I considered it right not to do so, but to amend it in the light of the Select Committee's report. There is always legal doubt in these cases. I do not say that we were necessarily 100 per cent. convinced that the vires points raised by the Select Committee were exactly correct. Nevertheless, there was sufficient evidence to convince us that it would be right to redraft the statutory instruments and avoid a potential difficulty. That is what we have done by bringing the revised order before the House.
  Therefore, the words that the hon. Member for Wrexham quoted—
  "save as the Commissioners may allow"—
  have disappeared from the instrument and have been replaced with more precise wording to cover the two points that we were anxious to amend as a result of consultations since the Budget.
  The hon. Member for Wrexham also asked me whether there would be any delay over deciding about the 80 per cent. rule that has been mentioned so many times. We shall do our best to avoid any delay. About 1,600 traders are involved in the scheme. The number of traders who will make applications in connection with the 80 per cent. rule is much smaller. I do not anticipate, therefore, that there will be a huge burden of work. I hope that we shall be able to deal expeditiously with the applications.
  As the hon. Member for Wrexham acknowledged, the review will take place after we have gained some experience of working the scheme. We expect to consider

  1203
  how the scheme is working next spring or summer. The hon. Gentleman also asked me whether this provision will be reviewed if and when we move to an origin system of value added tax. It will, of course, need to be reconsidered at that time, but I cannot anticipate either when that will be or what the results of the review will be.
  The hon. Member for Wrexham mentioned that representations had been made to him about the leaflets. In the light of the order, assuming that it is agreed tonight, we shall issue revised guidance as soon as possible.
  Finally, the hon. Gentleman referred to the sixth directive and asked whether we were satisfied that we had authority under that directive to pursue the order. The answer is yes, we are satisfied that we have that authority. Any Minister will be concerned about technical arid legal matters. I am not a lawyer. There is bound to be slight concern, therefore, as to whether all its provisions can be upheld. We have received clear legal advice on the point, however, and I am in no doubt about it.
  My hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. Stern) referred to the Danish solution, as he described it, to a similar problem. Denmark is one of the few countries in the European Community that has three-monthly returns. The time allowed for payment at the end of that period is one month and 20 days. That is 20 days longer than is allowed in the United Kingdom. The effect of the Danish system in shaving a few days off the time allowed for payment here creates no difficulty as it would in this country, where it would shorten, I think unacceptably. the time allowed for payment. That course is not therefore open to us.
  My hon. Friend referred also to a legal opinion which we were told the day before yesterday is now on t he way and which casts doubt on the order in relation to article 101. We have considered that point. Without the benefit of the new legal opinion that was promised to us recently, our clear advice is that the order is in order in that respect. Although there has been a fairly long consultation period over the order, I cannot help but remark upon the fact that that legal opinion has been promised to us a day or two after the House rises for the summer recess.
  The timing is obviously extremely difficult from our point of view. It is essential that the order is passed so that businesses know where they stand and we have time to make proper arrangements. Were we to hang on for a few days until we saw the promised new legal opinion, there would be a much greater effect on our ability to have the order approved by the House, with consequent disorganisation for Customs and Excise and for the traders involved.
  Mr. Stern: Speaking as one chartered accountant to another, does my right hon. Friend agree that the delay in providing the legal opinion is only what one can expect from a lawyer?
  Sir John Cope: My hon. Friend has made his point and I do not need to add to it.
  The right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) said that VAT money collected by firms is not the property of those firms. I agree with that and it is part of the rationale for the process.
  The hon. Member for Bradford, South drew my attention to the cost of the order, or at least to the fact that
  1204
  it is free because it is a replacement. It is a complete replacement and the previous order is now of no value and can be thrown away.
  There was a suggestion during the debate about monthly payments. The House will know that in some circumstances businesses can pay their VAT or send in their VAT returns monthly. Some seasonal traders have said that the one twelfth rule would be difficult for them because of the arithmetic workings and the seasonal nature of their trade. Customs and Excise will allow such businessses, upon application, to make their VAT returns and payments monthly as an alternative to quarterly returns with payments on account if it is judged to be right. It is for the businesses involved to consider that and to make an application if they think that it would be helpful.
  Mr. Beith: The Minister quoted my observation that the money collected in VAT is not the property of the business but should be remitted. He omitted to refer to the other side of the coin, which is that money not collected in VAT and not yet returned through the normal business invoicing and terms of trade is not money that the business has to hand over. Therefore, the business is making an interest-free loan in circumstances that do not apply to the majority of traders. I hope that the Minister will continue to keep that in mind, because that is what this is all about.
  Sir John Cope: As the right hon. Gentleman said, the order is all about cash flow. If we did not have the order, the Government's cash flow—the public sector borrowing requirement—would suffer considerably. There is no way in which we can reverse that painlessly for the businesses and place the Government in a position where their PSBR does not suffer. That is the underlying reason for introducing the order, and why I commend it to the House.
  Question put and agreed to.
  Resolved,
  That the Value Added Tax (Payments on Account) (No. 2) Order 1992 (S.I., 1992, No. 1668), dated 13th July 1992, a copy of which was laid before this House on 13th July, be approved.

  Value Added Tax (Payments on Account)
    STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS, &c.
    Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.).
    STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS, &c.

      DATA PROTECTION
      That the draft Data Protection (Regulation of Financial Services etc.) (Subject Access Exemption) (Amendment) Order 1992, which was laid before this House on 22nd June, be approved.—[Mr. Robert G. Hughes.]
      Question agreed to.
      Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.).

      RIGHTS OF THE SUBJECT
      That the draft Access to Personal Files (Housing) (Scotland) Regulations 1992, which was laid before this House on 30th June, be approved.—[Mr. Robert G. Hughes.]
      Question agreed to.

    PETITIONS

      Heywood Magistrates Court
      8.14 pm
      Mr. Jim Callaghan: I have no wish to detain the House, but I wish to present a petition that has been signed by 4,000 of my constituents in Heywood protesting at the proposed closure of Heywood magistrates court. It was given to me by Miss Susan Emmett and states:
      To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled;
      The humble Petition of Residents of Heywood and others;
      Sheweth that Heywood Magistrates' Court is part of Heywood's heritage and a familiar landmark in the town; that if it is closed, all proceedings which currently take place in Heywood Magistrates' Court will be transferred to Rochdale or Middleton, to the inconvenience of the local community.
      Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House will ensure that a magistrates' court is retained in Heywood.
      And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c.
      To lie upon the Table.

      RN Stores Depot, Eaglescliffe
      8.16 pm
      Mr. Michael Bates: I am grateful for this opportunity to present a petition in the name of six of my constituents. It concerns the proposed relocation of 180 jobs from the Royal Naval stores depot, Eaglescliffe to the Bath area. The petition was handed to me by Mrs. Eileen Sharp of Park End, Middlesbrough and is signed by Miss Bruce of Ormesby, Mr. Weighell of Marske, Mr. Wheatley of Marton and Miss Sykes of Eston.
      While understanding that the idea of losing jobs to another part of the country is never particularly welcome and recognising the ever-increasing need to improve efficiency in Government Departments, which can be achieved by economies of scale and centralising Departments, my petitioners would have me suggest that the relocation should not move the jobs to Bath, but that the Bath jobs should be relocated to the Eaglescliffe area. That would provide significant cost savings. The petition states:
      To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.
      The Humble Petition of the members of the workforce of the Royal Naval Stores Depot at Eaglescliffe.
      Sheweth that a proposal has been endorsed to create a centralised Naval Support Command in the Bath area which necessitates the loss of 180 jobs from the Royal Naval Stores Depot at Eaglescliffe near Stockton-on-Tees.
      Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your honourable House urge the Secretary of State for Defence to abandon the proposal to transfer the 180 jobs from Eaglescliffe.
      And your Petitioners as in duty hound will ever pray &c.
      To lie upon the Table.

  AWD (Bedford) Trucks
  Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Robert G. Hughes.]
  8.17 pm
  Mr. David Madel: This short Adjournment debate is an appeal for help to try to save AWD (Bedford) Trucks in Dunstable in my constituency from total collapse. I am delighted to see that my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North (Mr. Carlisle) is listening to the debate, because he shares with me intense concern about the current position.
  AWD (Bedford) Trucks is now in the hands of the receiver. It went into the hands of the receiver on 4 June this year. In my view, the company can be saved if a large order for civilian—I stress the word "civilian"—lorries for Libya can be given the go-ahead.
  I shall give a brief history of the company. Bedford trucks have been made in Dunstable for 40 years, and for longer than that in Luton next door, part of which is represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North. It used to be part of the giant American firm, General Motors, which has owned Vauxhall Cars, manufactured in Luton, since 1925. Over the years, Bedford Trucks has provided employment for thousands of men and women in the Dunstable area. In addition, the prosperity of many suppliers to Bedford Trucks has been sustained by a viable truck plant in Dunstable.
  In the 1960s and 1970s, as Vauxhall cars in Luton struggled desperately with huge financial losses and product problems, Bedford Trucks made a substantial contribution to keeping the car plant going.
  Bedford Trucks stopped being part of the General Motors group as a result of the collapse of the General Motors-Leyland deal in the mid-1980s. That severe commercial setback had bad economic consequences for Dunstable and the vehicle industry in this country. I am looking forward to reading about what the people at the top thought about it and Lady Thatcher's memoirs on it. I hope that I shall be around 30 years on from 1986 to see the Cabinet papers. I know how keen the Government are to publish more detail of what goes on. Who knows—the 30-year rule may be changed to a 20-year rule.
  As a result of that great commercial crisis, General Motors pulled out of Bedford Trucks, which left Dunstable dangerously exposed. Although the David Brown family, who took over the plant, and the work force have made tremendous efforts to keep the plant going, everybody in the Dunstable area knows that the number of people employed in the plant has gone down since the crisis of the mid-1980s.
  The present position is summed up in the receiver's letter of 1 July to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. It says:
  "Our role, as you will be aware, is to maximise realisations and our view is that a going concern sale of most or all of the business would not only enhance realisations but would also preserve employment and contribute to exports …
  We have been attempting to encourage interest in the business and it has become clear that prospective purchasers of the business as a going concern have generally required of us, not unreasonably, confirmation of the precise status of the contract to supply trucks to Libya. I understand you are aware of the background to this contract and the current impasse … We now understand that the matter lies with you for a decision. From our analysis of the situation, I should say that we do not accept that the trucks are 'military goods' and

  1207
  that there is, therefore, any basis on which the contract should not be allowed to proceed … We have been led to believe that governmental approval is required, has not been forthcoming to date, but remains 'under consideration'."
  The penultimate paragraph of page 2 reads:
  "If we are unable to resolve this issue within the next few weeks"—
  this letter was written on 1 July, two weeks ago—
  "the chances of a going concern sale will be, in our judgment, much diminished with the regrettable consequences this may entail and I therefore would be grateful if you could give this matter your early attention."
  That is the current position, and that is why I have raised the matter the day before we adjourn for the summer recess.
  The contribution of the Dunstable truck plant to the economic well-being of Dunstable and Bedfordshire over the years has been enormous. The plant's industrial relations have been superb. Indeed, Dunstable avoided the spectacular industrial relations smash-ups of the 1960s and 1970s because of the imaginative and co-operative spirit between management and trade unions.
  I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister for Trade and his civil servants for the helpful and courteous way in which, for a long time, they have listened to me pleading the case for the order for civilian trucks to go ahead. I end as I started, with an appeal for AWD (Bedford) Trucks to be allowed to sell civilian trucks to Libya. Time is running out at a terrifying speed. We must save the Dunstable plant from total collapse. I appeal to the Government for help.
  8.25 pm
  The Minister for Trade (Mr. Richard Needham): The workers of AWD in Dunstable have no more doughty champion than my hon. Friend the Member for Bedfordshire, South-West (Mr. Madel). He has done everything possible to assist in trying to resolve the difficult position that the company is now in, not only because of the unfortunate fact that it has gone into receivership but because of the complexities of the order. My hon. Friend and I discussed the order in detail on 9 July.
  I have the utmost sympathy with the predicament in which the company and its employees find themselves. My hon. Friend forcefully spelled out the history of that. I understand and share the distress and uncertainty that the employees must feel about the company's future. As my hon. Friend said, that is doubly distressing given the past of the business, which has acted professionally and innovatively and has upheld the high regard in which the vehicle industry has been held. We are all aware of the quality standards that AWD (Bedford) Trucks has set over the years.
  It might help the House and my hon. Friend the Member for Bedfordshire, South-West—I am glad to see my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North (Mr. Carlisle) present—if I give the background to the difficulties that we must jointly try to overcome. The receivers believe that the sale of AWD as a going concern is largely dependent on the export order which has been the subject of protracted negotiations in the past year. AWD has been at pains to draw those negotiations to the attention of the Government so that we know what is going on.
  Exports are actively encouraged by the Government. Indeed, most of my work involves the promotion of exports. Having said that, everyone in government and in
  1208
  the House will accept that some exports need to be controlled because of the nature of the goods or because of the countries to which they are being exported. The Export of Goods (Control) Order 1989 lists goods which are prohibited for export without an export licence from my Department. The list of goods is extensive and is included in the order for a variety of foreign policy or defence reasons.
  I shall not weary the House by giving a long list of the prohibited categories of goods, but, subject to certain conditions, the export of civilian lorries to any destination is not prohibited by the current EGCO which came into effect on 31 December 1991. My officials have made the position clear to the company and have been in regular contract with it since the proposed export of civilian lorries to Libya was raised with the Department.
  On 16 January, Mr. Coolican, who is the head of the export control organisation, wrote to the company stating that the export of civilian lorries to Libya does not require an export licence under the EGCO. As with all such inquiries, the letter from Mr. Coolican also warned that the advice was conditional on the lorries not being used in contravention of the article within the EGCO with regard to activities associated with weapons of mass destruction.
  The letter also warned that the order is subject to change very quickly. To be able to make such changes is, of course, essential if one is to be able to respond quickly to different and changing threats. All exporters of goods covered by the EGCO are or should be aware of the dynamic way in which the order can be changed. My officials constantly remind companies of that.
  For those not usually involved in export controls, I accept that such qualifications may seem rather heavy-handed, but when advice about licensibility is sought, it is important that the Department should make those points plain to alert exporters as regards the way in which the controls operate and the way in which things could change. Mr. Coolican wrote in similar terms to one of the former directors of AWD on 13 August 1991, when the issue of exports to Libya was first raised.
  I said that my Department advised that civilian lorries for export to Libya did not require a licence under the EGCO. Unfortunately, as we all know, that is not the end of the matter, and we now come to one of the complex issues I mentioned. The House will be aware that, from time to time, trade sanctions are imposed on various countries. The United Nations sanctions imposed on Libya are not the same as those imposed on Iraq or Serbia and Montenegro. The key difference is that the sanctions imposed against Libya are selective. To put it another way, the United Kingdom does not have a complete trade embargo against Libya.
  The House will recall that the United Nations adopted Security Council resolution 748 on 31 March 1992, following Libya's refusal to abide by resolution 731, which called on Libya to, among other things, hand over the two suspects for the Lockerbie atrocity. On 15 April 1992, an Order in Council came into effect which implemented the sanctions adopted by the Security Council under resolution 748.
  The two key elements of the sanctions against Libya are, first, an arms embargo and, secondly, an aviation-related embargo. The precise prohibition in United Kingdom law is on the provision of arms and related material of all types, including the sale or transfer

  1209
  of weapons and ammunitions, military vehicles and equipment. I suggest that the aviation issues are not relevant to this debate in any case.
  When my Department was first made aware of AWD's proposals to sell civilian lorries to Libya, it was not clear that some of the items were to be used by the Libyan armed forces. Subsequently, in September 1991, we were advised that some were for use by the Libyan armed forces. It has never been entirely clear, however, precisely who was the intended customer or end user of the lorries.
  There have been various indications by the company, as negotiations continued, of changing demands ranging from some to none to all of the lorries being used by the military. The use of lorries by the Libyan military has naturally and understandably caused concern and increased the complexity of the issue, althought it is important to stress, as I have repeatedly done, that these are civilian vehicles—open trucks, trucks with winches, cesspit cleaning vehicles and ambulances—and that none are to any military specification of which we are aware; nor have any military adaptations been requested by the Libyans.
  I remind my hon. Friend and the company that the responsibility for deciding whether to apply for an export licence under the Libya Sanctions Order rests with the exporter. A key decision that the company will need to make is whether the export of the lorries requires a licence under that order because the goods are arms and related material. My officials are perfectly prepared to offer help and guidance but, at the end of the day, it is only the exporter who has all the relevant information and only the exporter who therefore knows whether the goods will be caught by a control. That is the normal procedure for all exporters. If the company believed that to be the case, it would need to make an application for a licence which
  1210
  would be considered in the same way as any other application for a licence under the Libya Sanctions Order. As my hon. Friend knows, no such application has been made.
  I should point out at this stage that there is still a considerable amount of trade with Libya which is unaffected by sanctions. In 1991, the United Kingdom's total exports to Libya were £225·7 million. That figure represented approximately 10 per cent. of all Libya's imports. Although it is too early to say, it is expected that only a small proportion of the goods that the United Kingdom trades with Libya are likely to fall within the scope of the current sanctions order. It has been Government policy for some years neither to encourage nor to discourage trade with Libya, but clearly many United Kingdom companies are continuing to do business with Libya in areas unaffected by sanctions.
  It is only recently that I became aware that the receivers believe—as my hon. Friend read out from the letter—that Libyan order is crucial to the company continuing as a viable business. That has never been made crystal clear to my Department, but we now understand this to be the case, and we understand it doubly having listened to my hon. Friend's powerful speech.
  In conclusion, there is no requirement for an export licence under the EGCO. Whether a licence should be sought under the Libya Sanctions Order is a matter for the company to decide in the light of its own legal advice and after speaking to my Department.
  As for Libya, it is impossible to say what will happen in the future. Much will depend on the Libyan Government and, in particular, on Colonel Gaddaffi. I can assure my hon. Friend that I and my Department will continue to do all that we can to assist him to find a way for the company to get its trucks through this especially difficult minefield.
  Question put and agreed to.
  Adjourned accordingly at twenty-three minutes to Nine o'clock.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

  Occupational Health Service
  Mrs. Lait
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when the annual report of the Civil Service Occupational Health Service is due to be published.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  Part 1 of the annual report of the Civil Service Occupational Health Service for 1991–92 is published today. This reports on the health of the civil service. Part 2 of the report, which covers the activities of the Civil Service Occupational Health Service during 1991–92 and includes the agency's accounts, will be published by 31 July. Copies of both parts will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses on publication.

  Recruitment and Assessment Services Agency
  Mrs. Lait
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will publish the first annual report of the Recruitment and Assessment Services Agency.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  I have today arranged for copies of the first year's annual report of the Recruitment and Assessment Services Agency to be placed in the Library of the House.

  The report makes it clear that 1991–92 was not an easy year in which to launch a new recruitment business on a full repayment basis. The agency was unable to achieve a financial balance but it contained its cash deficit to £146,000 and its trading deficit on a accruals basis to £431,000. Although it nearly achieved its target for the number of recruitment schemes, the number of vacancies per scheme was down. On the other hand, it significantly exceeded its target for consultancy days and met its quality of service targets.

  Civil Service College
  Mrs. Lait
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will publish the annual report of the Civil Service College.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  I have today arranged for copies of this year's annual report of the Civil Service College to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Efficiency Unit
  Mr. Paice
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what topics have been covered in the efficiency unit's central scrutiny programme in the last financial year.

  Mr. Waldergrave
  Seventeen efficiency scrutinies have been undertaken by Departments in 1991–92 in association with the Prime Minister's adviser on efficiency and the efficiency unit. The programme of scrutinies, including those which are not yet completed, is as follows:690

  Department/Title of scrutiny

  Report completed

  Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

  Organisation of Purchasing and Supply

  Yes

  Customs and Excise

  VAT Enforcement

  Yes

  Ministry of Defence

  Third Line Helicopter Repair

  Yes

  Electronic Component Repair

  Yes

  Department of the Environment

  Rent Officer Service

  Yes

  Department of Health

  Office Equipment, Furniture and Fittings

  Yes

  Home Office

  Information Flows Between Police and Government

  Yes

  Inland Revenue

  Organisation of Trust Work

  Yes

  Sub-Contractors Deduction Scheme

  Yes

  Northern Ireland Office

  Escorting and Conveyance of Prisoners

  Yes

  Overseas Development Administration

  Output and Performance Measures

  Yes

  Scottish Office

  Text Creation

  Yes

  Department of Social Security

  Departmental Relationships

  No

  Benefiting the Community

  Yes

  Department of Trade and Industry

  Management Information Systems

  No

  Management of Accommodation

  Yes

  Department of Transport

  Developers' Contributions to Highway Works

  Yes

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what plans he has for his Department to celebrate in 1993 the European Year of the Elderly; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 13 July,Official Report, columns 430–31.

  Civil Servants' Shareholdings
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what guidance, other than the civil service pay and conditions of service code and the establishment officers' guide, his Department provides relating to civil servants' shareholdings; if he will list the number of occasions within the last five years on which civil servants have reported shareholdings to establishment officers in his Department; what regulations apply to the staff of the next steps agencies within his Department; what mechanisms are in place to prevent potential conflicts of interest; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  My Department provides brief guidance in part IV of the Cabinet Office staff handbook, but individuals refer to the code and guide for detail. All
  691
  three documents are publicly available whilst the code and the guide are in the Library of the House. The same regulations apply to staff in the agencies. Information about reported shareholdings is not held centrally in the form requested; each application is, however, scrutinised carefully to guard against potential conflicts of interest.

PRIME MINISTER

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Office and the Cabinet Office in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Office monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  The Prime Minister
  The Government continue to place a high priority on helping small businesses, through improvements to the business climate through deregulation and through specific programmes of support and assistance.

  Subsidiarity
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to apply the principle of subsidiarity in the drafting of Government legislative proposals to be submitted to Parliament in respect of the role and powers of local government within the United Kingdom.

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 13 July 1992] : The Government are guided by all appropriate considerations in drafting legislative proposals in respect of the role and powers of local government.

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

  War Crimes
  Mr. Janner
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many public records in the Public Record Office relating to war crimes in the Channel Islands have been closed for more than 30 years.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Documentation relating to public records in the Public Record Office closed for longer than 30 years is not held in a form which would enable all records relating to a particular subject to be readily identified with precision, but a small number of records relating to the Channel Islands in general are subject to extended closure.

  Credit Repair Agencies
  Mr. Hawkins
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, what action he will take on advertisements by credit repair agencies purporting to be able to have county court judgments removed from the register.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  I am deeply concerned that consumers should think carefully before paying any fees for such a service. The procedures for having entries removed from the register are described in the leaflet sent to defendants on entry of judgment; they are quite simple 692
  and can be followed easily and cheaply by defendants themselves. However, the circumstances in which entries can be deleted from the register are limited. Almost all judgments are registered on entry of judgment, the major exception being where judgment is given at a contested hearing which the losing party attended and at which he did not ask for time to pay. Most entries then stay on the register for six years, even where payment has been made; they can be removed only where the defendant provides proof that the debt was paid within one month of judgment, where the court, through administrative error, has wrongly registered the judgment, or where the defendant makes a successful application to have the judgment "set aside". But the court will not set the judgment aside simply because the debt has been paid subsequently; a judgment will usually be set aside only on the ground that there is a defence to the claim which ought to be heard. Officials in my Department have already taken steps to warn the courts to be alert for potential abuses of this procedure and are also in contact with the Office of Fair Trading which is considering whether it would be appropriate to use any of its powers against these companies.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Tax Law
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what guidelines exist on the circumstances in which a Minister should be informed when arguments advanced in a lower court are reversed at a subsequent stage; and if he will publish those guidelines.

  Mr. Dorrell
  I am not aware of any such guidelines.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what occasions the agreement referred to by the Minister in column 213 of the Official Report of Standing Committe B, 6 June 1991, has been upheld by the courts.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The passage to which my hon. Friend refers mentions two instances of agreement between taxpayers and the Inland Revenue. Neither has had to be considered by the courts.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether Padmore v. CIR referred to by the then Economic Secretary to the Treasury on 6 June 1991, Standing Committee B, columns 205 and 213, was a judicial review case; and whether the Padmore case applied to taxpayers who were not in partnership with the taxpayer bringing the case.

  Mr. Dorrell
  Padmore v. CIR was not a judicial review case. The taxpayers who benefited from the judgment in that case included at least one who was not in partnership with Mr. Padmore.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) in what circumstances it is the policy of the Inland Revenue to propose to a taxpayer that public law proceedings brought by another taxpayer shall be treated as a test case for that taxpayer also; and when that policy first started;
  693
  (2) what rights he intends to confer upon taxpayers by providing that an agreement with a taxpayer that public law proceedings brought by another taxpayer shall be treated as a test case for that taxpayer;

  (3) if he will list the occasions on which the Inland Revenue agreed on a judicial review with a taxpayer that public law proceedings brought by another taxpayer shall be treated as a test case for that taxpayer also;

  (4) on how many occasions has the Inland Revenue agreed with a taxpayer that public proceedings brought by another taxpayer shall he treated as a test case for that taxpayer also;

  (5) in what circumstances it is the policy of the Inland Revenue to accept a proposal from the taxpayer that public law proceedings brought by another taxpayer shall be treated as a test case for that taxpayer also; and. when that policy first started;

  (6) if he will list the precedents in cases of judicial review for the Minister's statement in column 213 of the Official Report of Standing Committee B, 6 June 1991, that, other people could have joined in that agreement.

  Mr. Dorrell
  If the matters in issue in public law proceedings are relevant to the tax affairs of another taxpayer not party to the proceedings, such a taxpayer can rely on the result of those proceedings without reference to the Inland Revenue.

  The then Economic Secretary explained in Standing Committee B last year that the established principles would apply if retrospective legislation were in contemplation following those proceedings. If a taxpayer not party to the proceedings has expressly agreed with the Inland Revenue that the final resolution of some aspect of his or her tax affairs should await the outcome of public law proceedings, and follow the result, Ministers would feel bound to exclude that taxpayer from the scope of any subsequent retrospective legislation in the same way as the successful litigant. I am aware of no instance when this issue has arisen in practice in relation to public law proceedings.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer in what circumstances the Inland Revenue is excluded from the application of common law.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The Commissioners of the Inland Revenue are required to act in accordance with the powers conferred upon them by statute and in accordance with common law.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will make a statement on the circumstances in which a taxpayer may apply for judicial review where the Exchequer has refused to repay tax unlawfully raised;

  (2) what steps he has taken to ensure that a taxpayer can apply for judicial review where the Exchequer has refused to repay tax unlawfully raised.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The decision to apply for judicial review in a particular instance is a matter for the taxpayer concerned.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what is his policy on the repayment of tax unlawfully raised;

  (2) by what authority the Exchequer is not required to repay tax unlawfully raised.
  694
  Mr. Dorrell
  I assume that my hon. Friend's reference to "tax unlawfully raised" is a reference to tax paid pursuant to regulations subsequently found to be ultra vires. The question of the recovery of ultra vires charges levied by public bodies is currently in issue in the case of Woolwich v. CIR in which the judgment of the House of Lords is expected shortly.

  Income Tax (Building Societies) Regulations 1986
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the position of regulation 3 of the Income Tax (Building Societies) Regulations 1986 with regard to the imposition of double taxation.

  Mr. Dorrell
  Regulation 3 did not impose double taxation.

  Citizens Charters
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his policy on retroactive amendments to citizens charters.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The taxpayers charter was relaunched in August 1991 following the publication of the citizens charter in July 1991. The amendments were to make it shorter and easier to understand, and not to change its substance. The question of retroaction does not arise.

  Taxpayers Charter
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the cost of the carving of the taxpayers charter in Somerset House.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The full cost of the taxpayers charter in Somerset House, including the panel, lettering and erection, was £4,927. Copies are displayed in offices throughout the Department.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the exceptions and proposed exceptions to the taxpayers charter to the right of a taxpayer to take a grievance to an independent tribunal.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The circumstances under which a taxpayer has the right to take a grievance to an independent tribunal are laid down in statute. The taxpayers charter commits the revenue departments to publicising these rights, but does not affect them.

  Income Tax (Building Societies) Regulations 1986
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many building societies had a late enough year-end and interest accruals so concentrated at the end of their accounting period that they benefited from the introduction of the Income Tax (Building Societies) Regulations 1986.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The regulations were designed to deal consistently with societies, whatever their year-end, by securing in each case that interest came into account once, and once only, on the transition to revised payment arrangements for composite rate tax.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what response he has made to the points raised recently by the counsel to the Woolwich building society.
  695
  Mr. Dorrell
  I am not aware of any points raised recently by counsel for the Woolwich building society.

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has for his Department to celebrate in 1993 the European Year of the Elderly; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Nelson
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 13 July, at column 430. I have no plans for additional action.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Department and his policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The Government's economic policies are designed to maintain an environment in which business and enterprise can develop and prosper. The Treasury therefore places a high priority on helping small businesses, and among the specific measures included in the 1992 Budget were:a package worth £480 million in 1992–93 and £590 million in 1993–94 to assist business ratepayers. No business will face an increase in its rates bill for 1992–93 above the rate of inflation; raising the VAT registration threshold in line with inflation to £36,600;
  reducing VAT penalties;
  changes to the VAT cash accounting system (under which small businesses with turnover under £300,000 can defer VAT payments until they receive payment of bills owing to them). This is now available to traders who owe Customs and Excise up to £5,000;
  increasing the limit for small employers making quarterly PAYE and NICs payments (rather than monthly) from £400 to £450 a month;
  exempting most business assets from inheritance tax, so that family businesses may be passed on without charge; the halving of car tax on new cars, which will benefit many small businesses; and
  requiring Government contractors to pay their bills to sub-contractors promptly.

  Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise officials also continuously review forms, explanatory notices and leaflets with the aim of providing guidance which is easily understood.

  Capital Allowances
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to improve the inspection of the validity of capital allowances claimed on office equipment leases.

  Mr. Dorrell
  Claims to capital allowances are subject to the same scrutiny by tax inspectors as other aspects of taxpayers' affairs. The operation of the capital allowance system is generally kept under review and guidance is given to inspectors where appropriate.

  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps his Department is taking to ensure that capital allowances are not claimed by the same finance company on the same equipment which has been the subject of a previous financial agreement on which allowances have already been claimed.
  696
  Mr. Dorrell
  The eligibility of expenditure for capital allowances is a matter covered by detailed and comprehensive legislation. Examinations carried out by tax inspectors are aimed at ensuring that claims made are in accordance with the requirements of this legislation.

  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the loss to the Exchequer from the artificial inflation for the purposes of capital allowances claimed on office equipment leases of the retail value of equipment such as photocopiers.

  Mr. Dorrell
  No such specific assessment has been made.

  Pension Funds
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will draw up proposals to amend the Financial Services Act 1986 to strengthen the regulation of in-house pension fund investment managers and bring it closer into line with that of external managers.

  Mr. Nelson
  Rules on the management of investments under the Act are a matter for the Securities and Investments Board and the self-regulating organisations. The Investment Management Regulatory Organisation issued in May this year a consultation document which reviews the rules applicable to occupational pension schemes and recommends changes.

  Taxpayers (Confidentiality)
  Mrs. Chaplin
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what provision has been made to ensure that the confidentiality of taxpayers' affairs is preserved if the Inland Revenue contracts out some of its support services.

  Mr. Dorrell
  There are two safeguards. The first is that all relevant contracts will contain provisions obliging contractors to make all necessary arrangements to protect the privacy of personal information. The second is that contractors and their employees will be subject, in the same way as Revenue employees, to the criminal sanctions—a fine, or imprisonment, or both—provided by section 182 of the Finance Act 1989 for unauthorised disclosure of personal tax information.

  Central Statistical Office
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how the Central Statistical Office performed against its key targets for 1991–92; and what are the CSO's key targets for 1992–93.

  Mr. Lamont
  The Central Statistical Office's performance against its key targets for 1991–92 is described in the agency's annual report, which is published today. All of the CSO's statistics were published on their pre-announced release dates. Nine of the CSO's 11 targets relating to revisions were achieved, as were eight of the nine targets on coherence: there was a high rate of achievement on the targets for response rates; and the agency achieved its targets for running costs and efficiency improvements, though not that for receipts from sales.

  The steps taken by the Government since 1989, including the establishment of the enlarged CSO as a separate department, the package of measures announced in May 1990 and the move to executive agency status last

  697
  November, have all contributed substantially to a significant improvement in the quality of economic statistics. I applaud the efforts CSO staff have made to achieve this.

  The CSO's key targets for 1992–93 are also published today as part of the CSO's strategic plan for the 1992–95 period. Copies of both the annual report and strategic plan are being placed in the Library of the House. As in the previous year these targets cover the timeliness of published statistics: the size of revisions; the coherence of GDP and other key economic statistics; the response rates for CSO statistical inquiries; action to minimise compliance costs for business; response times to public requests for information; and the CSO's running costs, efficiency improvements and receipts.

  Following the further package of measures to improve the quality of economic statistics announced in November 1991 some of the key targets for 1992–93 have been tightened. I expect the initiatives to improve economic statistics to continue to bear fruit.

  Entitlements for 1992–93 cash limits resulting from the carryover of capital underspends Cash limit on Votes

  Class

  Vote

  Department

  Description

  Amount

  £ thousands

  II

  1

  Foreign and Commonwealth Office

  Overseas representation

  4,935

  II

  3

  Foreign and Commonwealth Office

  External broadcasting and monitoring

  3,142

  III

  4

  Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

  Agricultural, food and fishing services

  2,000

  IV

  2

  Department of Trade and Industry

  Support for industry, international trade, statutory and regulatory work, consumer protection and administration

  3,133

  IV

  4

  Export Credits Guarantee

  Administration

  2,000

  IV

  7

  Office of Fair Trading

  331

  V

  9

  Office of Electricity Regulation

  112

  VI

  1

  Department of Employment

  Programmes and central services

  1,497

  VII

  1

  Department of Transport

  National roads, England

  524

  VII

  2

  Department of Transport

  Administration and transport services

  2,000

  VII

  4

  Department of Transport

  Driver and vehicle licensing

  2,000

  VII

  5

  Department of Transport

  Local roads and transport

  1,100

  VIII

  5

  Department of the Environment

  Central environmental services, etc.

  2,865

  VIII

  6

  Department of National Heritage

  Royal palaces, royal parks, historic buildings, ancient monuments and the national heritage

  699

  VIII

  7

  Property Holdings1

  Civil accommodation services and administration, etc.

  1

  VIII

  11

  Ordnance Survey

  1,487

  IX

  2

  Home Office

  Prisons, England and Wales

  1,989

  IX

  3

  Home Office

  Administration, immigration and police support services, England and Wales

  2,000

  X

  11

  Her Majesty's Land Registry2

  1

  X

  12

  Public Record Office

  1,759

  X

  13

  The Crown Office, Scotland

  Administration

  59

  XI

  1

  Department for Education

  Schools, research and miscellaneous services

  1,977

  XI

  2

  Department for Education

  Higher and further education

  839

  XI

  4

  Department for Education

  Administration

  1,069

  End-Year Flexibility Schemes
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the entitlements for 1992–93 resulting from the carry-forward of capital and running costs underspends allowed under the end-year flexibility schemes.

  Mr. Portillo
  A list of entitlements totalling £188 million for capital expenditure and £41 million for running costs is shown in the table.

  Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimates, individual cash limits and running costs limits will be increased when entitlement is taken up.

  The total increase in cash limits resulting from the take-up of end-year flexibility will he charged to the reserve and will therefore not add to the planned total of public expenditure.
  699

  Class

  Vote

  Department

  Description

  Amount

  £ thousands

  XII

  1

  Department of National Heritage

  Museums and galleries

  270

  XIII

  1

  Department of Health

  Hospital and community health services, family health services (part) and related services, England

  47,893

  XIII

  3

  Department of Health

  Administration, miscellaneous health services and personal social services, England

  2,665

  XIII

  6

  Office of Population Censuses and Surveys

  178

  XIV

  4

  Department of Social Security

  Administration and miscellaneous services

  7,690

  XV

  2

  The Scottish Office Agriculture and Fisheries Department

  Agricultural services, agricultural grants and fisheries, Scotland

  2,000

  XV

  3

  The Scottish Office Industry Department

  Training programmes, roads and transport services and industrial support, Scotland

  748

  XV

  12

  The Scottish Office Home and Health Department

  Law, order, miscellaneous health and social work services, Scotland

  803

  XV

  13

  The Scottish Office Education Department

  Education, arts and libraries, Scotland

  2,341

  XV

  16

  Scottish Record Office

  231

  XV

  17

  General Register Office for Scotland

  578

  XV

  19

  The Scottish Office

  Administration

  361

  XVI

  2

  Welsh Office

  Agricultural services, fishing, arterial drainage, flood and coast protection; regional and industrial development, Wales

  449

  XVI

  5

  Welsh Office

  Tourism, roads and transport, education, arts and libraries and health and personal social services, Wales

  4,709

  XVI

  8

  Welsh Office

  Hospital, community health, family health services (part) and related services, Wales

  6,552

  XVI

  9

  Welsh Office

  Administration

  181

  XVIII

  1

  Her Majesty's Treasury

  Administration

  2,000

  XVIII

  5

  Customs and Excise

  Administration

  4,398

  XVIII

  6

  Inland Revenue

  Administration

  1,281

  XVIII

  10

  Department for National Savings

  1,616

  XIX

  2

  Cabinet Office

  Other services

  2,000

  TOTAL VOTED

  126,463

  1 This is a token Vote. Carryforward will be taken in the form of increased appropriations in aid of £3,053,000.

  2 This is a token Vote. Carryforward will be taken in the form of increased appropriations in aid of £2,000,000.

  Cash limits on non-voted expenditure

  Cash block

  Department

  Description

  Amount

  £ thousands

  DOE/HC

  Department of the Environment

  Grants and capital expenditure financed by the Housing Corporation in England

  700

  DOE/UA

  Department of the Environment

  External financing requirements of Urban Development Corporations in England, grants to local authorities and other bodies under the urban programme, the derelict land reclamation and city grant programmes (including associated LA credit approval(s) and other expenditure for inner cities initiatives

  21,723

  DOE/LACAP

  Department of the Environment

  Basic credit approvals to local authorities in England for housing, transport (except passenger transport authorities), education, health, other services and Home Office (fire services in shires only). Supplementary credit approvals and grants to authorities in England for housing

  1,403

  700 701

  Cash block

  Department

  Description

  Amount

  £ thousands

  DOE/OES

  Department of the Environment

  Supplementary credit approvals for other Isles of Scilly (water and sewerage)

  4,719

  DES/LACAP

  Department of Education

  Supplementary credit approvals for education in England

  905

  DOH/LACAP

  Department of Health

  Supplementary credit approvals for health in England

  895

  MAFF/LACAP

  Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

  Supplementary credit approvals for flood defence and coast protection and harbour improvements in England

  772

  SO/LA 1

  Scottish Office

  Net capital allocations and grants to local authorities in Scotland for roads and transport, water and sewerage, police, education, social work services, general services, urban programme, river purification and civil defence

  10,612

  SO/LA2

  Scottish Office

  Net capital allocations and grants to local authorities in Scotland for housing. Capital expenditure by New Towns in Scotland for housing and other environmental services

  13,065

  WO/UA

  Welsh Office

  Supplementary credit approvals and grants (both capital and current) to local authorities in Wales in respect of the urban programme and Urban Development Grant. Urban Investment Grant and expenditure by the Cardiff Bay Development Corporation

  3,695

  NID1

  Northern Ireland Departments

  Services in Northern Ireland broadly analogous to services in Great Britain covered by cash limits but including family practitioner services

  3,150

  TOTAL NON-VOTED

  61,639

  TOTAL CAPITAL END YEAR FLEXIBILITY (VOTED AND NON-VOTED)

  188,102

  Entitlements for 1992–93 running costs limits resulting from the carryforward of running costs underspends

  Department

  Amount

  (£000s)

  Overseas Development Administration

  224

  Intervention Board—Executive Agency

  145

  Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

  1,563

  Trade and Industry

  1,500

  Department of Transport

  1,099

  Property Holdings

  274

  Home Office

  6,520

  Lord Chancellor's Department

  1,777

  Department for Education

  475

  Department of Health

  1,264

  Office of Population Censuses and Surveys

  504

  Department of Social Security

  10,795

  Scottish Office

  1,305

  Scottish Courts Administration

  148

  Scottish Record Office

  50

  General Register Office, Scotland

  64

  Welsh Office

  294

  Northern Ireland Office

  2,729

  Northern Ireland Departments

  HM Treasury

  427

  Customs and Exercise

  2,012

  Inland Revenue

  7,000

  Department for National Savings

  814

  Central Statistical Office

  162

  Government Actuary's Department

  50

  Total

  41,195

  Central Government Staff
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the number of staff in post in central Government Departments at 1 April.
  702
  Mr. Portillo
  On 1 April 1992 there were 565,319 staff in post in central Government. Of those, 504,237 were non-industrial staff and 61,082 were classified as being in industrial work. A summary showing staff in post by Department has been placed in the Library.

  Excise Duties
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when further draft regulations to implement the single market legislation for excise duties will be issued to the trade for comment; and what additional guidance is being issued.

  Sir John Cope
  We have consulted widely on the single market legislation on excise duty. Customs and Excise have been in touch with the trade on this subject since June 1990 and a rolling programme of regulations is well advanced. The first draft regulations, about keeping and preserving records and accounts, have already been issued to the trade.

  Draft notices have been issued which give guidance on excise warehousing and registered excise dealers and shippers. Other notices and draft regulations will follow shortly.

  Copies of the draft regulations and notices have already been placed in the Library of the House.

  Russia (Currency Stabilisation)
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the procedure for the United Kingdom to make a response to a call by the International Monetary Fund
  703
  under its general arrangements to borrow in respect of a currency stabilisation fund for Russia; and what financial provision is made.

  Mr. Nelson
  In the event of an agreement by the IMF executive board to an activation of the general arrangements to borrow—GAB—the United Kingdom would meet its obligations by setting up a line of credit under which the IMF could borrow up to an agreed amount of sterling. Loans to the IMF would be made from the National Loans Fund—NLF—under the International Monetary Fund Act 1979, as amended by the International Monetary Arrangements Act 1983. Under the terms of the GAB the IMF is obliged to repay any borrowing once the terms of the loan expires—a maximum of five years. Conditions also exist under which repayment can take place, at either the IMF or the lender's instigation, before that time.

  Under the GAB decision, loans made to the IMF are matched by a liquid claim on the IMF, and consequently do not add to public expenditure. Loans under the GAB are denominated in special drawing rights—SDRs—although payment would be made in sterling and are remunerated at the IMF's SDR interest rate. The International Monetary Fund Act 1979 provides for foreign exchange and interest rate gains and losses on loans to be for the account of the NLF. Any such gains or losses would not score as public expenditure, though any difference between the cost of borrowing by the NLF and the interest received would score in the central Government borrowing requirement and the public sector borrowing requirement.

  Disabled Employees
  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his answer to the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner) of 6 July,Official Report, column 10, (a) how many of his Department's employees, and (b) what proportion of his Department's employees, were registered disabled in 1989 and 1990.

  Mr. Nelson
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: Details of the numbers and proportions of registered disabled people employed by my Department in 1989 and 1990 were as follows:

  Number

  Per cent.

  1989

  35

  1·1

  1990

  31·5

  1·0

  These figures show the position at 1 June 1989 and 1 June 1990 and are drawn from the publication "Independent". Copies of this publication are in the Library of the House of Commons. Part-time staff are counted as half units. The Department also employs a number of people with disabilities who have chosen not to register as disabled.

  Banks (Regulation)
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to create a banking commission to regulate all banks operating in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Nelson
  The Government have no plans to establish a new regulatory body in place of the Bank of 704
  England, which is currently responsible for supervising all banks operating in the United Kingdom. The Government will shortly be bringing forward their proposals for implementing the second banking co-ordination directive, under which the primary responsibility for supervision of EC banks' operations throughout the EC will fall to the authorities of their home state.

  Auditors
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will prepare proposals for amending the Banking Act 1979 to prevent auditors from recruiting directors of the client bank.

  Mr. Nelson
  The Government have no such plans.

  Banking Act
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will draw up proposals to amend the Banking Act 1987 to prevent auditors of banks advising those banks on tax matters.

  Mr. Nelson
  The Government have no such plans.

  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proposals he has for amending the Banking Act to require all banks to file copies of the audit tenders received with the regulators.

  Mr. Nelson
  The Government have no such proposals.

  Economic and Monetary Union
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proposals he has for keeping Parliament informed of steps taken by the United Kingdom with a view to moving to the third stage of economic and monetary union.

  Mr. Nelson
  As clause 2 of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill makes clear, no notification of an intention by the United Kingdom to move to the third stage of economic and monetary union will be given to the Council of the European Communities unless a draft of the notification has first been approved by Act of Parliament.

  Pension Plans
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what representations he has had about the quality of financial advice surrounding the transfer from occupational pension schemes to private personal pension plans; and what steps he is taking to(a) ensure the provision of best advice and (b) compensate or recompense those suffering the consequences of poor advice;

  (2) what is the number of insurance companies and others fined or disciplined each year under the Financial Services Act 1986 for the placing of investments in such a way as to compromise the giving of independent financial advice;

  (3) to what extent, and through which agencies, the duty of best advice exists in the insurance and related industries; and what steps he is taking to report to Parliament on the quality of this best advice.

  Mr. Nelson
  These are matters for the Securities and Investments Board.

  Departmental Objectives
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will set out the objectives of each division and branch of his Department.

  Mr. Nelson
  The main aim of the Treasury is to assist Ministers in the formulation and implementation of the Government's economic policy. This is reflected in seven broad areas of continuing activity towards which all divisions and branches contribute. Within each area more specific objectives are defined from time to time. A full statement of these roles and current objectives is set out on pages 14 to 21 of the "1992 Departmental Report for the Chancellor's Departments"—Cm 1918.

  Personal Investment Authority
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what advice he has offered to the Securities and Investments Board and the formation committee of the proposed personal investment authority on the need for greater consumer representation.

  Mr. Nelson
  None. The formation committee was appointed by SIB and the self-regulating organisations (SROs) to establish the personal investment authority (PIA). I understand that the formation committee will be consulting widely on the constitution and other aspects of the PIA.

  Commission Charges
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received from the Office of Fair Trading on the disclosure of commission charges by financial advisers and insurance and other company representatives; and whether he proposes to undertake any review himself.

  Mr. Nelson
  If I receive a report from the Director General of Fair Trading under the competition provisions of the Financial Services Act 1986, I shall consider it carefully.

  EC Economic and Finance Council
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the outcome of the latest meeting of the European Community's Economic and Finance Council.

  Mr. Lamont
  The Economic and Finance Council of the European Community met in Brussels under my chairmanship on 13 July. The Paymaster General represented the United Kingdom.

  The Council held one of its six-monthly multilateral surveillance discussions of the economic situation in the Community. The Council agreed that prudent monetary and fiscal policies must be maintained and that there was a further need to reduce structural rigidities. The Council also welcomed the Italian Government's recent package of measures designed to reduce their budget deficit.

  The Council also discussed a programme for economic convergence submitted by the Netherlands. The Council noted the exceptional Dutch record of price and exchange rate stability, but emphasised that the recent increase in inflation must be quickly reversed. The Dutch commitment to targets for the reduction of their budget deficit and
  706
  their debt to GDP ratio was welcomed, as was their programme of structural reforms, privatisation, reducing subsidies, improving public sector efficiency and increasing labour market participation.

  The Council also discussed Russia's need for medical aid and agreed that up to 150 mecu of the 1·25 becu loan already agreed by the Community for the countries of the former Soviet Union should be released in order to help the Russians to meet their medical needs. Balance of payments assistance for Albania in the form of a grant of 35 mecu from the Community budget was also agreed. A further tranche may also be considered at a later date for 1993.

  Over lunch, President Delors and the German representative, Herr KÖhler, gave a brief report on the outcome of the recent Group of seven meeting in Munich and I set out my programme for the work of the Council under the United Kingdom presidency. I emphasised that my main priorities would be to work towards an agreement on the future financing of the Community, to complete the single market, to reduce the scope for fraud against the Community budget and to encourage free trade, noting in particular the importance of enhanced access to EC markets for the countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

  The Council also held a useful discussion of the Commission's proposals for the future financing of the Community. A majority of member states agreed that the Commission's proposals for increases to the Community budget were excessive. Some useful new elements were introduced into the discussion, such as the scope for offsetting savings, the need for improved financial management and a greater role for the European Investment bank in improving economic and social cohesion.

  Pension Funds
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proposals he has to require the Investment Management Regulatory Organisation to withdraw recognition of membership from those pension funds whose ultimate control lies outside the jurisdiction of Great Britain.

  Mr. Nelson
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: This is a matter for the Securities and Investments Board (SIB) and the Investment Management Regulatory Organisation (IMRO). I understand that SRO members, the control of which lies outside the United Kingdom, are subject to detailed fitness and properness checks and monitoring of their United Kingdom operations, as with any other member.

HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION

  Recycled Stationers
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commisison, pursuant to his answer of 1 July,Official Report, column 567, if the Commission will make it its policy to ensure that stocks of recycled stationery are permanently kept in all the stationery cupboards adjacent to offices, regardless of whether or not a particular demand has been identified.
  707
  Mr. Beith
  This is a matter for the Administration Committee now that it has been set up. However, I understand that, in order to make the most effective use of the limited space available, it is the practice to adjust the variety of stock items in stationery cupboards, including recycled stationery, to meet the particular demands of users as they arise.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Sunday Trading
  Mr. Ray Powell
  To ask the Attorney-General, pursuant to his oral answer of 11 May,Official Report, columns 367–68, on Sunday trading, what consideration he has now given to (a) the result of the Kirklees case and (b) the Advocate-General's opinion in the case before the European Court of Justice.

  The Attorney-General
  I have considered the decision of the House of Lords in the Kirklees case and the opinion of the Advocate-General in the cases before the European Court of Justice. The decision of the House of Lords means that local authorities can apply for interim injunctions against retailers in order to enforce the law without giving cross-undertakings in damages. The Advocate-General has said that the Shops Act 1950 pursues an objective which is justified in Community law. He also said that it is for national courts to decide whether the effects of the Shops Act 1950 exceeded what was necessary to realise its objective. We are now awaiting the judgment of the European Court of Justice.

  I do not consider that action by me would be appropriate at present.

SCOTLAND

  Registers of Scotland
  Mr. Bill Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when the annual report of the Registers of Scotland executive agency will be published.

  Mr. Lang
  Copies of the annual report have today been placed in the library.

  Law Courts
  Mr. Gallie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what targets have been set for completing office business in the sheriff courts and supreme courts; and what performance was secured in 1991–92.

  Mr. Lang
  The targets set for completion of office business in the sheriff courts in 1991–92 are as follows. These targets remain in force for 1992–93. The percentage figures following each target indicate the proportion of sheriff courts achieving the target figures or better in the course of the year. More detailed information on the performance of individual court offices will be made available to local court advisory committees. Similar targets are in force in the supreme courts and all of these were achieved in 1991–92.

  Targets for sheriff clerk offices and performance 1991–92

  To issue the first deliverance in all ordinary writs, or return to sender, within two working days of receipt. 97 per cent.

  To issue the first deliverance in all summary cause actions (including small claims), or return to sender, within three
  708
  working days of receipt. 97 per cent.

  To draft, in preparation for signature, all final ordinary decrees in absence (excluding divorce) within one working day of receipt of the minute craving decree. 91 per cent.

  To draft, within seven days of receipt of the affidavits, in preparation for signature, all final decrees in undefended ordinary actions of divorce or return the affidavits to the sender. 91 per cent.

  To draft, in preparation for signature, all decrees in actions of divorce under the simplified procedure within one working day of expiry of the period of notice. 98 per cent.

  To issue extract decrees in all ordinary actions (excluding divorce) within three working days of the date of ordering or the expiry of the days of appeal—whichever is the later. 80 per cent.

  To issue all summary cause/small claim extract decrees within one working day of the due date. 96 per cent.

  To issue extract decrees in all ordinary actions of divorce within one working day of the due date. 86 per cent.

  To issue extract decrees of divorce under the simplified procedure within one working day of the due date. 89 per cent.

  To issue the first deliverance in all petitions for sequestration/liquidation, or return to sender, within two working days of receipt. 91 per cent.

  To prepare for signature the first deliverance in all adoption petitions within one working day of a correct petition being received. 89 per cent.

  To scrutinise and accept or reject commissary petitions and inventories within two working days of receipt. 96 per cent.

  To issue confirmation within three working days of acceptance of inventory. 91 per cent.

  To conduct small estate interviews within seven days from the time an interview is requested. 98 per cent.

  To process juror claims for payment, or return to sender, within two working days of receipt. 97 per cent.

  To process postal fines (other than unidentified payments) on day of receipt. 99 per cent.

  To issue warning letters, means inquiry citations, warrants, extracts, etc, and transfer fines within seven days of the trawl. 93 per cent.

  To remit all non-Exchequer receipts to entitled parties within 14 days from the end of the last accountancy period.94 per cent.

  To effect a card reconciliation of all outstanding financial penalties on a monthly basis. 88 per cent.

  To reply to letter pleas within one working day of the court. 98 per cent.

  To order social inquiry and other reports within one working day of the court. 98 per cent.

  To complete probation, community service, compensation and fines supervision orders within two working days of the court. 98 per cent.

  To issue juror citations in the first instance at least 21 days prior to a jury sitting/trial. 96 per cent.

  To reply to all letter inquiries except those which require extensive investigation within two working days of receipt. 92 per cent.

  Mr. Gallie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what objectives for reducing court waiting periods have been established; what targets have been set for 1992–93 in respect of court waiting periods for the supreme and sheriff courts; and if he will give details of the performance of the supreme courts and each of the sheriff courts in 1991–92.

  Mr. Lang
  The programming of court business is a matter for the judiciary. Acting in co-operation with the judiciary in the supreme and sheriff courts, the Government seek to provide the resources which will allow speedy access to justice. Having regard to the time required by parties to have their cases properly prepared, the following objectives have been adopted:The Lord President of the Court of Session has accepted the recommendations of a committee chaired by Lord Maxwell relating to the reduction of waiting periods in the Supreme Courts: the target is to reduce waiting periods to the recommended levels and, subject to any acceleration in the

  709
  rate of increase in court work, maintain waiting periods at that level: for certain categories of hearing, additional targets involving much reduced waiting periods, have been set;
  Sheriffs Principal have agreed to overall targets of reducing waiting periods for summary criminal trials in the Sheriff Courts to 12 weeks or less by the end of 1992–93 and to hold them at that level thereafter: and to maintain waiting periods at 12 weeks or less for civil cases in the Sheriff Courts.

  The main targets for waiting periods for 1992–93 are as follows. "Waiting period" is the period between a trial or proof being requested or an appeal being received and the date assigned expressed in weeks. The same targets applied in 1991–92 and national performance for that year is noted in the second column.

  Target

  1991–92

  performance

  Criminal Appeal Business

  Summary prosecutions: Notes of Appeal against Sentence and Stated cases (accused in custody)

  4

  4

  Court of Session

  (a) Ordinary proofs

  24

  28

  (b) Defended Consistorial proofs

  17

  17

  Sheriff Courts (national average)

  (a) Civil proofs/debates

  12

  11·8

  (b) Summary Criminal Trials

  12

  14·5

  In 1991–92 waiting periods of 12 weeks or less were achieved for civil debates/proofs in 90 per cent. of sheriff courts.

  Waiting periods of 12 weeks or less were achieved for summary criminal business in 78 per cent. of sheriff courts.

  Performance of individual sheriff courts at 31 March 1992 is set out in the table.

  Court

  Civil proofs

  Summary criminal trials

  Hamilton

  14

  22

  Edinburgh

  14

  17

  Perth

  14

  17

  Linlithgow

  14

  15

  Elgin

  13

  11

  Stirling

  12

  10

  Aberdeen

  12

  12

  Dumbarton

  12

  13

  Dingwall

  12

  12

  Glasgow

  12

  13

  Ayr

  12

  15

  Dumfries

  12

  9

  Stornoway

  12

  14

  Kirkcaldy

  12

  13

  Dunoon

  12

  12

  Portree

  12

  8

  Rothesay

  12

  12

  Fort William

  12

  12

  Falkirk

  11

  18

  Inverness

  11

  11

  Kirkcudbright

  11

  12

  Campbeltown

  10

  6

  Kilmarnock

  10

  14

  Airdrie

  10

  14

  Paisley

  10

  9

  Cupar

  10

  11

  Alloa

  10

  6

  Wick

  10

  14

  Lanark

  10

  10

  Oban

  10

  12

  Greenock

  10

  11

  Stonehaven

  10

  10

  Dornoch

  9

  11

  Kirkwall

  9

  9

  Forfar

  9

  7

  710

  Court

  Civil proofs

  Summary criminal trials

  Selkirk

  9

  11

  Stranraer

  9

  12

  Dundee

  9

  8

  Haddington

  8

  14

  Jedburgh

  8

  8

  Peebles

  8

  12

  Banff

  8

  10

  Duns

  8

  8

  Lerwick

  8

  8

  Peterhead

  8

  12

  Tain

  8

  11

  Dunfermline

  7

  7

  Arbroath

  7

  11

  Lochmaddy

  4

  8

  In addition, the sheriffs principal have agreed that sheriff court programmes should he designed to ensure that the number of trials adjourned due to lack of court time should not exceed 5 per cent. of the total number set down, a target met in 86 per cent. of sheriff courts in the first three months of this year.

  Elderly People
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met representatives of the Abbeyfield organisation to discuss the provision of residential care for elderly people; when he next plans to meet them; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: My hon. Friend the Minister for Education and Housing attended the national conference of Abbeyfield Societies in September 1989. More recently, an official from my Department gave the opening address at the annual conference of the Abbeyfield Society for Scotland in March this year. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has no plans at present to meet representatives of the Abbeyfield organisation.

  The Government fully recognise the contribution made by the Abbeyfield Society to the care of elderly people and expects the society to continue to play an important role in this area of community care in the future.

  Police Funding, Strathclyde
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next plans to meet representatives of Strathclyde regional council to discuss the impact of funding contraints on police services; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: My right hon. Friend has no plans to do so. The Government pay specific grant on all net expenditure by police authorities. Responsibility for the provision of sufficient funds to allow Strathclyde police to staff up to their fully authorised establishment level rests with Strathclyde regional council. I welcome the decision recently taken by the council to reduce the existing shortfall in the number of police officers in Strathclyde.

  Fisheries Protection
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will set out the arrangements which his Agriculture and Fisheries Department makes for the provision of maritime fishery protection services; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Maritime fishery protection services in Scottish waters are provided by the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency—an executive agency of the Secretary of State for Scotland—to provide intelligence on fishing patterns and to deter and detect illegal fishing activity.

  The agency has four offshore patrol vessels which can operate out to the 200-mile limit; two fast launches for patrolling inshore waters and sea lochs; and a small launch used for seasonal patrol of estuarial waters. The agency also contracts with the Ministry of Defence for the supply of Royal Navy vessels to undertake fishery protection patrols in Scottish waters. The total budget of the agency for marine surveillance is £9·2 million in the current financial year.

  The agency deploys two fisheries surveillance aircraft in Scottish waters and charters helicopter services as required for inshore patrol duties. The budget for aerial surveillance in the current financial year is £2·4 million.

  Heritage Lands
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland under what criteria grants may be paid by Scottish National Heritage for the maintenance of estate land to which no right of public access exists.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Scottish National Heritage operates a range of grant schemes designed to conserve and enhance Scotland's natural heritage and to foster the public's enjoyment and understanding of it. All grants awarded deliver public benefit by helping to meet Scottish National Heritage statutory objectives, whether or not there is a public right of access to the land involved.

  Football Matches
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish the numbers of those arrested and ejected at football matches in Scotland expressed as a percentage of attendance in the last five years for which information is available.

  Sir Hector Monro
  This information cannot be asembled in the time available. I will write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Prison Escapes
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many prisoners have escaped from(a) police custody and (b) penal institutions in the last 10 years for which information is available.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The number of escapes from police custody is not held centrally.

  The numbers of escapes and absconds from penal establishments over the last 10 years are as follows:

  Absconds

  Escapes

  1982

  32

  14

  1983

  38

  16

  1984

  52

  19

  712

  Absconds

  Escapes

  1985

  36

  39

  1986

  43

  7

  1987

  41

  24

  1988

  75

  30

  1989

  65

  20

  1990

  88

  27

  1991

  150

  36

  19921

  54

  19

  1 to date

  The definitions of escape and abscond are that a prisoner escapes if he unlawfully gains his liberty by overcoming the physical security restraints to which he is subject at the time he was in the presence of a prison officer or officers specially assigned to guard him: a prisoner absconds if he unlawfully gains his liberty by an abuse of trust without having had to overcome any physical security restraint and if he was not at the time in the presence of a prison officer specially assigned to guard him.

  Judges
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the rate of remuneration of(a) retired judges and (b) temporary judges when they sit part-time in the Court of Session.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The rates of remuneration are at present under review. The current rates, where applicable, are(a) £423 per day and (b) £383 per day.

  Law of Damages
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he intends to take with a view to implementing the recommendations of the Scottish Law Commission relating to bringing the law of damages in Scotland into line with that obtaining in England and Wales.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 18 June 1992]: My right hon. Friend has welcomed and accepted the recommendation made by the Scottish Law Commission in its report on the effect of death on damages—Scot. Law Com. No. 134. The hon. Member for Cunninghame, North (Mr. Wilson) introduced a Bill, based upon the Scottish Law Commission's recommendations, on 10 June and the Government have offered the hon. Member their support and assistance in seeking to have the Bill enacted.

  Feudal System
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will bring forward proposals to abolish the feudal system in Scotland.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 19 June 1992]: The Scottish Law Commission is currently carrying out a major review of property law in Scotland. As part of this work, the commission published a discussion paper in July 1991 seeking comments on various proposals for reform or abolition of the feudal system. The commission is analysing the responses to the discussion paper and will submit a report making specific recommendations for reform. We intend to await this report before reaching any conclusions about the need for a change in the law.

  NHS Superannuation Scheme
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when the framework document of the next steps agency for the national health service superannuation scheme will be published for Scotland.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 29 June 1992]: As announced by my right hon. Friend on 6 March, the Scottish Office superannuation division, which administers the national health service superannuation scheme in Scotland, is to be launched as a next steps agency by the autumn. The framework document under which the agency will operate will he available by the launch date which will be announced as soon as possible.

  Island Health Services
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the non-doctored islands in Scotland and the number of patients in each.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 2 July 1992]: I shall write to the hon. Gentleman as soon as possible.

  Cases of homicide, attempted murder, serious assault and petty assault recorded by the police involving the alleged use of a firearm Scotland 1982 to 1991

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  1989

  11990

  1991

  (a) Homicide (murder and culpable homicide)

  1. K. division, Strathclyde police

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2. Strathclyde region

  0

  5

  0

  5

  3

  0

  2

  2

  2

  6

  3. Scotland

  3

  6

  3

  9

  5

  3

  2

  6

  3

  7

  (b) Attempted murder

  1. K division, Strathclyde police

  0

  0

  5

  0

  0

  1

  0

  1

  5

  4

  2. Strathclyde region

  3

  7

  13

  11

  11

  17

  22

  9

  27

  34

  3. Scotland

  9

  10

  14

  18

  16

  20

  27

  12

  31

  39

  (c) Serious assault

  1. K division, Strathclyde police

  0

  1

  7

  2

  2

  6

  2

  1

  3

  6

  2. Strathclyde region

  18

  39

  34

  23

  21

  57

  32

  34

  26

  44

  3. Scotland

  78

  75

  80

  158

  139

  147

  74

  85

  55

  65

  (d) Petty assault

  1. K division, Strathclyde police

  21

  16

  16

  19

  27

  19

  8

  12

  13

  22

  2. Strathclyde region

  179

  211

  180

  225

  203

  169

  168

  109

  158

  199

  3. Scotland

  191

  260

  213

  250

  221

  195

  177

  116

  238

  314

  1 The definition of serious assault was amended at the start of 1990. The effect of the change was to reduce the total number of recorded incidents of serious assault and to increase the recorded figure for petty assault correspondingly.

  Victims of homicides which involved the use of a sharp instrument Scotland 1982 to 19911

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  1989

  1990

  11991

  (a) Homicide (murder and culpable homicide)

  2. Strathclyde region

  25

  19

  29

  25

  21

  32

  26

  28

  27

  26

  3. Scotland

  36

  36

  46

  34

  33

  44

  38

  38

  44

  34

  1 Information on the criminal use of sharp instruments, including knives, is not collected at divisional level, or for crimes other than homicide.

  2 Provisional.

  I have nothing to add to the replies I gave on 24 June 1992 to the hon. Member for Cumbernauld and Kilsyth (Mr. Hogg) at columns 254–55 and the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) at column 252.

  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the current levels of violent crime in (i) K division of Strathclyde police, (ii) Strathclyde region and (iii) Scotland; and what action he proposes to initiate to reduce these levels.

  Community Policing
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received in the last 12 months regarding community policing levels; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: Some 20 letters about policing levels have been received from members of the public since June 1991, together with several from Members of Parliament, including the hon. Member. The allocation of resources to particular policing priorities is a matter for the chief constable concerned.

  Crime, Strathclyde
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish a table showing the number of(a) murders, (b) attempted murders and (c) serious assaults in which (i) guns and (ii) knives were used in (1) K division of Strathclyde police, (2) Strathclyde region and (3) Scotland in each year since 1982; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: The available information is set out in the tables.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: Information on the number of incidents in which knives were used is not held centrally.

  The number of crimes and offences involving the alleged use of a firearm recorded by the police for each year since 1982 is given in the table.
  715

  Number of crimes and offences recorded by the police involving the alleged use of a firearm, 1982–1991

  1982

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  K Division, Strathclyde Police

  72

  47

  74

  96

  82

  76

  43

  54

  123

  159

  Strathclyde Region

  695

  818

  803

  917

  831

  823

  735

  718

  980

  1,250

  Scotland

  1,283

  1,336

  1,353

  1,675

  1,525

  1,429

  1,159

  1,173

  1,484

  1,887

  I have nothing further to add to the replies I gave on 24 June 1992 to the hon. Member for Cumbernauld and Kilsyth at columns 254–55 and the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill at column 252.

  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish a table showing the number of incidents in which(a) knives and (b) guns were used in (i) K division of Strathclyde police, (ii) Strathclyde region and (iii) Scotland in each year since 1982; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: Levels of violent crime are increasing in K division of Strathclyde police, in Strathclyde region, and in Scotland as a whole. I deplore this trend. The Government have increased funding for the police, who are in the front line in tackling violent crime, by 52 per cent. in real terms since 1979. The detection and prevention of violent crime are given a high priority by police forces throughout Scotland, and the Government will continue to provide the necessary resources to enable the police to maintain law and order.

  Replica Guns
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what information he has on the use of replica guns in incidents of crime or criminal intent in Scotland; how the use of such replicas has increased or decreased in each year since 1982; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) if he has any plans to introduce new initiatives to discourage the manufacture, sale and use of replica guns; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: Information is collected centrally on each crime and offence involving the alleged use of an imitation firearm. Details collected include local authority district, crime and offence classification, date of incident, number of accused, age and sex of principal accused, number of weapons, type of location where used, how used and, in cases where someone was injured or threatened, number of victims and age and sex of principal victim.

  The number of crimes and offences involving the alleged use of an imitation firearm recorded by the police in Scotland in each of the years 1982–1991 is given in the table:

  Year

  Numbers

  1982

  49

  1983

  43

  1984

  92

  1985

  56

  1986

  55

  1987

  68

  716

  Year

  Numbers

  1988

  61

  1989

  76

  1990

  96

  1991

  102

  I have nothing further to add to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Strathkelvin and Bearsden (Mr. Galbraith) on 10 February 1992, at column 411.

  Leukaemia
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish the numbers of leukaemias(a) observed and (b) expected in the 0 to 24 year age group in the postcode sector DG7.3—Castle Douglas—in the periods (i) 1968 to 1973 (ii) 1974 to 1978, (iii) 1979 to 1984, (iv) 1984 to 1989 and (v) 1990 to the present time, respectively; and if he will make a statement on the comparative incidences of leukaemia in Castle Douglas relative to the rest of Scotland.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: The table shows numbers of registrations of leukaemia in the 0 to 24 age group in postcode sector DG7.3, with expected numbers based on Scottish national rates. The figures shown for the period 1990 to 1991 are provisional.

  Observed and expected 1numbers of registration of leukaemia (ICD9 204–208) in the 0·24 age group in postcode sector DG7.3, 1968–91.

  Period of registration

  Registrations

  Observed

  Expected

  1968–73

  2

  0·26

  1974–78

  1

  0·21

  1979–84

  1

  0·20

  1985–89

  0

  0·19

  1990–91

  0

  0·04

  1 Based on Scottish national rates standardised for age.

  Source: ISD Scheme SMR6.

  The number of observed registrations of leukaemia in this age group in postcode sector DG7.3 falls within the range to which chance variations in the overall distribution of the disease gives rise.

  Homelessness
  Mr. Dewar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many 16 and 17-year-olds in each region in Scotland were registered as homeless in 1990–91; and how many of these were considered as in priority need and housed.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: Information on one person households aged under 18 is set out in the table. Information is not available about the number of 16 and 17-year-olds in other types of applicant households.
  717

  Total number of applicants aged under 18 for whom case returns have been received1

  Number of applicants assessed as: Homeless or potentially homeless

  Applicants assessed as in priority need:

  Region

  Total

  Number found accommodation

  Scotland

  2,779

  1,368

  983

  808

  Borders

  7

  5

  4

  3

  Central

  170

  105

  76

  68

  Dumfries and Galloway

  30

  21

  7

  7

  Fife

  98

  52

  19

  19

  Grampian

  143

  99

  75

  69

  Highland

  19

  3

  1

  1

  Lothian

  397

  319

  280

  250

  Strathclyde

  1,772

  683

  469

  340

  Tayside

  136

  77

  52

  51

  Orkney

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Shetland

  5

  2

  0

  0

  Western Isles

  2

  2

  0

  0

  1 The table shows the number of case returns received for such households in 1990–91. For Scotland as a whole, case returns have been received for 93 per cent, of all applicant households.

  Forestry Commission
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) on what basis the target date of 1995 was identified for the Forest Enterprise part of the Forestry Commission becoming self-financing; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what plans have been drawn up for the Forest Enterprise part of the Forestry Commission becoming self-financing; what are the implications for staffing levels; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 10 July 1992]: The internal reorganisation of the Forestry Commission, which came into effect on 1 April 1992, required an allocation of staff between the Department of Forestry, including the Forestry Authority, and Forest Enterprise, which will have a separate accounting structure that will clearly identify its particular activities and performance. target date of 1995 for the enterprise to become self-financing was decided by the Forestry Commissioners as part of this reorganisation.

  The Forest Enterprise is drawing up business plans for the years to 1995, and the implications for staffing levels are not yet known.

  Inverclyde Enterprise Zone
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total of public investment in the Inverclyde enterprise zone; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The total of public sector investment in the Inverclyde enterprise zone to date is approximately £13 million, excluding the cost of land purchases which amounted to £2·9 million.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will estimate the total of private investment to date in the Inverclyde enterprise zone; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The value of the investment made by the 25 or so companies which have established in the Inverclyde enterprise zone is a matter for each individual company. However, about 425,000 sq ft of industrial/business space has been developed in the zone thus far by the private sector, with
  718
  a further 120,000 sq ft expected to commence shortly. It is estimated that these basic development costs could exceed £50 million.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give(a) the date of designation of the Inverclyde enterprise zone and (b) its expiry date.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: Inverclyde enterprise zone was designated on 3 March 1989 and will expire on 2 March 1999.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will indicate(a) the physical area of the Inverclyde enterprise zone, (b) the proportion of the total area which is unused at the present moment and (c) the proportion which is under construction today.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The Inverclyde enterprise zone comprises some 274 acres. Some 66 per cent. of the zone is unused at present; that is, there has been little or no development work since designation. The remaining 34 per cent. is currently under construction/recovery or developed.

  Departmental Staff
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many staff his Department currently employs; what are the total personnel costs; and what were the staffing levels and personnel costs in 1970.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The number of staff employed by the Scottish Office and associated departments, excluding the Scottish prison service, at 1 April 1992 was 6,558. Personnel management costs for the year 1991–92 were £2,353,617. At 1 April 1992 the Scottish prison service employed 4,228 staff; personnel management costs for 1991–92 were about £813,000.

  On 1 January 1970 the composite total for the number of staff employed by the Scottish Office and associated departments including the Scottish prison service was 9,515. This total cannot be broken into its constituent parts; nor are personnel management costs for that year available.

  Departmental Advisers
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list any advisers retained by his Department since 1987 who have been criticised in published reports by Department of Trade and Industry inspectors.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The information requested is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, my Department takes all relevant factors into account when considering such appointments.

  Framework for Action
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many copies of the framework for action survey questionnaire were sent out by his Department; and how many staff were involved in this project.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The administration of this survey was handled by the information and statistics division—ISD—of the Common Services Agency, not by the Scottish Office. The ISD issued 37,705 copies of the questionnaire. Eight members of staff were involved in working on the survey at various times.

  Mental Handicap Project, Glasgow
  Mrs. Fife
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has accepted Greater Glasgow health board's bid for bridging finance for the Scottish Society for the Mentally Handicapped project at Bilsland drive, Maryhill.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The project at Bilsland drive, Maryhill is a jointly funded scheme which has not required bridging finance in order to proceed.

  Disabled Employees
  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, pursuant to his answer to the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner) on 1 July,Official Report, column 627, (a) how many of his Department's employees and (b) what proportion of his Department's employees were registered disabled in 1989 and 1990.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: In 1989, 85 registered disabled persons were employed by my Department—1·4 per cent. of the total work force; the corresponding figures for 1990 were 73 and 1·2 per cent. In each of these years my Department employed, in addition, an unrecorded number of disabled persons who had chosen not to register.

  Framework for Action
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give figures showing the expenditure by his Department on(a) the preparation and (b) the delivery of the framework for action survey questionnaire; and the level of response to it.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: Final figures for expenditure on the survey are not yet available. The level of response to the survey is not yet available, but will be included in the final report, due to be published at the beginning of August.
  720
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to complete work on and publish the results of the framework for action survey questionnaire.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: Preliminary results from the framework for action survey were released on 2 June 1992. The final report is currently being prepared, and will be published at the beginning of August. The report will be placed in the House of Commons Library.

  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many original copies and how many reminders and duplicate copies of the framework for action survey questionnaire were sent out by his Department; and what were the costs involved in each case.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The information and statistics division of the Common Services Agency sent out 37,705 questionnaires. In addition, all recipients of the questionnaires were sent reminder cards.

  Samples for this survey were selected from three sources: from health board payrolls; all general medical and dental practices; and honorary consultants and associate specialists.

  Duplicate questionnaires would only be received by members of staff in the unlikely event of their falling into more than one category and being selected in the separate samples, or where they are on the payroll of more than one health board and are selected under their separate payroll reference numbers.

  The final costs of carrying out the work on this survey are not yet available.

  Coal (Northern Ireland)
  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much coal was transported to Northern Ireland from Ayr harbour in 1992–93.

  Mr. Norris
  I have been asked to reply.

  About 800,000 tonnes were transported in 1991, the latest year for which figures are available.

EDUCATION

  Local Management of Schools
  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will review the local management of schools formula to take into account actual salary costs in schools with more than 10 teachers; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  We have said that we will review the policy on funding teachers' salaries within LMS schemes. However, it remains our view that governors should be responsible and accountable for the financial implications of their decisions. That is a fundamental principle of good management in both the public and the private sectors. Many local education authorities have taken sensible steps during the transitional period to ease schools' passage into the new arrangements. It would be an error for other authorities to assume that inactivity on their part will lead to a change of policy.

  Nursery Education
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans Her Majesty's Government have to make the provision of nursery education a statutory duty upon local authorities; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  The Government have no such plans.

  School Meals
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will publish a table showing(a) expenditure and (b) the average price of school meals in each year since 1976 in cash and constant prices.

  Mr. Forth
  The latest year for which information on actual expenditure on school meals is available is 1989–90. The available information is as follows:

  Net expenditure on school meals and milk1

  Cash

  2 Real terms

  £ million

  £ million

  1975–76

  318

  1,065

  1976–77

  382

  1,127

  1977–78

  365

  947

  1978–79

  388

  908

  1979–80

  422

  846

  1980–81

  397

  673

  1981–82

  397

  614

  1982–83

  411

  593

  1983–84

  427

  589

  1984–85

  432

  567

  1985–86

  435

  541

  1986–87

  460

  554

  1987–88

  443

  506

  1988–89

  405

  432

  1989–90

  382

  382

  The Department has collected figures for the average price of school meals for 1990 and 1991 only. The available information3 is as follows:

  1990

  1991

  Primary

  68p

  72p

  Secondary

  72p

  66p

  Special

  68p

  74p

  1 Recurrent expenditure, less income from paid meals and EC grants.

  2 Figures for earlier years have been converted to 1989–90 prices using the GDP (market prices) deflator.

  3 Figures represent the average charge in England (shown in pence) for a standard meal in schools operating dining centres.

  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will publish the latest figures showing the numbers of children taking(a) paid school meals and (b) free school meals in (i) primary, (ii) secondary and (iii) special schools; and what proportion they make up of (1) pupils present and (2) pupils on the school roll in each case.

  College

  Title

  Name

  Date of appointment

  Kingshurst

  Principal

  Valerie Bragg

  January 1988

  Macmillan

  Principal

  John Paddick

  January 1989

  Djanogly

  Principal

  Matt Andrews

  September 1988

  Dixon's

  Principal

  John Lewis

  September 1989

  Leigh

  Principal

  Virginia Waterhouse

  January 1990

  Emmanuel

  Principal

  George McHugh

  September 1989

  Harris

  Principal

  Lyndon Jones

  January 1990

  Bacon's

  Principal

  Peter Jenkins

  September 1990

  722
  Mr. Forth
  The numbers and percentages of pupils on roll taking school meals are shown in table A15 of "Statistics of Education: Schools 1991", copies of which are available in the Library.

  Information on the numbers of pupils present in schools on any given day is not collected centrally.

  City Technology Colleges
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what discussions he has had with the Audit Commission on transferring responsibility for the auditing of city technology colleges from the colleges themselves to the Audit Commission; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  My right hon. Friend has had no such discussions. It is a requirement on city technology colleges that they have annual audit reports by qualified external auditors appointed by the college. There are no plans to transfer the responsibility for auditing city technology colleges to the Audit Commission.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list the land and sites presently held by the City Technology College Trust; and what are the future proposals for each site.

  Mr. Forth
  The only land presently held by the City Technology College Trust is the site of the former Fitzherbert school, Brighton. The CTC Trust has been actively marketing the site, and is engaged in currrent negotiations to sell it.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on the circumstances surrounding the purchase by the the City Technology College Trust of the former Fitzherbert school in Brighton; and what amount of public money was used to acquire the school.

  Mr. Forth
  The former Fitzherbert school in Brighton was purchased in June 1989 as the site of a proposed city technology college. The cost to public funds was £2·3 million net of legal expenses.

  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will give the names of the CTC original headteachers who no longer hold the post and the reasons for their departures.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list the names of principals of each of the city technology colleges; and what information he has on their dates of appointment.

  Mr. Forth
  The names and dates of appointment of the current principal, or equivalent, of each CTC are as follows:
  723

  College

  Title

  Name

  Date of appointment

  Britschool

  Principal

  Anne Rumney

  January 1990

  Brooke

  Principal

  Gareth Newman

  September 1990

  Haberdashers'

  Director

  Roy Baldock

  November 1990

  Thomas Telford

  Headmaster

  Kevin Satchwell

  January 1991

  ADT

  Chief Executive

  Richard Painter

  October 1990

  Landau Forte

  Principal

  Peter Shackleton

  September 1990

  None of these are new appointments made since the establishment of the colleges.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to his answer of 7 July,Official Report, column 120, how many times officials from his Department have had the books and accounts of city technology colleges opened to them; and if he will list the colleges concerned and the dates of each such inspection.

  Mr. Forth
  Auditing of city technology colleges is the function of external auditors appointed by each college. The Department requires colleges to submit their accounts and auditors' reports soon after the end of each financial year. In addition, the Department's internal audit division has visited each of the colleges at least once since they have opened in order to provide advice on accounting matters to both the colleges and to the Department.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what amounts of public money are estimated to be spent on the funding of city technology colleges for(a) 1992–93. (b) 1993–94 and (c) 1994–95, respectively.

  Mr. Forth
  Planned expenditure on city technology colleges by the Department for Education in the financial years specified is as follows:

  1992–93—£54 million

  1993–94—£55 million

  1994–95—£56 million

  Discretionary Awards
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how expenditure on discretionary awards for students is allowed for within the local authority grant mechanisms; what are the figures for 1991–92 and 1992–93; and if he will break these down by local education authority.

  Mr. Forman
  In determining education's share of the local authority finance settlement, the Government take account of the broad range of pressures on local education authorities, including the demand for discretionary awards. The total of education standard spending for 1992–93 is £18,786 million, but it is for individual local authorities to decide how to deploy the resources available on the different services for which they are responsible. The proportion of individual local education authorities' standard spending assessments which is attributable to discretionary awards is not separately identified.

  English Tests
  Dr. Howells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has to arrange a meeting between the School Examinations and Assessment Council and the Northern Examination Association to draft pilot tests in English at key stage 3 of the national curriculum.

  Mr. Forth
  None.

  Local Education Authority Reorganisation
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list the number of(a) primary schools and (b) secondary schools affected by local education authority reorganisation for each year since 1987.

  Mr. Forth
  The number of schools is as follows:

  Primary

  Secondary

  1987

  451

  612

  1988

  451

  360

  1989

  364

  504

  1990

  517

  223

  1991

  408

  174

  In some cases a school may have featured in more than one statutory proposal.

  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list the time taken for each local education authority schools reorganisation plan since 1987, from submission of the plan to the Department to a decision being made.

  Mr. Forth
  This information could be made available only at disproportionate cost.

  Surplus Places
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on the reduction of surplus places in schools since August 1988.

  Mr. Forth
  It is estimated that since August 1988 local education authorities have removed about 100,000 places a year. But the net effect has to a large extent been balanced out by the provision of new places in areas where pupil numbers are expanding. As a result, there is still much more that needs to be done. I shall therefore continue to give high priority in the allocation of resources to cost-effective projects for the removal of surplus places.

  Grant-maintained Schools
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education which grant-maintained schools have made an application for a change in admissions arrangements; and in each case(a) what was the proposed change and (b) was the proposed change approved.

  Mr. Forth
  Decisions have been taken on proposals for changes by the following grant-maintained schools, as indicated.
  725

  School

  Change proposed; decision

  Maplesdon Noakes School, Kent

  Introduction of policy giving priority to children of employees of the school; approved

  St. Francis Xavier's College, Liverpool

  Admission of a small number of girls to the sixth form and change to the order of subscription criteria; approved

  Wymondham College, Norfolk

  Increase in number of day pupils; approved

  Wilmingdon Grammar School for girls

  Modification to selection arrangements; approved

  Bingley Grammar School

  Introduction of policy giving priority to children of employees of the school; approved

  North Halifax High School

  Clarification of existing selection arrangements; approved

  Crossley Heath High School

  Clarification of existing selection arrangements; approved

  Caistor Grammar School

  Modification of priority criterion relating to place of residence; approved

  Budmouth School

  Introduction of policy giving priority to children of parents prepared to participate in home-school partnership arrangements; approved

  Bullers Wood School, Bromley

  Introduction of policy giving priority to children of employees of the school; approved

  Haydon School

  Introduction of policy giving priority to children of staff at the school; approved

  Introduction of policy giving priority to siblings of former as well as current pupils at the school; rejected

  Oldfield School

  Introduction of policy giving priority to early applications; rejected

  Queen Elizabeth's School, Barnet

  Change to order of oversubscription criteria; approved

  The King's School, Grantham

  Removal of references to residence within the county boundaries; approved

  In addition, decisions have yet to be taken on proposals by the following schools for changes to take effect for September 1993.

  School

  Change proposed;

  Dartford Grammar School for Boys

  Modification to existing selection arrangements

  Dartford Grammar School for Girls

  Modification to existing selection arrangements

  Queensbury School, Dunstable

  Introduction of a policy giving priority to early applications

  Highams Park School, London

  Replacement of catchment area with a policy of allocating places on the basis of proximity of a child's home to the school; higher priority to be given to siblings and children with medical needs

  726

  School

  Change proposed;

  Send CE First School

  Admission of children at the beginning of the year, rather than the term, in which they reach age 5

  Heathside School, Weybridge

  Up to 40 places to be allocated to children with a particular interest in information technology, music or sport

  The John Fisher School, Purley

  Clarification of existing policy; addition of further priority categories

  King John School, Essex

  Resumption of former catchment area

  Coopers School, Kent

  Introduction of a policy giving priority to children of employees of the school

  Nonsuch High School for Girls, Surrey

  Modification to existing selection arrangements

  Departmental Objectives
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will set out the objectives of each division and branch of his Department.

  Mr. Forman
  The Department's objectives were most recently published in its departmental report, Cm 1911. They are currently under review.

  Student Loans
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what the indexation rate for student loans will be for the academic year 1992–93.

  Mr. Forman
  The indexation rate for the year beginning 1 September 1992 will be 3·9 per cent. This was the increase in the retail prices index in the year to June 1992. It represents a significant fall from the previous rates of 5·8 per cent. in the 1991–92 academic year and of 9·8 per cent. in 1990–91. This demonstrates the Government's success in driving inflation down.

  We shall show the new indexation rate in a revised edition of "Student Grants and Loans—A brief guide 1992–93". We shall publish that revised edition shortly.

  Special Needs
  Mr. Anthony Coombs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he is going to consult on his proposals to amend the Education Act 1981 for the benefit of children with special educational needs and their parents.

  Mr. Forth
  I am today issuing a consultation document on the Government's proposals to amend the Education Act 1981 which were announced by my noble Friend the Minister of State in another place on 29 June; and on our intention to establish a special educational needs tribunal which I announced on 11 July. Our proposals would improve local education authorities' performance on assessing and issuing statements for pupils with SEN; give parents of children with statements of SEN the right to state a preference for their child's school; oblige governors of LEA and grant-maintained schools whose school is named in a statement of SEN to admit that pupil; and provide for a clear and comprehensive system of rights of appeal by parents to an independent tribunal whose decisions would be binding on LEAs.

  Consultants' Contracts
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) if he will list the total number of contracts awarded to private consultants by his Department for each year since 1987;

  (2) if he will list the total value of contracts awarded to private consultants by his Department for each year since 1987; and what is the projected cost for 1992 and 1993, respectively;

  (3) if he will list the title of each contract awarded to private consultants by his Department for each year since 1987.

  Mr. Forman
  [holding answer 9 July 1992]: The total value of contracts awarded by this Department in each year since 1987 is as follows:

  £ thousands

  Year

  Value

  1987

  1364

  1988

  1438

  1989

  555

  1990

  974

  1991

  1,517

  1 Additional costs of £535,000 and £92,000 were spent on costs associated with the privatisation of the Plant Breeding Institute in 1987 and 1988 respectively.

  The Department's estimate of expenditure on private consultants for 1992–93 is £1·677 million, including estimates for sport and science which transfer to other departments in the 1992–93 financial year. Decisions on the distribution of the Department's running costs for future years are taken on an annual basis. No estimate can yet be given for 1993–94.

  Details of contracts awarded for each year since 1987 are as follows:

  Consultant

  Assignment

  1987

  1. CMG Information Systems

  Development of a new administrative computer system for Her Majesty's Inspectorate

  2. CCTA

  Education information study

  3. Research Services Limited

  Undergraduate income and expenditure survey

  4. Coopers and Lybrand

  Advice on financial delegation to schools

  5. Peat Marwick Mitchell & Co.

  Review of the preparation and production of inspection reports

  6. Spicer & Pegler Associates

  Review of accounting procedures at one of the Department's grant-aided bodies

  7. Deloitte Haskins & Sells

  Financial management advice and assistance to the University Grants Committee

  8. Deloitte Haskins & Sells

  Review of audit controls over teachers' pensions (payments and contributions)

  728

  Consultant

  Assignment

  9. Loughborough Consultants Limited

  Analysis of universities' responses to the Jarratt report

  10. BIS Applied Systems Limited

  Office systems strategy—tele-communications study

  1988

  1. Logica Limited

  Technical study in connection with the Department's education information strategy

  2. Logica Limited

  Review of teacher information needs

  3. Peat Marwick McLintock

  Study of requirements for an integrated Vote and management accounting system

  4. CMG

  Specification of needs for the Department's core resource information system

  5. BIS Applied Systems

  Communications strategy for HMI

  6. FI Group

  Study of ORACLE implementation

  7. Ernst Whinney

  Management system for HMI travelling and subsistence

  8. ITS Limited

  Training review

  9. Coopers and Lybrand

  Study of holding board models for the ABRC

  10. Coopers and Lybrand

  Management framework for the control of information systems projects

  11. Deloitte Haskins & Sells

  Advice on computer accounting systems for the Department

  12. Deloitte Haskins & Sells

  Financial management advice and assistance to the University Grants Committee (UGC).

  13. Loughborough Consultants Ltd.

  Research selectivity project for the UGC

  14. City University

  Financial services for the UGC

  15. Royal Society

  Analysis of the earth science review for the UGC

  1989

  1. Digitus

  Desk Top Publishing

  2. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Financial management survey of MRC

  3. Peat Marwick McLintock

  Financial Survey of SERC

  4. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Financial Computer System

  5. Peat Marwick McLintock

  Financial Computer System

  6. Peat Marwick McLintock

  Student Loans

  7. Illston & Crowcroft

  Evaluation of Manufacturing Systems Engineering Programme

  8. SCOLL

  IT Specialist Productivity

  9. BIS

  CRAMM Reviews

  10. Fearnhart

  Service Desk

  11. BIS

  Telecommunications, Darlington

  12. BIS

  Data Collection and EDI

  13. CMG

  Data Modelling

  1990

  1. Ernst & Young

  SARD: Financial management review of Central Council for Physical Recreation

  2. Peat Marwick McLintock

  Pensions branch: Pensions administation system

  3. PE International

  Developmnent of grade 7 training

  729

  Consultant

  Assignment

  4. PE International

  Development of management training

  5. Touche Ross

  Management consultancy: survey of NERC

  6. Peat Marwick McLintock

  Feasibility study of commercial funding for development of training materials and production of workshop materials

  7. Peter Pierce-Price

  Quality assurance of ECCTIS 2000

  8. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Youth Service: management implications of the ERA

  9. Tunnock and Parish

  Preparation and production of two COMMETT Strand B guides

  10. F. Parrott

  Summary report of survey of quality assurance for Computerised Management Information Systems in FE colleges

  11. J. Broadbent

  Specialist advisor to Youth Service Unit

  12. CMC Management Communicatie-Management Consultants

  Contribution to seminar on Restructuring an Inspectorate

  13. Elizabeth Braiden Management and Survey Consultant

  Her Majesty's Inspectorate survey on performance related pay: District Inspectors questionnaire

  14. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Comparison of costs and effectiveness of a Her Majesty's Inspectorate Inspection Project with alternative approaches

  15. Touche Ross

  Advice on extension of I.MS to Special Schools

  16. PE International

  Management consulting for development of branch induction programme

  17. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Review of BACS payment system

  18. FI Group

  Grant payments system

  19. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Network Security

  20. LBMS

  Ingres database

  21. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Mainframe replacement

  22. Butler Cox

  FESR

  23. ICL

  CRIS-P report writing

  24. SSADM (SCOLL)

  Productivity Improvement Programme

  25. Lalcrest

  Productivity Improvement Programme

  26. KPMG Peat Marwick

  Annual Business Plan

  27. RML

  Advice on technical enhancements to PCs and network

  28. KPMG Peat Marwick

  Review of teachers' superannuation scheme

  29. Intac

  Videoconferencing

  30. Hoskyns

  Resource planning

  31. BIS

  Project review of Enhanced Technical Data Service (ETDS)

  730

  Consultant

  Assignment

  32. Oracle

  Evaluation of software for ETDS

  33. Henley

  Feasibility of ETDS

  34. BIS

  Feasibility study into ETDS.

  35. Oxford Computer Training

  Programming Advice

  36. Kinesis

  Facilitator in implementation of IT Records Management System

  37. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Management of change for IT Records Management System

  38. Amtec

  Feasibility Study for Policy Branch Information System

  39. Tranrate

  Programming work on New Basic Teachers Record System

  40. Radius

  Enhancement and Screen Production on Accounts Payable System

  41. ICL

  Report and general support to CRIS-F

  42. ICL

  Review Repair Status of mainframe operating system and recommend any necessary additions

  43. Two B

  Amendments to Software

  44. CMG

  Evaluating Network Carriers

  45. Butler Cox

  PIRE of the FESR System

  46. BIS

  Full Study for replacement of Data Collection Processing System (DCPS)

  47. Oracle

  Benchmark of Hardware for DCPS

  1991

  1. Robson Rhodes

  Selection and implementation of Financial Management System for Teacher's Pensions Agency

  2. Poplar Consultants

  Accountancy arrangements for Pensions Branch

  3. Price Waterhouse

  Financial Management Survey of NCET

  4. London University

  Study on innovative uses of non-teaching staff

  5. Forvus

  Secondary schools staffing survey

  6. High Whiteside

  Consultancy services to Pensions Branch

  7. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  Open University review: Study of costs of part-time Higher Education provision in 3 comparator institutions

  8. PE International

  Development of Staff Attitude Survey

  9. PE International

  Development of Customer Care training

  10. KPMG Management Consultancy

  Training needs analysis of proposed Teachers' Pensions Agency

  11. McNeil Robertson Partnership

  Development of Teachers' Pensions Agency

  12. Coopers Lybrand

  Review of Grant Maintained Schools for internal audit

  13. LBMS Ltd

  Development of productivity improvement initiative

  731

  Consultant

  Assignment

  14. Touche Ross

  Budgeting and accounting for DES central services

  15. Express Computer Consultants

  Redevelopment of PC express software

  16. CSL Ltd

  Grant maintained schools audit

  17. EIS Ltd

  Support for Policy Branch Information System

  18. Insight Consulting

  CRAMM review

  19. Coopers Lybrand

  Advice to schools on service contracts

  20. W. S. Atkins

  Policy Branch Information System

  21. SEMA Systems

  Procurement consultancies for UNIX/RDBMS purchases

  22. LBMS Ltd

  SSADM version 4 case tool support

  23. Admiral

  Project management guide for conducting IS projects

  24. Derek Etherington

  Sports sponsorship

  25. PE International

  Financial management and policy review of the Sports Council

  26. Howard Whitehead and Partners

  Management consultancy: survey of ESRC

  27. Peat Marwick McLintock

  Feasibility study of commercial funding for development of training materials and production of workshop materials

  28. Michael Gill

  Quality assurance of PROSPECT

  29. Touche Ross

  Preparation of FE colleges for independence

  30. Ernst & Young

  Relocation study for FEFC

  31. Brown Associates

  Financial management of ESRC

  32. Touche Ross

  Operational research assistance

  33. Coopers Lybrand

  Inner city youth work training

  34. Neville Russell

  Accounting advice on APS and MBS

  35. Price Waterhouse

  Technical advice on financial controls for National Curriculum Council

  36. Robert Young

  Rewriting school development plans

  37. Software Sciences

  IT strategy for A and B Branch

  38. Kinsley Lord

  Management of A and B Branch

  39. SEMA Systems

  Consultancy for Schools 4 Branch

  40. SEMA Systems

  Support for Schools 1 and TPG UNIX/INGRES systems

  732

  Consultant

  Assignment

  41. MTA Ltd

  Feasibility of use of computers in schools

  42. Coopers Lybrand

  Commitment audit and cash flow verification for Bacon's CTC

  43. PA Consulting

  Operational research assistance for A and B Branch

  44. Forvus Computer Services

  Continuous student record

  45. Thorn EMI

  A & B Review

  46. Sybase

  RDBMS Trials

  47. Kinesis

  Options for connecting PCs to network

  48. Kinesis

  Secretariat Review

  49. BBT

  ETDS Data Conversion

  50. ORACLE

  Programming Her Majesty's Inspectorate T and S

  51. Duhig Berry

  Project management for survey projects

  52. PE International

  IS Training Strategy study

  53. LBMS

  Productivity Improvement

  54. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  QA consultancy

  55. NCC

  Redrafting IS Standard C1

  56. Duhig Berry

  1PSM project

  57. BIS

  CRAMM review of PAS

  58. Touche Ross

  Re-charging

  59. H. Whiteside

  Project management consultancy

  60. LBMS

  Independent schools

  61. LBMS

  Her Majesty's Inspectorate project SSADM support

  62. Admiral

  QMS

  63. SD Scicon

  Changeman consultancy

  64. Research Machines

  Unix

  65. Microsoft

  Scoping study ITIS

  66. MSL

  Graphical user interface

  67. Thorn EMI

  A and B strategy study

  68. Sema Group

  A and B strategy study INGRES support

  69. Express Consultancy

  PC consultancy

  70. W. S. Atkins

  SSADM consultancy support

  71. EIS

  Policy branch information system

  72. Oxford Computer Services

  Superbase consultancy

  73. Kinesis

  Records management

  74. Radius

  Enhancements to PASS software

  733

  Consultant

  Assignment

  75. Sema Group

  Evaluation of UNIX and 4GL/RDBMS

  76. ORACLE

  Her Majesty's Inspectorate management system

  77. Dataflex

  Her Majesty's Inspectorate management system

  78. BIS

  ETDS study

  79. Coopers Lybrand Deloitte

  ETDS and DCPS business case

  80. Insight

  ETDS CRAMM review

  81. SCS

  Project consultancy

  82. SEMA

  DCPS

  83. ROCC

  Project consultancy

  84. Duhig Berry

  NBTRS

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  European Council Agenda
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what are the powers of the European Commission over the inclusion of part A items on the agenda of the European Council.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  The agenda for the European Council itself—Heads of State or Government and the President of the Commission—is not divided into parts A and B.

  The President of the Council of Ministers is responsible for dividing the agenda for ordinary Council meetings into part A and part B. An "A" item may be withdrawn from the agenda if a member of the Council or the Commission so requests, unless the Council decides otherwise.

  Chemical Weapons
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the measures required for implementation of the proposed chemical weapons convention by the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The chemical weapons convention will require Her Majesty's Government to notify the future Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons of the legislative and administrative measures it has taken to implement the convention in the United Kingdom. This will include the establishment of a national authority.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the proposed chemical weapons convention text recently agreed at the conference on disarmament in Geneva.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We welcomed the presentation of a draft chemical weapons convention to the conference on disarmament on 22 June as offering a major step forward towards the completion of the convention this year. We will support efforts to achieve this and encourage others to do the same.

  Air Pollution
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects to ratify the protocol to the 1979 convention on long-range transboundary air pollution concerning the control of emissions of volatile organic compounds or their transboundary fluxes.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The United Kingdom is working to ratify this protocol as soon as possible. This is likely to be at the same time as, or soon after, ratification by the European Community.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list all the protocols to the 1979 convention on long-range transboundary air pollution that have been agreed to by Her Majesty's Government, indicating which have been ratified by the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The United Kingdom has signed and ratified the following protocols to the 1979 convention.

  The protocol on Long-Term Financing of the Cooperative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Long-Range Transmission of Air Pollutants in Europe (EMEP);

  The protocol concerning the Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds or their Transboundary Fluxes.

  In November 1991 the United Kingdom signed the protocol concerning the control of emissions of volatile organic compounds or their transboundary fluxes. Preparations to ratify this agreement are in hand.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Department and his policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. Goodlad
  The Government continue to place a high priority on helping small businesses, through improvements to the business climate, through deregulation and through specific programmes of support and assistance.

  Small firms are given full opportunity to bid for business with my Department. It is also our policy to pay invoices on time.

  Business transacted by my Department with small firms in the United Kingdom has increased from £21·1 million in the financial year 1990–91 to £24·2 million in 1991–92. In 1991–92 17·7 per cent. of total expenditure on the purchase of goods and services was with small firms.

  Peru
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been made to the Peruvian authorities concerning human rights; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  As I told the hon. Member for Argyll and Bute (Mrs. Michie) on 29 June, we take every appropriate opportunity, both bilaterally and with our European partners, to emphasise to the Peruvian
  735
  authorities their obligation to respect and protect human rights. When President Fujimori called on my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister earlier this year, he was left in no doubt about the strength of feeling in this country. On 17 June, our embassy in Lima reminded the Peruvian Foreign Ministry of the importance we attach to the issue of human rights. Most recently, on 26 June, the EC troika ambassadors called on the Peruvian Prime Minister. Inter alia, they stressed the need for full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

  Prisoners of War
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the Commonwealth of Independent States about President Yeltsin's recent statements about prisoners of war.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We have raised this issue in Moscow with the Russian authorities and will continue to pursue it.

  Nuclear Exports
  Mr. Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what measures were agreed at the nuclear suppliers group meeting in Warsaw in April to improve controls on nuclear exports.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The Nuclear Suppliers Group—NSG—achieved an important step forward in nuclear non-proliferation by the adoption of new controls on nuclear-related dual-use exports. The 27 participating countries reached agreement on guidelines governing transfers and on a list of the nuclear-related dual-use equipment and materials and related technology they will cover. They intend to bring the new arrangements into effect by the end of 1992.

  The group also adopted amendments to the existing NSG trigger list, published in 1978, which bring it into line with other international supplier controls.

  The text of the two documents have been communicated to the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency and will be published as parts I and II of a new agency circular—INFCIRC/254 Rev. 1—in July. When they are available, copies will be placed in the Library of the House.

  GCHQ
  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans Her Majesty's Government have to place the Government communications headquarters on a statutory basis; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hurd
  We shall bring forward proposals to place GCHQ on a statutory basis together with those for the Secret Intelligence Service to which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister referred during the debate on the Address on 6 May.

  Pakistan
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 25 June,Official Report, column 269, how long
  736
  the deputy high commission in Karachi has been waiting for information from the high commission in Islamabad to deal with the five outstanding applications for entry clearance.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 9 July 1992]: My answer of 25 June referred to two outstanding applications not five. The deputy high commission in Karachi received the information requested from the high commission in Islamabad within six and seven weeks respectively. Both cases have now been resolved.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

  Zambia
  Mr. David Howell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what response Her Majesty's Government have given to the recent request by President Chiluba of Zambia for additional relief for Zambia's foreign debts; what proportion of these debts are owed to Governments; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  We have already rescheduled debt service payments totalling some £4·1 million due in 1992 on past United Kingdom aid loans. We have also told the Zambian Government that, provided their economic reform programme remains in place, we will consider cancelling all Zambia's outstanding aid debt to the United Kingdom.

  Other official debt owed to the United Kingdom and other government creditors will be considered in the context of the Paris club. Subject to IMF approval of Zambia's economic reform programme, we shall be pressing for Zambia to receive Trinidad terms at a Paris club meeting later this month. These terms resulted directly from proposals made by the Prime Minister, in 1990, to relieve the burden of debt on the poorest, most heavily indebted countries.

  Of Zambia's $4·8 billion—£2·7 billion—long-term debt, about $2·8 billion—£1·6 billion—is owed to Governments.

  Slovakia
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list British assistance to Slovakia; what are the levels of assistance for 1992–93; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  British bilateral assistance is provided to Czechoslovakia under the know-how fund—KHF. For 1992–93 we expect expenditure to amount to some £6 million. There is no separate programme for either Slovakia or the Czech lands. An updated list of all KHF projects was placed in the Library of the House on 29 June.

HEALTH

  Dentistry
  Ms. Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she intends to impose the new fee scale on 8 July if no agreement is reached with the British Dental Association.
  737
  Dr. Mawhinney
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State gave the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Sir T. Arnold) on 23 June at columns 161–62.

  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many dentists in the family health services authority covering Rossendale and Darwen constituency are now refusing to take new child national health service patients; and what percentage that figure represents of the total number of dentists registered in that FHSA area;

  (2) how many dentists in the family health services authority covering the Rossendale and Darwen constituency are now refusing to take new adult national health service patients; and what percentage that figure represents of the total number of dentists registered in that area.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The information requested is not available. Lancashire family health services authority has not reported being unable to find a dentist for anyone who has asked for help. There are currently 454 dentists on Lancashire FHSA's dental list.

  Radiation
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what research studies have been sponsored by her Department into the effects of low dose ionising radiation on human blood cells.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department of Health is currently sponsoring the following projects:

  1. Collaborative studies on the development and inter-comparison of assays for the detection of abnormal radiosensitivity in individuals;

  2. Mutation frequencies in workers at the Sellafield Laboratory.

  Care Homes
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will instruct health authorities, where they place patients in private and voluntary sector homes, to meet topping up costs; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Yeo
  When a health authority accepts responsibility for a patient's in-patient care, it must meet the cost of that care in full, regardless of where it is provided. We have issued guidance, EL(91)108, a copy of which is available in the Library, to health authorities about the circumstances in which, under current legislation, they may make payments to independent sector residential care or nursing homes.

  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she will take to enforce the obligation of health authorities to provide nursing care for patients discharged from hospitals to nursing homes, by implementing the recommendations of this House's Social Security Committee contained in its fourth report of Session 1990–91, on the financing of private residential and nursing home fees; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Yeo
  The Government's response to the recommendations of the Committee's fourth report was fully set out in February 1992, Cm 1828.

  District Health Authority Funding
  Sir Michael Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the district health authorities in England and Wales whose 1992–93 revenue allocation is greater than 5, 10 and 15 per cent. below the target capitation figure which has been agreed by their regional health authorities.

  Mr. Sackville
  Allocations to district health authorities are the responsibility of the regional health authorities. The following information has been supplied by individual regional health authorities, and are not directly comparable. They should be taken as a broad indication of the relative positions of districts.

  The table shows the districts whose 1992–93 revenue allocation is more than 5 per cent., and more than 10 per cent., less than their weighted capitation share. There is only one district, Worthing, whose 1992–93 revenue allocation is more than 15 per cent. under its weighted capitation share.

  The information relating to Wales is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales.

  District health authority/ies

  Regional health authority

  5 to 10 per cent.

  10 to 15 per cent.

  Northern

  None

  None

  Yorkshire

  None

  None

  Trent

  None

  None

  East Anglian

  Huntingdon

  None

  North West Thames

  North Bedfordshire South Bedfordshire East Hertfordshire

  None

  North East Thames

  North East Essex Mid Essex Tower Hamlets Southend

  None

  South East Thames

  Brighton Hastings South East Kent

  Canterbury and Thanet

  South West Thames

  None

  Chichester

  Wessex

  None

  None

  Oxford

  Kettering

  None

  South Western

  Torbay

  None

  West Midlands

  Sandwell Dudley North Staffs. South East Staffs.

  None

  Mersey

  Southport and Formby Crewe

  North Western

  Blackburn Burnley Chorley Bolton Oldham Stockport Tameside

  Blackpool

  Romanian Adoptions
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many prospective adoptive parents seeking to adopt a child from Romania through her Department are now ineligible as a result of the agreement with the Romanian Committee for Adoptions signed on 19 March.

  Mr. Yeo
  A total of 65 families in the United Kingdom who had applications with their respective Government Departments on 19 March were advised, normally via their respective local authority social services departments, that they were ineligible to adopt under the terms of the agreement.

  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many prospective adoptive parents seeking to adopt a child from Romania are eligible for treatment as special cases as a result of securing parental permission to adoption prior to 16 July 1991;

  (2) what action her Department is taking to notify prospective adoptive parents seeking to adopt a child from Romania of the agreement of the Romanian Committee for Adoptions to process applications where parental permission was obtained prior to 16 July 1991.

  Mr. Yeo
  The Romanian Committee for Adoptions has recently agreed to consider adoption applications from United Kingdom citizens who are able to satisfy the committee that the birth mother had given formal consent to the adoption of her child to the prospective adopters before 17 July 1991. The Department is continuing to trace those to whom the concession may apply, via local authority social services departments.

  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children from Romania have been adopted by parents resident in the United Kingdom since 1988; and how many of those children have since been received into local authority care.

  Mr. Yeo
  From the information provided by the Home Office I understand that approximately 340 children have been given leave to enter the United Kingdom from Romania for the purposes of adoption since 1988. Adoption orders are not made until a child has been resident in the United Kingdom for at least 12 months. We are aware of four Romanian children who have been received into local authority care.

  Romanian Adoptions
  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 16 June,Official Report, columns 477–78, if he will list the other 11 countries involved in the agreement with the Romanian Committee for Adoption, and if the age conditions are the same for all those countries.

  Mr. Yeo
  I understand from the Romanian Committee for Adoptions that as of 10 July 1992. the following countries have signed an agreement with it:

  Belgium

  Canada

  Cyprus

  Denmark

  Finland

  France

  Holland

  Italy

  740

  Norway

  Sweden

  Switzerland

  United Kingdom

  United States of America.

  I have been advised that the age conditions are the same for all countries.

  Health Authority Returns
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will introduce legislation to require private patients' services to be included in health authority returns; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  No.

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has for her Department to celebrate the European Year of the Elderly in 1993; and if will make a statment.

  Mr. Yeo
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave him on 13 July at columns 430–31.

  Ethnic Minorities
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will issue guidelines to ensure that national health service staff are aware of the specific problems of certain ethnic minorities in(a) religions, (b) languages and (c) food habits; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department has funded the King's Fund centre to produce guidance on ethnic minority health which will include religions, Ianguages and food habits. We hope to publicise this widely to national health service staff.

  Ambulance Targets
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the target in the patients charter for ambulances to reach patients in an emergency; what is the latest information she has on the percentage success in meeting this target for each district health authority and regional health authority; and what action is being taken nationally to meet the target.

  Mr. Sackville
  The benchmark emergency performance targets in the patients charter are 19 minutes and 14 minutes for rural and urban areas respectively.

  Revised recommendations on emergency response times were issued by the national health service management executive in November 1990 as part of a package of good practice guidance for the modern ambulance service. The new standards were formally promulgated in "Health Service Guidance" issued in December 1991.

  The latest available figures are given in the tables. These refer to the former metropolitan and non-metropolitan services and to emergency response targets of 14 and 20 minutes.
  741

  Table 1

  Patient transport services 1990–91

  Quality of service

  Emergency calls: Response times: Metropolitan authorities

  Percentage of calls where response within

  Ambulance authority

  7 minutes (target 50 per cent.)

  14 minutes (target 95 per cent.)

  Northumbria Metropolitan

  53·0

  91·5

  West Yorkshire Metropolitan

  34·4

  87·5

  South Yorkshire Metropolitan

  31·2

  75·4

  London Ambulance Service

  11·0

  73·7

  West Midlands Metropolitan

  51·9

  88·1

  Mersey Metropolitan

  59·6

  96·5

  Greater Manchester Metropolitan

  46·6

  94·6

  Notes:

  1. The response time of an ambulance is defined as the time elapsed from the receipt of emergency call to the arrival of fully equipped ambulance at the scene of the incident.

  2. When calculating the percentage of calls resulting in a response within a specified time the total number of calls received was used as the denominator. It should be borne in mind that some of these calls (for example, aborted calls or hoax calls) will not have resulted in a response. The effect of this is to depress the percentage response figures slightly.

  Source: KA34 DUI Statistics Division (SD2B) 1992.

  Table 2

  Patient transport services 1990–91

  Quality of service

  Emergency calls: Response times: Non-Metropolitan authorities

  England

  Ambulance authority

  Percentage of calls where response within 8 minutes (Target 50 per cent.)

  Percentage of calls where response within 20 minutes (Target 95 per cent.)

  Cleveland

  64·4

  91·1

  Cumbria

  55·6

  91·4

  Durham

  53·3

  96·7

  Humberside

  74·0

  99·6

  North Yorkshire

  65·8

  95·6

  Derbyshire

  49·2

  96·4

  Leicestershire

  53·0

  96·2

  Lincolnshire

  64·1

  95·7

  Nottinghamshire

  58·4

  96·5

  Cambridgeshire

  42·2

  89·0

  Norfolk

  54·5

  88·7

  Suffolk

  51·9

  88·4

  Bedfordshire

  57·2

  97·5

  Hertfordshire

  58·0

  95·2

  Essex

  50·3

  93·7

  East Sussex

  66·5

  91·8

  Kent

  59·1

  96·7

  Surrey

  51·0

  97·0

  West Sussex

  59·9

  93·6

  Dorset

  57·5

  93·5

  Hampshire

  53·1

  97·2

  Wiltshire

  64·3

  97·7

  Isle of Wight

  47·3

  83·9

  Berkshire

  47·0

  93·1

  Buckinghamshire

  55·1

  88·6

  Northamptonshire

  60·1

  98·2

  Oxfordshire

  50·9

  87·3

  Avon

  59·5

  96·3

  Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

  40·7

  90·4

  Devon

  54·0

  94·2

  Gloucestershire

  59·9

  94·8

  Somerset

  55·2

  92·1

  Hereford and Worcester

  58·0

  95·5

  Shropshire

  50·8

  92·4

  Staffordshire

  47·8

  97·7

  Warwickshire

  61·3

  96·0

  742

  Ambulance authority

  Percentage of calls where response within 8 minutes ( Target 50 per cent.)

  Percentage of calls where response within 20 minutes ( Target 95 per cent.)

  Cheshire

  56·2

  87·4

  Lancashire

  67·1

  98·9

  Source: KA34 DH Statistics Division (SD2B) 1992.

  Notes:

  1. The response time of an ambulance is defined as the time elapsed from the receipt of an emergency call to the arrival of fully equipped ambulance at the scene of the incident.

  2. When calculating the percentage of calls resulting in a response within a specified time the total number of calls received was used as the denominator. It should be borne in mind that some of the of these calls (for example, aborted calls or hoax calls) will not have resulted in a response. The effect of this is to depress the percentage response figures slightly.

  Hospitals
  Sir Malcolm Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate her Department has made of the capital cost of the United Kingdom hospital building programme to meet the plans of regional health authorities over the next five years.

  Mr. Sackville
  From information held centrally, the total capital cost over the five years 1993–94 to 1997–98 of all schemes costing over £1 million in the current national health service building programme in England is estimated to be £2·8 billion. Around £1·5 billion capital will be invested in NHS buildings this year.

  Information relating to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is a matter for my right hon. Friends, the Secretaries of State for Scotland and for Wales and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

  Overseas Doctors
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make it her policy to oppose current European Community medical directives which restrict the free movement of overseas-qualified doctors within the Community.

  Mr. Galbraith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will take action to remove the EC medical directives which restrict the free movement of overseas-qualified doctors within the Community; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The medical directives were introduced in 1975 to facilitate the free movement of EC doctors within the Community through the automatic recognition of the medical qualifications awarded by member states. The European Commission is looking at the possibility of amending the directives to incorporate overseas qualifications and discussions are presently taking place between health officials of member states.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she last met representatives from the Overseas Doctors Association to discuss European Community directives on the free movement of doctors and their implications for overseas-qualified doctors.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has not met representatives of the Overseas Doctors
  743
  Association recently to discuss this issue but she wrote to their chairman on 25 June setting out the latest position on the European medical directives.

  Ministers and officials meet representatives of the association at regular intervals. On 18 February they met my hon. Friend the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State. Their last meeting with officials was on 18 June. On both occasions this issue was discussed in detail.

  My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary also spoke on this topic when he attended the association's annual dinner as guest speaker on 2 July.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make it her policy to put discussion on the implications of European Community medical directives affecting overseas-qualified doctors on the programme for the European Community Health Council during the United Kingdom's presidency.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Proposals to amend the directives are the responsibility of the Commission which is currently consulting member states.

  Dioxin
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether her Department intends to undertake surveys of the levels of dioxin in blood in the population around the Coalite plant in Derbyshire; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  Families on the three farms near the Coalite plant which produced milk with high dioxin levels have already been offered blood tests, and those who accepted have been advised of the results. As the only people in the area likely to have been exposed to higher than normal levels of dioxins are the families on these farms who drank their own farm milk, there is no need for widespread blood analysis or other health screening in the area.

  Community Care (Rural Areas)
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has received from the National Council for Voluntary Organisations concerning the development of community care in rural areas; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Yeo
  We have periodic meetings with the National Council of Voluntary Organisations at which we discuss a wide variety of matters to do with the development of community care.

  Eye Tests
  Mr. Hanson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many eye tests have been carried out in each year since 1979.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The number of national health service sight tests, which are free to patients, paid for by family health services authorities and health boards in Great Britain in each financial year are shown in the table.

  Number of NHS.sight tests by financial year Great Britain

  Millions

  1979–80

  9·55

  1980–81

  9·53

  1981–82

  9·70

  744

  Millions

  1982–83

  9·94

  1983–84

  10·63

  1984–85

  11·34

  1985–86

  11·76

  1986–87

  12·21

  1987–88

  13·49

  1988–89

  14·39

  1989–901

  6·04

  210·97

  1990–91

  4·84

  212·43

  1991–92

  5·79

  1 From 1 April 1989, NHS sight tests were restricted to certain groups in the population. The sight tests paid for in 1989–90 include 1·82 million conducted prior to 1 April 1989 when sight tests were universally available. The remaining 4·22 million sight tests paid for in 1989–90 do not represent a full year under the new system, because of the delay in payments.

  2 Total number of sight tests conducted. These figures were estimated using data from a survey carried out by the Federation of Ophthalmic and Dispensing Opticians (FODO).

  The Department collects no information on the overall volume of private sight tests. However, there is no reason to assume that total volume in 1991–92 will have declined from the volume of 12·43 million.

  Pesticides
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what health risks are associated with the common weedkilling pesticides Mecocrop and Dicamba; and if her Department will sponsor a study into their effects on adults, children and pets.

  Mr. Sackville
  The possibility that health risks might be associated with the use of these pesticides was considered before they were approved for use. No adverse health effects are likely when the products are used in accordance with the conditions of approval. All pesticides are reviewed periodically for safety and efficacy in use. Mecoprop is under review at present and Dicamba is in the future review programme. The matter of effects on pets is for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to consider. Adverse effects on pets would seem unlikely if the products are used in accordance with the conditions of approval.

  Surgeons
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the total number of surgeons currently working in United Kingdom hospitals; and how many of these surgeons qualified outside the European Community.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The total number of surgeons workings in hospitals in England and Wales at 30 September 1990 the latest date for which figures are available, was 11,141, of whom 2,994 qualified outside the European Community. The "whole time equivalent" figures are 9,892·8 and 2,655·1 respectively.

  Information relating to Scotland and Northern Ireland is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

  Hospitals
  Sir Malcolm Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate her Department has made of the construction and repair costs of bringing all hospitals in England and Wales up to her Department's target standards of safety.

  Mr. Sackville
  According to information held centrally, the cost at March 1991 of bringing the national health service estate up to national safety standards was £395 million. This estimate includes work on property due to be replaced within three years, property not used for patient care, property awaiting planned maintenance and property awaiting disposal which together represent about 30 per cent. of the NHS estate. Around £1·5 billion capital will be invested in NHS buildings this year.

  Information relating to Wales is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales.

  Disability (Consultation)
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many user consultative committees have been set up at disablement services centres with representation from artificial limb and wheelchair users' organisations; and what steps are being taken to ensure that such committees will be organised at all centres.

  Mr. Yeo
  We do not routinely collect information on the number of formal user consultative committees set up at disablement services centres, but we understand that in 1991–92 there were 12 such committees, with more in the process of formation. We actively encourage consultation of user interests; the method of consultation is best decided locally.

  Radiotherapists
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the establishments in England which train radiotherapists, the number of training places in each, the number of students successfully completing their course in each of the past five years, and the percentage pass rate in each of the past five years, for each establishment.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The 31 radiography training establishments in England are as follows:

  Addenbrooke's Hospital School of Radiography, Cambridge

  Birmingham School of Radiography, Birmingham

  Bradford and Airedale College of Health, Bradford Royal

  Infirmary, Bradford

  Bristol School of Radiography, Bristol Royal Infirmary,

  Bristol

  Charterhouse College of Radiography, London

  Christchurch College, Canterbury

  Christie Hospital and Holt Radium Institute, Manchester

  Cleveland School of Radiography, South Cleveland

  Hospital, Middlesbrough

  Derbyshire College of Higher Education, Derby

  East Anglian College of Radiography, Ipswich

  Guy's Hospital Radiography Education Centre, London

  Hatfield Polytechnic, Hertfordshire

  Humberside College of Health, Hull

  John Radcliffe Hospital School of Radiography, Oxford

  King's College Hospital, Department of Radiography,

  London

  Leeds School of Radiography, Royal Infirmary, Leeds

  Merseyside School of Radiography, Royal Liverpool

  Hospital College, Liverpool

  Moor Hospital School of Radiography, Iancaster

  746

  Newcastle Schools of Radiography, Royal Victoria

  Infirmary, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

  Northampton General Hospital School of Radiography,

  Northampton

  North Trent Radiography Training Unit, City

  Polytechnic, Sheffield

  Portsmouth School of Radiography, St. Mary's Hospital,

  Portsmouth

  Queen Elizabeth Military Hospital, School of

  Radiography, London

  Royal Marsden Hospital, School of Therapeutic

  Radiography, Sutton, Surrey

  Salford College of Technology, Salford

  Southampton General Hospital, School of Radiography,

  Southampton

  South East Thames Regional Radiotherapy Centre, St.

  Thomas' Hospital, London

  South West College of Health, Plymouth

  South West Thames Regional Radiography Centre, St.

  Luke's Hospital, Guildford

  South West Thames School of Radiography, St. George's

  Hospital, London

  Stoke-on-Trent School of Radiography, City General

  Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent.

  The other information requested is not held centrally and could he provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Hospital Waiting Times
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will state for each health authority in England as at I April 1992 whether it has published a guaranteed maximum waiting time for patients seeking(a) hip replacements, (b) cataract removals and (c) hernia repairs; and for those authorities that had done so what waiting times were guaranteed by each authority.

  Mr. Sackville
  From 1 April 1992, under the patients charter, all health authorities are required to guarantee admission for treatment within two years of a patient being placed on a waiting list. This will be improved to 18 months for hip and knee replacement and cataract operations from 31 March 1993. From 1 April 1992 health authorities should ensure that guaranteed maximum waiting times are publicised.

  Senior Nurses
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) by each health authority district area how many senior nurse posts have been lost in each of the past five years according to(a) director of nursing services—DNS—level, (b) assistant DNS, (c) senior nursing support posts and (d) senior nursing officers; and how many posts in each category have been lost through (i) redeployment and (ii) retirement;

  (2) how much money has been saved by each health authority through the elimination of senior nursing posts in each of the last five years; and how the money has been reallocated in each instance.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not available centrally.

  Medicines Commission
  Mr. Hague
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she expects to receive the annual report of the Medicines Commission for 1991.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  We have received the report, and copies have today been laid before both Houses of Parliament in accordance with the requirements of section 5(2) of the Medicines Act 1968.
  747
  Bound volumes have been placed in the Library containing the 1991 reports of the Medicines Commission, the Committee on Safety of Medicines, the Committee on Dental and Surgical Materials, the Committee on the Review of Medicines, the British Pharmacopoeia Commission and the Veterinary Products Committee.

  We are glad to pay tribute to the valuable work done by the distinguished members of the Medicines Act advisory bodies and thank them warmly for the time and effort which they contribute to the public interest in this most important field.

  Medicines
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what regulations apply to the issuing of out-of-date medicines by pharmacists.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Expiry dates, which indicate a shelf-life based on manufacturers' stability data, are required to be included on the manufacturers' label of a medicinal product by the Medicines (Labelling) Regulations 1976, as amended. Pharmacists do not dispense medicines past their expiry date other than in very exceptional circumstances, such as in an emergency.

  While there are no specific regulations governing the supply by pharmacists of medicines past their expiry date, the dispensing of expired stock runs contrary to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's code of ethics, and disciplinary proceedings may be taken against pharmacists who are found to be in breach of the code.

  The dispensing of substandard medicines is a breach of the pharmacist's terms of service under the National Health Service (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 1992.

  Maternity Services
  Mrs. Gillan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the Government's response to the second report of the Select Committee on Health of Session 1991–92 on maternity services (House of Commons Paper No. 29).

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The Government have today published their response to the Health Committee's second report on the national health service maternity services.

  Pregnancy, childbirth and the early months of life are no longer the hazardous experiences they were in times past. The record speaks for itself. The rate of perinatal and infant mortality is at the lowest level ever. Maternal deaths are now very rare indeed. More premature babies are saved than ever before. Doctors, midwives and nurses can justifiably be proud of the services they give.

  The Government have a responsibility for ensuring that women receive the best possible maternity care. We also believe that the service must be sensitive to the views of those who use it, that women are empowered to take decisions about their care. The Government will maintain the high level of service in the NHS and will make improvements where these are necessary. Central to these objectives are:

  the patients charter which makes the needs and wishes of those who use the health service paramount;

  the improvements in care resulting from the confidential inquiries into maternal deaths and into stillbirths and deaths in infancy;

  the target setting and performance monitoring carried out by the NHS management executive to maintain and raise standards of health care.

  748
  In the response to the Health Committee, the Government have announced two new initiatives:

  the setting up of a maternity services task force to disseminate information widely in the NHS about good practice in the management of health care during pregnancy, childbirth and the postnatal period;

  to appoint an expert committee to review policy on care during childbirth and to be chaired by a woman independent of professions involved.

  Membership of the expert committee will include strong representation from women who use the service. The expert committee's job will be to make recommendations about arrangements for care, taking full account of the shift in the attitudes of many women in favour of a more homely and less technological setting for care while not compromising the safety of mothers and babies. The committee's considerations will include birth at home.

  In all the activities associated with care during pregnancy and childbirth, the woman should be properly informed and able to participate fully in the decisions that are taken. This is common ground between the Government and the Health Committee. The NHS reforms and the patients charter are the means for achieving these ends.

  Medicines Control Agency
  Mr. Carrington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will publish the annual report and accounts of the Medicines Control Agency.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  I have today placed in the Library copies of the agency's report and accounts for 1991–92.

  Abortion
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what methods her Department uses to confirm that the number of abortions reported to her Department by private abortion clinics is the actual number of abortions performed at that clinic.

  Mr. Sackville
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: Section 1(3) of the Abortion Act 1967 requires the medical practitioner performing the termination, not the approved place, to notify the chief medical officer. Procedures for certification and notification of termination of pregnancy are checked by the Department's officers during the course of unannounced inspection visits. Any inconsistencies revealed are fully investigated.

  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will detail the procedures followed by her Department when abortion notification forms are received which do not state the medical condition of the mother.

  Mr. Sackville
  [holding answer 13 July 1992] : The chief medical officer returns the notification form—HSA4—to the operating doctor with a request that the medical condition should be completed.

  Disabled Employees
  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health. pursuant to her answer of 30 June, to the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West, (Mr. Janner)Official Report, column 462, how many and what proportion of her Department's employees were registered disabled in 1989 and 1990, respectively.
  749
  Mr. Sackville
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: In June 1989 there were 30 registered disabled people employed in the Department which represented 0·7 per cent. of the total work force. In 1990, the comparable figures were 29 and 0·6 per cent.

  Dry-cleaning Chemicals
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what research has been undertaken by her Department into potential health risks from chemicals used by dry cleaners; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I have been asked to reply.

  The majority of dry cleaners use either perchloroethylene (tetrachlorethylene), or 1,1,2 trichloro-1,1,2 trifluoroethane (R113). White spirit and trichlorethylene are also known to be used and a few may use 1,1,1 trichloroethane (methyl chloroform) or trichlorotluoromethane) (R11). No specific research into the potential health risks from the use of these chemicals by dry cleaners has been carried out by either the Department of Employment or the Department of Health, but the Health and Safety Executive is currently assessing recently published scientific data concerning health risks associated with exposure to perchloroethylene.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Fair Employment
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress has been made to correct the under-employment of Protestants by the Eastern Health and Social Services area board; whether this board has been investigated by the new Fair Employment Commission; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The Eastern health and social services board has an equal opportunities policy and has developed procedures for the implementation and monitoring of equality of opportunity, which are in line with the recommendations in the code of practice on fair employment. The board is committed to carry out any affirmative action necessary to address any apparent imbalance in its work force.

  The board has not been investigated by the Fair Employment Commission, but, in line with other employers, consults the commission as and when necessary.

  Hospitals
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what has been the total expenditure on hospitals by the Eastern health and social services area board in each of the past five years; and how much in each year was for capital projects.

  Mr. Hanley
  The information requested is as follows:

  Year

  Capital works

  Total

  £

  £

  1986–87

  7,972,296

  217,094,300

  1987–88

  11,509,758

  236,424,600

  1988–89

  11,013,938

  255,205,941

  1989–90

  9,032,633

  267,502,118

  1990–91

  11,659,842

  296,815,875

  Forestry
  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people are employed in the forestry industry in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Hanley
  About 1,050; 500 of whom are employed in the Department of Agriculture forest service and approximately 550 in the private sector.

  Hospital Services, Downpatrick
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps have been taken to provide funding for the relocation of acute hospital services on the Downshire site in Downpatrick, Co. Down; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The management and delivery of acute hospital services in the Downpatrick area is the responsibility of the Eastern health and social services board. The consultation period on its recently published consultative document "Framework for General (Acute) Hospital Services within the Board Area" is due to end on 30 September 1992, after which the board will frame its proposals for the future. I understand that the board has not at this time agreed any plans to relocate acute hospital services on the Downshire site.

  Fishing Industry
  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people are employed by the fishing industry in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Hanley
  There is estimated to be some 2,900 people employed in the Northern Ireland fishing industry either on a full-time or part-time basis. This includes sea fisherman, fish farmers, those engage in processing and other ancillary occupations and commercial salmon and inland fishery enterprises.

  Hospital Bed Closures
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will increase the budgetary allocation to the Eastern health and social services board in order to prevent the proposed reductions of beds and job losses in hospitals within the board area; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The Eastern board's recently published consultative document "A Framework for General (Acute) Hospital Services within the Eastern Board Area" contains an analysis of the future need for acute hospital beds in its area. The conclusion in the document that fewer acute beds will be needed does not stem primarily from cost or budgetary considerations. Advances in medical techniques and tchnology, and improvements in efficiency levels in the use of beds to match those being achieved elsewhere, mean that the same number of patients could receive treatment of a higher quality in the Eastern board area with at least 750 fewer beds. The Government are fully committed to seeking continuing improvements in the quality of care while making the best use of available resources and they fully support the principles which underline the Eastern board's policy for the provision of acute care.

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has for his Department to celebrate in 1993 the European Year of the Elderly; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 13 July,Official Report, columns 430–31.

  The Department of Health and Social Services in Northern Ireland is contributing to the development of the national programme for the year and, in addition, has set up a Northern Ireland steering group to plan and co-ordinate regional activities.

  Cold Weather Payments
  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on what dates and in what parts of Northern Ireland the cold weather payments system was triggered during the winter of 1991–92; and how many households received payment on each occasion.

  Applications

  Admissions

  School

  Places available

  Grade 1

  Grade 2

  Grade 1

  Grade 2

  Down High School, Downpatrick

  100

  74

  33

  74

  26

  Assumption Grammar School, Ballynahinch

  135

  134

  36

  134

  1

  St. Patrick's Grammar School, Downpatrick

  100

  94

  28

  94

  16

  St. Louis's Grammar School, Kilkeel

  78

  35

  41

  35

  40

  Total

  423

  337

  138

  337

  83

  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many households in Northern Ireland qualify for payments under the cold weather payments scheme.

  Mr. Hanley
  Social Security operational matters are the responsibility of the chief executive of the Social Security Agency. However, I understand that information is not kept on the number of households in Northern Ireland who qualify for payments under the cold weather payment scheme.

  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on what dates cold weather payments were made in Northern Ireland in response to a forecast of a qualifying period; and if he will indicate the period taken for payment to be made once the system has been triggered.

  Mr. Hanley
  Social Security operation matters are the responsibility of the chief executive of the Social Security Agency. However, I understand that since the introduction of the forecast system on 1 November 1991, no cold weather payments have been made in Northern Ireland in response to a forecast of a qualifying period.

  Legal Parades
  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will give details of(a) the number of security force personnel and (b) the cost of policing each legal parade or march held in (i) Newry town, (ii) Armagh, (iii) Newtownhamilton or (iv) Markethill in each of the past three years.
  752
  Mr. Hanley
  Social security operational matters are the responsibility of the chief executive of the Social Security Agency. However, I understand that the cold weather payment system was not triggered in any part of Northern Ireland during the winter of 1991–92.

  Grammar Schools
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) how many places in grammar schools in South Down were allocated to students who obtained a grade 1 and a grade 2, respectively, in the selection procedure;

  (2) how many applications were received by each grammar school in South Down from pupils who received grade 1 and grade 2 in the selection procedure;

  (3) how many places were available for student intakes into each grammar school in South Down for the academic year 1992–93.

  Mr. Hanley
  The information requested in respect of 1992–93 is as follows:

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

  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) how many legal parades were approved by the Royal Ulster Constabulary in(a) Newry town, (b) Armagh, (c) Newtonhamiltown and (d) Markethill in each year since 1980;

  (2) if he will give details of all legal parades or marches in each of the past five years, that were held in (a) Newry town, (b) Armagh city, (c) Newtownhamilton and (d) Markethill;

  (3) what organisation sought permission for each legal parade in (a) Newry town, (b) Armagh, (c) Newtownhamilton and (d) Markethill in each of the past five years.

  Mr. Mates
  I shall write to the hon. Gentleman as soon as possible.

  Police Complaints
  Mr. Gale
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what decisions he has reached on the recommendations contained in the report of the Independent Commission of Police Complaints on its triennial review 1988–91.

  Sir Patrick Mayhew
  My predecessor announced on 27 March 1991 that he intended to consult various interested bodies. A consultation document was sent to the police authority, the Chief Constable, the police representative bodies, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Standing Advisory Commission on Human Rights, the Committee
  753
  on the Administration of Justice, the Northern Ireland Committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and Northern Ireland Members of this House. The document was also made available to anyone else on request.

  I have given further consideration to the recommendations in the light of the comments received. I have decided to accept six of the commission's nine recommendations in whole or in part.

  I have accepted the following two recommendations which can be implemented by amendments to regulations and I have asked my officials to bring forward the necessary amendments as quickly as possible:
  The informal resolution procedure should be amended to provide for the complainant to indicate in writing that he is satisfied that his complaint has been resolved (recommendation 2). The regulations would make it clear that the complainant is not required to sign such a statement if he or she does not want to.
  Regulations should be made to provide a monitoring role for the Commission where the Police Authority decides to use its discretionary power under Article 6(2) of the 1987 Order to deal with a complaint against a senior officer other than by formal investigation (recommendation 3).

  I have also accepted the following three recommendations whose implementation will require primary legislation. The second of these is part of a wider recommendation. They will be implemented at the earliest legislative opportunity:
  A complaint should be referred to the Commission once it has been recorded by the appropriate authority under Article 5(1) or Article 6(1) of the 1987 Order (recommendation 4).
  The Commission should be granted discretion to discontinue supervision of a case where it becomes apparent that supervision is not warranted (second part of recommendation 6).The 1987 Order should be amended to require the Commission to give its reasons to the Chief Constable for preferring disciplinary charges at the recommendation stage under Article 13(1) rather than at the later stage of direction (recommendation 7).
  The purpose of recommendation 7 is being achieved by administrative action pending amendment to legislation.

  I have accepted the following recommendation which is an administrative matter for the Policy Authority and the Independent Commission for Police Complaints: meetings between the Police Authority and the Commission should continue on a more structured basis (recommendation 9)

  I have decided not to accept the following three recommendations and the first part of another recommendation:
  The Chief Constable should be required to consult the Commission in those cases where he is of the opinion that the matter does not constitute a complaint within the meaning of Article 2 of the 1987 Order; the Commission's decision should prevail where there is a difference of view as to whether the matter should properly be regarded as constituting a complaint (recommendation 1)
  The Commission should be given a reserve power under an amended Article 8 of the 1987 Order to "call in" for supervision in the public interest those matters considered by the Commission to be of grave or exceptional circumstances (recommendation 5)
  The mandatory supervision of complaints category relating to serious injury should be eliminated, that supervision in all cases should be a matter for the discretion of the Commission (first part of recommendation 6)
  Consideration should be given to the establishment of a truly independent tribunal with a legally qualified chairman to hear disciplinary charges. Such charges would be presented on behalf of the Commission at the hearing; any consequential disciplinary action would be the responsibility of the Chief Constable and he might therefore require to have a presence or a specialised function at a tribunal (recommendation 8).
  754
  I have been heartened by the positive response to the consultation document on the commission's recommendations and I am satisfied that the action I have outlined will further enhance the operation of the procedures for dealing with complaints against the police.

  Water Privatisation
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will indicate when he plans to privatise the water and sewerage functions of the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland.

  Sir Patrick Mayhew
  The citizens charter for Northern Ireland made clear the Government's intention to privatise the Department of the Environment's water and sewerage functions. Hitherto, it had been intended that these functions would be transferred to a Government-owned company before privatisation. However, having reviewed progress, I have concluded that we should in fact proceed directly to privatisation, as soon as practicable in 1995–96. This will build on the preparatory work which has already been done and will allow customers and taxpayers to obtain at the earliest date the benefits that privatisation will bring.

NATIONAL HERITAGE

  Broadcasting, Northern Ireland
  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to ensure that regional broadcasting within Northern Ireland is maintained and enhanced; and if he will make it his policy to ensure that regional broadcasting stations at Newry town hall and elsewhere will continue to operate in the future.

  Mr. Key
  BBC programming and day-to-day administration, including its continuing commitment to regional broadcasting in Northern Ireland, are a matter for the corporation under its royal charter and licence and agreement. The Broadcasting Act 1990 established the framework for other national and regional television and radio services.

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has for his Department to celebrate in 1993 the European Year of the Elderly; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Key
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 13 July 1992,Official Report, columns 430–31.

  Supermarkets
  Mr. Bill Michie
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what information is held on the number of playing fields lost to supermarket developments over the last 10 years in England.

  Mr. Key
  There is no centrally held information on the loss of playing fields. However, the Sports Council's grant in aid for 1991–92 included a specific sum to cover the cost of preparing a national register of playing fields in England. This will provide a means of monitoring gains and losses in playing fields and should be completed at the end of May 1993.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Scottish Business
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Lord President of the Council what plans he has to propose amendments to the procedures for the consideration of business in the House which relates solely to Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Newton
  Existing procedures offer a variety of ways of handling Scottish business. The recent reconstituting of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee provides an additional opportunity for consideration of Scottish issues by the House.

WALES

  Welsh Development Agency
  Mr. Rowlands
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what was the expenditure of the Welsh Development Agency's property development programme in 1991–92 in the district authority areas of(a) Cynon Valley, (b) Merthyr Tydfill and (c) the Rhondda; and what is the estimated expenditure in these three districts in 1992–93;

  (2) whether he will list each project in the Welsh Development Agency's property development programme for 1991–92 and the cost of each project in that year and the corresponding information in 1992–93.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I have arranged for the chief executive of the WDA to write to the hon. Gentleman, and for a copy to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Young People
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many 16 and 17-year-olds there are in(a) Blaenau Gwent, (b) Gwent and (c) Wales; and how many in each case are (1) in full-time education, (2) in youth training schemes, (3) receiving income support and (4) are neither in full-time education, youth training schemes, nor in receipt of income support.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The total numbers of 16 and 17-year-olds and the numberrs of those in full-time education for the requested areas are given in the table. Also shown are the numbers of persons of all ages on youth training schemes; age-specific data are not collected. Reliable information on the numbers of 16 and 17-year-olds receiving income support and those who are neither in full-time education, on youth training schemes, nor in receipt of income support is not available for Wales.

  Thousands

  Blaenau Gwent

  Gwent

  Wales

  16 and 17-year-olds:

  Total population1

  2·1

  11·8

  76·7

  In full-time education—colleges2

  n/a

  3·0

  17·9

  In full-time education—schools3

  n/a

  3·1

  22·4

  All persons on Youth Training schemes4

  n/a

  2·6

  16·0

  1 Mid year estimate 1990 (Source: Office of Population Censuses and Surveys)

  2 Those aged 16 or 17 on 31 August 1991 following full·time courses at colleges of further and higher education as at November 1991.

  756
  3 Those aged 16 or 17 on 31 August 1990 attending schools as at January 1991.

  4 All ages, as at 24 May 1992.

  Blind Children
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what percentage of parents of blind and partially sighted children received social work counselling in Wales in the latest year for which figures are available; and if he will make it his policy to issue guidelines to local authorities concerning the development of counselling services for parents upon discovery of a child's disability.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The figures requested are not held centrally. The Children Act 1989 provides a framework for the provision of services for all children, including those with disabilities. It makes clear the duty of local authorities to safeguard the needs of children with disabilities and their families, and to ensure that advice, guidance and counselling are available. It is for each local authority to decide what serices they consider appropriate. Comprehensive guidance on all aspects of the Act was issued to local authorities prior to its implementation in October 1991. The Secretary of State has no plans to issue further guidance to local authorities on this matter.

  Neath-Port Talbot Hospital
  Mr. John Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether the preparation for the building of the Neath/Port Talbot hospital is on target; and when the first contracts will he signed.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  I understand that West Glamorgan health authority still anticipates that work will commence later this year on the infrastructure contract. Progress therefore remains on target.

  Youth Training
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether the system for monitoring the numbers of young people covered by the youth training guarantee and seeking a place on youth training announced in the oral answer by the Secretary of State for Employment,Official Report, 7 July 1992, column 172, will cover Wales; who will be responsible for monitoring in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I reviewed performance on the youth training guarantee at a recent meeting with the chairmen of Welsh training and enterprise councils and I am satisfied that Welsh TECs have the resources they need to meet the guarantee. The Minister of State has subsequently written to the chairmen asking them for advance information of any issues in meeting it. My officials are discussing the position with each TEC, and will also be reviewing with TECs and principal careers officers whether changes to monitoring arrangements need to be made in the light of the steps announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment on 7 July.

  Elderly People
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the total number of elderly people dependent on income support, that have been turned away from voluntary care homes in Wales, for the latest year for which figures are available.
  757
  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The information requested is not held centrally.

  Rural Wales
  Mr. John Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will bring together the principal agencies concerned with the problems of rural Wales under his chairmanship at regular intervals.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Ministers frequently meet the chairmen and chief officers of all the agencies concerned to discuss the problems facing rural Wales and my officials are in regular contact with the staff of these agencies. The agencies also maintain close liaison with each other on matters of common interest.

  Sites of Special Scientific Interest
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish a list of all sites of special scientific interest in Wales at present; how many of these sites of special scientific interest have been damaged during the last year: and what is the estimated percentage figure of the land mass of Wales currently designated as sites of special scientific interest.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  There are currently 843 sites of special scientific interest in Wales. I have arranged for copies of the full list of sites to be placed in the Library of the House.

  The Countryside Council for Wales is aware of damage to 45 sites during the period 1 April 1991 to 31 March 1992. The area of Wales which has been notified as sites of special scientific interest is approximately 9·5 per cent.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Department and his policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The Government continue to place a high priority on helping small businesses, through improvements to the business climate, through deregulation and through specific programmes of support and assistance.

  Measures operated by my Department to assist small businesses include the following:

  Support fur Local Enterprise Agencies
  There are currently 21 local enterprise agencies in Wales and there is a likelihood of a number of new organisations approaching me for approval in the near future. In order to strengthen the network of agencies to improve and enhance services to small businesses mergers between agencies are encouraged where appropriate. One merger involving two agencies has occurred since last year. The WDA and the DBRW provided £318,000 in direct grant support to enterprise agencies for core services in 1991–92.
  Training and Enterprise Councils
  The training and enterprise councils (TECs) in Wales are responsible for running a range of measures which assist small businesses. They are continuing to develop provision to help new and existing businesses to acquire and build skills which will enable them to compete and grow. During the last financial year Welsh TECs assisted over 8,000 owner-managers and helped more than 3,300 people to start their own new businesses.758
  Regional Selective Assistance, Regional Enterprise Grant
  Small businesses continue to take advantage of the help available under regional selective assistance. In the year to end of June 1992. 139 small firms (employing up to 200 people) accepted offers of RSA. The value of these offers in 1992 amount to £19·2 million. A further 151 small firms (employing less than 25 people) accepted oilers of Regional Enterprise Grant totalling £1·70 million.
  Enterprise Wales
  Launched in January 1988, the consultancy initiatives have proved extremely popular in Wales. More than 5,175 companies have applied. In 1991–92 alone 1,040 applicants were received, 6 per cent. above the economic weight. and 1,031 business reviews were commissioned, 19 per cent. above the economic weight.
  Small firms Meth award for research and technology (SMART)
  The number of small Welsh companies which received a SMART stage I award during the past 12 months was 16 and 11 companies received the SMART stage 2 awards. The maximum value of each stage 1 award has been increased from £37,500 to £45,000 and each stage 2 award from £50,000 to £60,000. On a per-capita basis, Wales has continued to do better than most other regions in this annual competition, receiving about 9 per cent. of the total awards nationwide.
  Support for products under research
  This scheme, which was introduced in 1991, is intended to support highly innovative projects by companies employing up to 500 persons. During the first year of its operation, offers of financial assistance were made to 10 Welsh companies. to a total value of £750,000.

  Special Educational Needs
  Mr. Rod Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will set up a tribunal to consider appeals relating to educational provision for children with special needs in Wales.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  I am pleased to announce that I am today issuing in Wales a consultation paper "Special Educational Needs—Access to the System". This sets out our proposals to introduce legislation to give new rights to parents of children with special educational needs, including a tribunal system, and to make improvements to the assessment and statementing procedures.

  Our proposals will extend parents' rights over choice of school, reduce the time taken by local education authorities in making assessments and statements, extend parents' rights to appeal and make those rights more coherent and establish an independent appeals tribunal to replace the present complex arrangements. We shall also be issuing further guidance for local education authorities on the criteria to be used for making assessments and issuing statements.

  I am arranging for a copy of the consultation paper to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Grant-maintained Schools
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many schools in Wales have opted out: how many have applied to opt out; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Five schools have voted in favour of applying for grant-maintained status and submitted proposals for my consideration. Of these, three were approved. I expect many more applications over the next few months.

  Open Government
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what actions he is pursuing to promote open government in his Department; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  My Department is taking part in the Duchy of Lancaster interdepartmental review which is looking at: reviewing statutory restrictions on disclosure; extending rights of access to personal records including those held manually; and publication and greater accessibility of technical and other inspection reports.

  European Single Market
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement concerning the impact of the European single market on the Welsh economy.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The impact of the single market programme on the Welsh economy will depend on how individual firms respond to the challenges and opportunities which the removal of trade barriers will create. Few firms, even those whose markets are predominantly local, will remain unaffected by some part of the single market programme. To help meet this challenge, the Government have provided the most comprehensive single market information service anywhere in the Community. In Wales, programmes such as Euroline, Interprise and the partnerships which are being developed with other regions of the Community, such as Baden Wurttemberg, also enhance the opportunities available to companies and both my Department and the Welsh Development Agency make every effort to encourage Welsh companies to take advantage of what is on offer.

  Channel Tunnel
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his latest assessment of the impact and advantages for the Welsh economy of the opening of the channel tunnel.

  Mr. David Hunt
  This is one of the most important projects being undertaken in Europe today. It will provide a new opportunity for access to continental Europe for freight as well as business and leisure travel, to the considerable benefit of the whole of Britain. I am certain that both existing and future businesses in Wales will share in the benefits the channel tunnel will bring.

  British Coal
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he proposes next to meet the chairman of British Coal.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The date for my next meeting with the chairman of British Coal has not yet been fixed.

  British Rail
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he next proposes to meet the chairman of British Rail to discuss investment and development in regional railways.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I see the chairman of British Rail regularly to discuss a wide range of rail issues. I hope to meet Sir Bob Reid again later this year.
  760
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many people were employed by British Rail in Wales in 1971 and 1991; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  This information is not held centrally.

  Whaling
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many representations he has received concerning the killing of whales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I have received two representations concerning the killing of whales. The hon. Gentleman will by now have seen a copy of the letter that my right hon. Friend the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food issued to all Members of the House on 7 July which sets out the Government's position on whaling. I have nothing further to add.

  Grant-maintained Schools
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the financial advantages of opting out of their local education authority for(a) high schools and (b) primary schools; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  All grant-maintained schools, irrespective of whether they are in the primary or secondary sector, are eligible for four forms of grant aid from my Department: transitional grant, annual maintenance grant. special purpose grants and capital grant.

  Transitional grants enable schools to prepare for their new responsibilities in the grant-maintained sector and are payable in advance of the effective date of operation. Annual maintenance grant is based on what a school would have received for its running costs under its former LEA's local management of schools scheme. In addition, the grant includes an amount calculated to be the school's proportion of the LEA's expenditure on services which were previously provided centrally, thereby giving the school complete freedom in deciding which services it wishes to purchase to meet its own priorities, independently of the local authority. Special purpose grants mainly parallel the support available to LEAs through my Department's grants for education support and training—GEST—programme, much of which is currently retained at LEA level, again providing the grant-maintained school with the flexibility to decide its own priorities. Capital grants are available in the form of allocations for named projects and formula-based allocations for the purchase of equipment and small scale projects. All grant-maintained schools are automatically entitled to the latter, thereby guaranteeing them a certain level of funding.

  The financial advantages of grant-maintained status are therefore, manifold. It is for governors and headteachers to decide together how to manage the funds, how to manage the curriculum, whom to employ, and what services and goods to buy. Grant-maintained schools therefore benefit from increased flexibility to spend their resources, free from LEA bureaucracy. A recent survey by the Grant Maintained Schools Centre revealed that:

  88 per cent. of schools reported increased pupil numbers;

  48 per cent. have reported increased classroom support staff;

  761

  82 per cent. have reported increased spending on books and equipment,

  72 per cent. of those who responded reported increased teacher numbers.

  GM heads reported greater flexibility, enhanced administrative support, and redirection of funds from LEA bureaucracy to classroom.

  There can be no doubt about the benefit of grant-maintained status to parents, pupils and schools alike. I expect many more applications for grant maintained status over the coming months from schools wishing to take advantage of these benefits.

  A494
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales which traffic census statistics his Department uses concerning the proposed A494 improvement from the River Dee to Ewloe.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The north-east Clwyd traffic study was used as the basis for these road proposals, a summary of which was sent to the hon. Gentleman on 22 February 1992.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will seek a new census of traffic concerning the A494 improvement from the River Dee to Ewloe which takes into account the holiday peak period traffic flows; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Peak period holiday traffic flows are already taken into account. It is not the intention at present to carry out additional traffic census as such, but information from existing automatic traffic counters will continue to be examined and assessed.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if the statistics on traffic flow used to consider the A494 improvement scheme were taken before the completion of the M53-A55 link; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The projected traffic flows used to formulate the proposals took into account the existence of the M53-A55 link.

  NHS Capital Costs
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his best estimate of the total capital costs to the NHS in Wales, by health district and in total, arising from(a) the removal of Crown immunity, (b) health and safety requirements for the incineration of infected waste and (c) recommendations to limit ionising radiation exposure to patients; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  District health authorities in Wales have estimated that the capital expenditure needed to meet the cost of work associated with the removal of Crown immunity and the introduction of new requirements for the incineration of infected waste is as follows:

  £ million

  Powys

  1·5

  Gwent

  4·4

  West Glamorgan

  4·5

  Clwyd

  2·1

  Mid Glamorgan

  4·0

  East Dyfed

  5·0

  762

  £ million

  Pembrokeshire NHS Trust

  0·7

  South Glamorgan

  47·0

  Gwynedd

  3·7

  Total

  73·0

  No figures are available centrally relating to the capital costs of measures to limit the exposure of patients to ionising radiation.

  Cardiovascular Disease
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will set a target date to cut the number of premature deaths from cardiovascular disease by 40 per cent. in Wales.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The Welsh Health Planning Forum has published an overall goal of a reduction in premature deaths from cardiovascular disease of a third by the year 2002 compared with 1988.

  This category of condition encompasses, among other conditions, coronary heart disease and stroke for which separate targets have been set.

  In Wales, from the baseline set in 1985, a reduction of 45 and 52 per cent. is sought for women and men respectively in the death rate from coronary heart disease, and 37 and 47 per cent. for women and men respectively in the death rate from stroke.

  I am pleased to report that Wales is well on course to meeting these targets.

  Radiotherapists
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the establishments in Wales which train radiotherapists, the number of training places on each and the number of students successfully completing their course in each of the past five years, and the percentage pass rate in each of the past five years, for each establishment.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Wales's only School of Therapeutic Radiography is located at Velindre hospital, Cardiff. It is currently accredited to offer 10 student places annually. Information on pass rates, etcetera, over the past five years is as follows:

  Number of Students

  Entered for final examinations

  Successfully completed course

  Pass rate percentage

  1988

  7

  7

  100

  1989

  10

  10

  —

  1990

  3

  3

  100

  1991

  6

  5

  83

  1992

  5

  5

  100

  1 No intake in 1986.

  Local Government Reorganisation
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what advice has been offered by the Audit Commission in regard to transitional arrangements during the reorganisation of local government in Wales;

  (2) what steps he has taken to obtain the advice of the Audit Commission on transitional arrangements in regard to local government organisations in Wales.
  763
  Mr. David Hunt
  Transitional arrangements are currently the subject of consultation with the local authority associations and discussion with the Audit Commission.

  Senior Nurses
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much money has been saved by each health authority in Wales through the elimination of senior nursing posts in each of the last five years; and how the money has been reallocated in each instance.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  This information is not held centrally.

  Staff in Post: Senior nurses/senior midwives as at 30 September1

  Chief Administrative nursing officer

  Director of nursing services 2

  Other senior nurses/ Senior midwives3

  Total

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  1989

  Pembrokeshire

  1

  1·0

  —

  —

  2

  2·0

  3

  3·0

  Clwyd

  —

  —

  6

  6·0

  16

  16·0

  22

  22·0

  East Dyfed

  1

  1·0

  5

  5·0

  7

  7·0

  13

  13·0

  Gwent

  —

  —

  7

  7·0

  20

  20·0

  27

  27·0

  Gwynedd

  —

  —

  3

  3·0

  8

  7·2

  11

  10·2

  Mid-Glamorgan

  —

  —

  7

  7·0

  25

  25·0

  32

  32·0

  Powys

  1

  1·0

  2

  2·0

  6

  6·0

  9

  9·0

  South Glamorgan

  —

  —

  4

  4·0

  32

  31·8

  36

  35·8

  West Glamorgan

  1

  1·0

  5

  5·0

  14

  14·0

  20

  20·0

  1990

  Pembrokeshire

  1

  1·0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  1

  1·0

  Clwyd

  —

  —

  8

  8·0

  16

  16·0

  24

  24·0

  East Dyfed

  1

  1·0

  6

  6·0

  5

  5·0

  12

  12·0

  Gwent

  —

  —

  8

  8·0

  12

  12·0

  20

  20·0

  Gwynedd

  1

  1·0

  2

  2·0

  7

  6·2

  10

  9·2

  Mid-Glamorgan

  —

  —

  5

  5·0

  17

  17·0

  22

  22·0

  Powys

  1

  1·0

  1

  1·0

  6

  6·0

  8

  8·0

  South Glamorgan

  —

  —

  5

  5·0

  20

  19·8

  25

  24·8

  West Glamorgan

  1

  1·0

  5

  5·0

  12

  12·0

  18

  18·0

  1991

  Pembrokeshire

  —

  —

  —.

  —

  1

  1·0

  —

  —

  Clwyd

  —

  —

  —

  —

  31

  31·0

  —

  —

  East Dyfed

  —

  —

  —

  —

  8

  8·0

  —

  —

  Gwent

  —

  —

  —

  —

  16

  16·0

  —

  —

  Gwynedd

  —

  —

  —

  —

  13

  12·2

  —

  —

  Mid-Glamorgan

  —

  —

  —

  —

  14

  14·0

  —

  —

  Powys

  —

  —

  —

  —

  5

  5·0

  —

  —

  South Glamorgan

  —

  —

  —

  —

  27

  26·8

  —

  —

  West Glamorgan

  —

  —

  —

  —

  17

  17·0

  —

  —

  1 Excludes Welsh Health Common Services Authority. Some senior nurses/senior midwives may have been reclassified as senior managers over the years shown affecting the comparability of figures for different years.

  2 Included Assistant Director of Nursing Services.

  3 A new senior nurse/senior midwife structure was introduced during 1991, and staff cannot readily be split into the categories used for previous years.

  NHS Business Managers
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many business managers are currently employed in the national health service by each health authority area.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  This information is not available centrally.

  Senior Nurses
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales by each health authority district area in Wales, how many senior nurse posts have been lost in each of the past, five years according to(a) director of nursing services—DNS—level, (b) assistant DNS, (c) senior nursing support posts and (d) senior nursing officers; and how many posts in each category have been lost through (i) redeployment and (ii) retirement.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Information on the number of posts is not available centrally. However some information on the number and whole-time equivalent number of senior nurses/senior midwives is given in the table. Due to the regrading of staff during 1988–89, comparable information is not available for previous years. Senior nurse support staff cannot be separately identified.

  Local Authorities (Management)
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what proposals he has in regard to the internal management of local authorities in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The next stage of consultation on internal management is for discussion at the forthcoming meeting of the Welsh Consultative Council on Local Government.

  Health Gain
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what progress has been made towards completing the protocols for health gain promised in his Department's document "Agenda for Action 2".

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave him on 14 July 1992.

  Ophthalmic Treatment, Bangor
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his target date for bringing the percentage of patients treated at the ophthalmic treatment centre at Ysbyty-Gwynedd, Bangor who reside in the centre's host distict down to 10 per cent.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  No such target date has been set. In 1992–93 centrally funded capacity has been allocated on the basis of an assessment of waiting list problems, capitation share and demand. Decisions on how the initiative will be taken forward in 1993–94 will be made in due course.

  Dentistry
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish, by health authority, those hospitals in Wales that provide 24-hour emergency dental treatment, indicating those in which facilities and staff are always available for carrying out extractions.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The information requested is not available centrally. The level of service provision is a matter for the local health authority to determine.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many salaried dentists are employed by each family health services authority in Wales; and what is the projected increase over the next 12 months.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  None at present. The Department has not made a projection of an increase over the next 12 months.

  Burials
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) if he will publish for each county in Wales, for each of the last 10 years, the number of persons buried in land that they had previously owned, or owned at the time of death;

  (2) how many people were buried in Wales in land that they had owned at the time of their death, in each of the last 10 years.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  This information is not held centrally.

  Schools Inspectorate
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he is yet in a position to announce the appointment of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector for Wales, the timetable for the establishment of his office and the arrangements for the inspection of schools by registered inspectors.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I have given detailed consideration to all the issues and, most importantly, those of particular 766
  relevance to Wales. This includes the need to establish a body of inspectors in Wales able to inspect the significant number of schools which teach entirely or partly through the medium of Welsh and whether all schools have Welsh included in the national curriculum, as well as having features in the curriculum reflecting Welsh tradition and culture.

  I am delighted to announce that, on my recommendation, Her Majesty the Queen by Order in Council has appointed Mr. Roy L. James as Her Majesty's chief inspector of schools in Wales. Mr. James's appointment will be initially for three years.

  I do not want to delay implementation of the important objectives of our charter for parents in Wales and I have concluded that the office of HMCI Wales should commence in September 1992. The arrangements for inspections of secondary schools will start in September 1993 and in primary and special schools the following September.

  I have decided that schools in Wales should be inspected by registered inspectors every five years. This will mean a much more regular inspection with a published report than is the practice at present. With the time that will be needed to effect the inspection, the issue of an action plan and the necessary follow-up action, I believe that the period between inspections on a five-year cycle is reasonable, bearing in mind also the financial implications for local authorities of the new arrangements. It will provide the parents of most children with a detailed report during their child's time at primary or secondary school. Nevertheless, the frequency of inspections will be kept under review.

TRANSPORT

  Smoke Hoods
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will encourage operators of British registered passenger transport aircraft to provide smoke hoods which meet the EUROCAE ED-65 specification on their aircraft for passengers in circumstances of aviation fire.

  Mr. Norris
  The Civil Aviation Authority has responsibility for civil aviation safety in the United Kingdom. It is for the authority to determine the requirements for passenger safety equipment. I shall bring the hon. Member's question to the attention of the authority and ask it to write to him direct to explain its position regarding the EUROCAE standard for passenger smoke hoods.

  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will now exercise his powers to require the Civil Aviation Authority to obtain the addition to the section 1.2 of chapter 1 of annex 18 of the principal agreement covering the carriage of dangerous goods, and the provisions of that agreement incorporated in the International Civil Aviation Organisation technical instructions for the safe carriage of dangerous goods by air to enable passengers to carry on board passenger transport aircraft breathing-gas-charged smoke hoods.

  Mr. Norris
  The Civil Aviation Authority has the responsibility for civil aviation safety in the United Kingdom. The regulations relating to the carriage of
  767
  dangerous goods are complex and subject to international agreement. I shall draw the hon. Member's question to the attention of the CAA and ask it to write to him to explain the various technical and international aspects which must be considered.

  Unadopted Roads
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will seek to amend relevant legislation so as to compel local highway authorities to adopt and maintain currently unadopted roads which provide sole access to adopted public roads.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  I have no plans to do so. Local highway authorities' discretion enables all relevant considerations to be taken into account in decisions on adoption of private streets. A highway authority may, by virtue of section 236 of the Highways Act 1980, contribute towards the costs of a private street works scheme it has resolved to carry out if it considers that the wider public benefit warrants it.

  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will seek to amend relevant legislation so as to compel local authorities to adopt and maintain currently unadopted roads before granting planning permission for the construction of new roads to which the unadopted roads in question will provide the only access.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  No. It is for the local planning authority, in considering whether to grant planning permission, to take account of whether access arrangements are acceptable. The question whether any unadopted road giving access to the development should become a publicly maintainable highway is for the highway authority to decide.

  Aircraft Safety
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will clarify the responsibilities for safety regulations for United Kingdom registered passenger transport aviation of(a) the Civil Aviation Authority and (b) the joint airworthiness authorities; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  The responsibilities of the Civil Aviation Authority for the safety regulation of aircraft are set out in section 60 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 and in the Air Navigation Order 1989—SI 1989/2004—as amended. The Joint Aviation Authorities—JAA—is a co-ordinating body which establishes common safety standards and arranges joint certification among its member states, which includes the United Kingdom. Its members are engaged in developing a common code of operating regulation. A number of JAA codes were made directly applicable in member states of the European Communities from I January 1992 by Council regulation (EEC) No. 3922/91.

  Footpaths
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what advice he gives to local authorities about the impermeability of footpaths; and what standards are laid down.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  The Department has not given any advice. Most of the various forms of footpath 768
  construction currently in use are impermeable to a large extent. There are no departmental or national standards covering this requirement.

  M25
  Sir Michael Grylls
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to issue blight notices and pay compensation to property owners affected by his proposals to expand the M25 through the construction of feeder roads, before the completion of the public inquiries.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Those whose property would need to be acquired compulsorily for our proposals to improve M25 between junctions 12 and 15 may be eligible to serve blight notices now. Those who consider their homes would be seriously affected by the construction works or the use of the road in its widened form can also ask the Secretary of State to consider using his discretionary powers of acquisition.

  London Buses
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he intends to make propsals for the privatisation of London Buses.

  Mr. Norris
  I understand that London Transport is exploring the possibility of privatising the subsidiaries of London Buses Ltd. in advance of deregulation. This would require the Government's consent. I await a formal proposal from London Transport.

  Lane Rental Contracts
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proportion of(a) major and (b) all road maintenance contracts let so far in 1992 are covered by lane rental agreements.

  Mr.Kenneth Carlisle
  Fifty-three motorway and trunk road major maintenance contracts valued at £500,000 or more have been awarded so far this year. Twenty-five of these were lane rental contracts. The value of lane rental contracts awarded was £60·3 million, 68 per cent. of the total. Lane rental is rarely used other than for major maintenance.

  Driving Tests
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) how much has been paid by the Driving Standards Agency since July 1991 to driving examiners in bonus payments linked to the length of waiting times for driving tests and to the number of tests cancelled by the agency;

  (2) how much was paid in compensation to members of the public who suffered loss when their driving tests were cancelled (a) between July 1990 and June 1991 and (b) between July 1991 and June 1992.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  I have asked the chief executive of the Driving Standards Agency to reply to the hon. Member direct.

  Rail Passengers (Compensation)
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many British Rail InterCity passengers have received compensation since July 1991 because their trains were delayed; and how much compensation in total has been paid to those passengers.
  769
  Mr. Freeman
  Between July 1991 and June 1992, InterCity paid a total of £425,000 in compensation to passengers for train delays and cancellations. InterCity does not keep a record of the number of individual passengers who receive compensation.

  Rail Passengers (Compensation)
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport since July 1991 how many BR season ticket holders(a) have had the validity of their season tickets extended for days when there is no effective service and (b) have been offered discounts on the renewal of their season tickets to compensate them for poor service in the previous year.

  Mr. Freeman
  BR does not hold information centrally on the number of season tickets extended for days when there was no effective service: decisions on extending season tickets are delegated to route managers. The first discounts on season ticket renewals on routes which fail to meet their charter standards by more than a small margin are not due to be given until January 1993.

  Itchen Navigation
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what action has he taken to ensure that the rights of public access and passage along the lichen navigation and its towpaths between Winchester and Shawford are protected during works associated with the construction of the M3, Bar End-Compton; on what dates relevant legal notices were published; and if he will place copies of the notices, and responses, in the Library;

  (2) what public rights of access and passage exist along the Itchen navigation and its towpaths on the section between Winchester and Shawford.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  I am advised that the lichen navigation is in law a navigable waterway, but that the extent of rights of access and passage along it and its towpaths is not clear.

  Much of the Itchen navigation has become silted up so that navigation is not practicable. Nevertheless, following public inquiries in 1985 and 1987–88, my Department has taken statutory powers po divert the Itchen navigation and has undertaken to carry out the diversion works, which will make it navigable, as part of any future restoration of the navigation as a whole. Pending such restoration, a 1·8 m culvert is being provided under the M3 and the diverted B3335 to maintain the flow of water along the existing watercourse in accordance with the decision letter of 20 February 1990. I am not aware of any requirement to publish legal notices in connection with this work.

  I am satisfied that the work currently being carried out together with the powers taken to divert the navigation and the undertakings that have been given adequately protect the public rights.

  Blackburn-Hellifield Rail Line
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with British Rail about the restoration of services on the Blackburn to Hellifield railway line; and if he will make a statement.
  770
  Mr. Freeman
  None. The level of service on the line is a matter for British Rail. I understand that at present a montly summer Sunday service operates over the line and on to Carlisle. There is also a summer Saturday service from Blackburn as far as Clitheroe.

  Women's Transport Needs
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will state the amount of Government expenditure granted to women's transport needs in(a) percentage and (b) real terms since 1979.

  Mr. Freeman
  Transport expenditure for which my Department is responsible for transport for all categories of person. It does not distinguish between the needs of men and women.

  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what support is open to local authorities from his Department in the form of grants and other aid to enable them to implement improvements to public transport for women's needs.

  Mr. Freeman
  It is for local authorities to decide their own policies on the level of public transport they should support, taking account of local needs and to set budgets accordingly. Funds made available by my Department are not targeted at the needs of specific groups. Women are more frequent users of buses than men and are likely to benefit particularly from improvements to bus services.

  BA Aircraft Accident, Sumburgh
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to publish the full report of his Department's air accident investigation unit on the accident involving a British Airways advanced turbo-prop aircraft at Sumburgh, Shetland, on 23 December 1991.

  Mr. Norris
  The air accident investigation branch report on its formal investigation into the accident involving British Airways advanced turbo-prop aircraft at Sumburgh on 23 December 1991 is expected to be published in November this year.

  Air Accidents
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list each air accident since 1 January 1986, in respect of which there has been a full investigation report by his Department; and if he will list the date of the accident and the date of the report's publication in each case.

  Mr. Norris
  The air accident investigation branch of the Department of Transport has supplied the following list of air accidents since 1 January 1986 where a full investigation has been or is being carried out, with details of the reports.
  771

  Aircraft Accident Reports (AAR)

  Date

  Aircraft

  Registration Number

  Location

  Report Number

  Publication Date

  1986

  31 January 1986

  Shorts 369

  EI-BEM

  East Midlands Airport

  AAR 6/87

  January 1988

  8 April 1986

  Twin Squirrel

  G-BKIH

  Swalecliffe, nr. Banbury

  AAR 7/87

  February 1988

  15 May 1986

  Bell 214ST

  G-BKFN

  Fraserburgh

  AAR 9/87

  March 1988

  12 June 1986

  DH6 Twin Otter

  G-BGPC

  Port Ellen, Islay

  AAR 7/86

  December 1987

  6 November 1986

  Boeing Vertol 234

  G-BWFC

  North Sea, Sumburgh

  AAR 2/88

  April 1988

  15 November 1986

  Boeing 747

  G-AWNB

  Heathrow Airport

  AAR 8/87

  February 1988

  1987

  18 January 1987

  Fokker F27

  G-BMAU

  Castle Donnington

  AAR 7/88

  January 1989

  26 April 1987

  Cessna 441

  G-MOXY

  Blackbushe

  AAR 10/88

  March 1989

  30 April 1987

  Cessna 172

  OO-JEL

  Solent Channel

  AAR 4/88

  August 1988

  6 May 1987

  Bell 222

  G-META

  Lippits Hill

  AAR 3/88

  August 1988

  20 May 1987

  AS332L

  G-BKZH

  nr. Unst

  AAR 9/88

  February 1989

  21 June 1987

  Dragon Rapide

  G-AGTM

  Duxford Airfield

  AAR 1/88

  March 1988

  15 August 1987

  Hughes 500

  G-GASB

  South Heighton

  AAR 6/88

  November 1988

  9 December 1987

  Sikorsky 76

  G-BHYB

  Fulmer Rig. North Sea

  AAR 5/88

  July 1988

  1988

  1 February 1988

  B747

  N 605 PE

  Gatwick

  AAR 4/89

  August 1989

  6 February 1988

  Tristar

  G-BAH

  nr. Lydd

  AAR 1/89

  February 1989

  T154B

  LZ-BTE

  12 April 1988

  BAC 1–11

  G-AYWN

  Airmiss, Gatwick

  AAR 2/89

  May 1989

  B737

  G-ITBZ

  13 July 1988

  S-61N

  G-BEID

  North Sea, nr. Sumburgh

  AAR 3/90

  September 1990

  11 September 1989

  B747

  G-AWNM

  London Heathrow

  AAR 5/89

  December 1989

  17 October 1988

  S61N

  G-BDII

  North of Handa Island

  AAR 3/89

  June 1989

  10 November 1988

  S61N

  G-BDES

  East of Wick

  AAR 1/90

  May 1990

  21 December 1988

  B747

  N739PA

  Lockerbie

  AAR 2/90

  September 1990

  1989

  8 January 1989

  B737

  G-OMBE

  Kegworth

  AAR 4/90

  October 1990

  14 April 1989

  Concorde

  G-BOAF

  Tasman Sea

  AAR 6/89

  December 1990

  18 December 1989

  Bell 206

  G-SHBB

  Biggin Hill

  AAR 5/90

  February 1991

  1990

  25 July 1990

  Sikorsky S-6IN

  G-BEWL

  Brent Spa

  AAR 2,91

  October 1991

  10 June 1990

  BAC 1–11

  G-BJRT

  over Woodley. Berks

  AAR 1/92

  February 1992

  11 December 1990

  Tristar L1011

  C-GAG1

  South of Manchester

  AAR 3/91

  December 1991

  23 December 1990

  ATP

  G-OATP

  Ronaldsway Airports. IoM

  AAR 1/91

  August 1991

  1991

  30 January 1991

  DH Dash 7

  G-BOAW

  Stansted Airport

  AAR 3/92

  July 1992

  11 August 1991

  BAe ATP

  G-BMYK

  10 nm North of Cowly

  Not yet published

  29 August 1991

  RAF Jaguar/Cessna 152

  G-BMHI

  Mid Air—Carno, Powys

  AAR 2/92

  June 1992

  23 December 1991

  BAe ATP

  G-BTPE

  Sumburgh

  Not yet published

  1992

  5 Februarv 1992

  BAe ATP

  G-LOGA

  Edinburgh Airport

  Not yet published

  9 March 1992

  Lockheed 1011 Tristar

  9Y-TGJ

  Frankfurt (Landed at LHR)

  Not yet published

  14 March 1992

  Aerospatiale SA332

  G-TIGH

  East of Cormorant Alpha

  Not yet published

  East Shetlands Basin

  21 March 1992

  Concorde

  G-BOAB

  Between LHR and JFK

  Not yet published

  31 March 1992

  BAe 146

  G-UKHP

  Overshoot Aberdeen Airport

  Not yet published

  Vehicle Excise Duty
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will report upon the results of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority in conjunction with the Metropolitan and City of London police forces' campaign against vehicle excise duty evasion in London in June.

  Mr. Norris
  As a result of the June 1992 London campaign against evasion of vehicle excise duty, 2,481 reports of VED offences have been received so far—2,140 from the Metropolitan police and 341 from the City of London police. These cases are being investigated and where evasion is clear, prosecution will follow.

  Taxis
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he will publish the report of the working party on the safety of users of taxis and minicabs in London.

  Mr. Norris
  The report has been published today and copies have been placed in the Library. Any interested party may obtain a copy of the report from the Department of Transport.

  Vehicle Inspectorate
  Mr. Wells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when the Vehicle Inspectorate executive agency annual report for 1991–92 will be published.
  773
  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  The annual report has been published today. Copies are being placed in the House Library.

  Register of Small Ships
  Mr. Barry Porter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what changes he proposes to make to the arrangements for maintaining the register of small ships.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Following a competitive market testing exercise, I have made the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency responsible for administering the register, previously operated by the Royal Yachting Association. The financial provision for the service now needs to be transferred from the Department's class VII vote 2 to the DVLA vote—class VII, vote 4. Parliamentary approval of this new expenditure will be sought in a supplementary estimate for the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency vote—class VII, vote 4. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £55,000 will be met by repayable advances from the contingencies fund.

  A2 (Noise)
  Mr. Jacques Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when his Department will provide the decibel counts on the A2 motor road as it passes the Painter's Ash school and other points in the borough of Gravesham promised following the visit of the Minister of Public Transport in December 1991.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 10 July 1992]: An assessment of the current noise environment in the vicinity of the A2 will be made as part of the noise studies for the channel tunnel rail link in connection with the environmental impact assessment for the link. An assessment may also be required in order to calculate additional noise caused by the rail link for the purposes of implementing the proposed regulations on noise insulation grant based on the Mitchell committee's recommendations. I shall write to my hon. Friend as soon as noise information becomes available.

  Public Transport (Access)
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what plans he has to improve safety and access to public transport for women, children and the disabled;

  (2) what is his Department's role in encouraging improvements in public transport for women.

  Mr. Freeman
  My Department has a long-standing commitment to improve safety and access to public transport for people with mobility problems, including women, children and people with disabilities. We work closely with vehicle designers and manufacturers, public transport operators, local authorities and people with mobility problems as consumers, to promote and encourage greater recognition of their needs.

  Women Passengers (Assaults)
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many assaults on women travelling on public transport were reported in each year since 1979(a) in London and (b) in Britain as a whole.
  774
  Mr. Freeman
  In 1990, there were 380 reported assaults on women in London on the rail network and 655 reported for Great Britain as a whole. The corresponding figures for 1991 are 556 and 993 respectively. These figures comprise all violent and sexual offences, including common assault and battery, committed against women and include a small number of assaults on female police and staff. Corresponding figures for earlier years and other modes of public transport are not available.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what visits he has made to his EC counterparts in each member state to discuss deregulation matters since 18 April; what agreements came out of such meetings; and what plans he has for making further progress in deregulation matters during the United Kingdom's presidency of the EC.

  Mr. MacGregor
  Since my appointment as Secretary of State for Transport I have met several of my EC counterparts for discussions on a wide range of issues, and I have invited them all to the informal Transport Council I am holding on 16 and 17 July.

  On 23 June, I attended a meeting of the Transport Council in Luxembourg which agreed the third EC aviation liberalisation package, lifting a wide range of restrictions governing air services within the Community from 1 January 1993. Agreements were also reached on the liberalisation of shipping cabotage and road passenger cabotage.

  It will be a priority of the United Kingdom presidency of the EC to ensure that further progress is made towards the creation of a single transport market within the Community, based on the principles of competition and liberalisation. In particular, I shall be seeking an agreement on definitive arrangements for road haulage cabotage, and further progress on slot allocation at airports and state aids.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Sunday Trading
  Mr. Ray Powell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on his policy on Sunday trading following(a) the outcome of the Kirklees case and (b) the delivery of the Advocate-General's opinion in the case before the European Court of Justice.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  It remains our aim to bring forward proposals for reform of the law on Sunday trading in England and Wales once the question of compatibility with the treaty of Rome has been clarified; and we therefore continue to await judgment in relevant cases by the European Court of Justice, which is expected this autumn. This policy is affected neither by the Kirklees judgment, because that determined only the law on interim injunctions, nor by the Advocate General's delivery on 8 July of his opinion to the ECJ, because it formed only part of the Court's deliberations.

  Asylum
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) pursuant to his answer of 4 June Official Report, column 621, and the stated intention of Her Majesty's Government to ratify the convention determining the states responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the member states of the European Community signed in Dublin on 15 June 1990, what steps have been taken to ensure that there are effective judicial remedies with suspensive effect in all member states of the European Community for asylum seekers who may be returned from one member state to another member state under this convention; and if he will make a statement on the results of those steps;

  (2) pursuant to his answer of 4 June, Official Report, column 621, what steps Her Majesty's Government have taken to satisfy itself that there is access to legal advice at all stages of the determination procedure for asylum seekers in all EC member states and that such legal advice is publicly funded wherever the asylum seeker is indigent.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  None. Those are matters which are the responsibility of individual member states according to their national laws and procedures, but some of these matters will no doubt be considered in the future work programme of Immigration Ministers of the Twelve.

  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 4 June,Official Report, column 621, if he will specify in respect of which matters in the work programme adopted by the EC ministers concerned with immigration in December 1991 progress has been made under the Portuguese presidency; and what specific progress has been made.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Progress was made under the Portuguese presidency on a number of matters identified in the work progamme adopted by EC Ministers concerned with immigration in December 1991, including policy on family reunification; agreed arrangements for transit through member states of persons removed or deported; work on the common interpretation of the concepts used in the Dublin convention, and on extension of the system of the convention to third countries by means of a parallel convention; and the definition, for the purposes of considering asylum applications, of "first host country". Further work in all of these areas remains to be carried forward under the United Kingdom presidency.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Department and his policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  The Home Office continues to place a high priority on helping small firms to obtain business from the various divisions of the Department by improving access and the information necessary to ensure they have opportunities to submit competitive bids.

  We are currently updating our booklet "Selling to the Home Office" which summarises our purchasing needs and lists contact points for potential suppliers. This booklet
  776
  receives wide circulation through our attendance at "Meet the Buyer" functions, requests from manufacturers' associations and local councils', development initiatives for businesses in their areas.

  Home Office performance indicators do not differentiate between the size of firms to which contracts are awarded and we cannot, therefore, provide statistical information about the volume of business we place with small firms.

  Prisoners (Personal Property)
  Ms. Hoey
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures are taken to secure the personal belongings of prisoners inside prison.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Personal belongings authorised to be retained in a prisoner's own possession remain that prisoner's responsibility. Other property may be taken into store at a prison and will be held under suitably secure conditions. Under arrangements introduced in 1990, prisoner's property is stored and transported, where possible, in sealed bags to prevent accidental loss or theft.

  EFTA Nationals
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what transitional provisions will be made in respect of nationals of European free trade area countries who are present in the United Kingdom and wish to remain here pending the coming into force on 1 January 1993 of the agreement on the European economic area signed on 2 May.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  The agreement has yet to be ratified and it is not yet certain that it will come into effect on 1 January 1993. A decision on any necessary transitional arrangements will be taken nearer the time.

  Data Protection
  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what representations he has received from charities about the effect of the EC data protection directive on their fund-raising activities;

  (2) what is his assessment of the effects of the EC data protection directive, if implemented; and if he will make a statement;

  (3) what representations he has received from direct mail organisations about the effect of the EC data protection directive on their business;

  (4) what representations he has received concerning the EC data protection directive; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The Government have received a substantial number of representations about the likely effects of the draft data protection directive. SYN 287. Many have come from charities and direct mail organisations. The Government consider that the draft, if implemented in its present form, would place considerable burdens on many data users, and would curtail some legitimate and beneficial areas of activity altogether. The Government are seeking to modify those provisions in the draft directive which go beyond the European convention on data protection, which is the basis of United Kingdom law, and which the Government believe strikes the right balance between the interests of data users and data
  777
  subects. The Government await the Commission's redraft of the directive, which is being drawn up in the light of the views of the official working group in Brussels, the European Parliament, the data protection registrars or commissioners of the Community countries and data users groups.

  Prisoners (Hospitalisation)
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what procedure is followed by his Department when a prison inmate requires urgent hospital or medical treatment with a trust hospital and the inmate had no permanent abode prior to being sent to prison; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  When a prisoner needs to be taken for treatment to an outside NHS hospital, arrangements are made by the prison doctor. The costs of such treatment, whether provided by an NHS trust hospital or by a hospital which continues to be directly managed, fall ordinarily to the prisoner's district health authority of origin. Where this cannot be determined, they fall to the district in which the offence or alleged offence was committed.

  Tyre Treads
  Mr. Mills
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the availability to police forces of tyre tread depth gauges of a suitable standard to be accepted as evidence by the courts in cases of prosecution for illegal tyres.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The provision of equipment for use by police forces is a matter for chief constables. The Association of Chief Police Officers sent information on suitable gauges to each chief constable in September 1991.

  Stolen Cars
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the number of stolen cars in(a) the Northumberland police area and (b) the Durham area in 1991 that were (i) recovered undamaged, (ii) recovered damaged and (iii) not recovered.

  Mr. Jack
  The available information held centrally shows that, of 30,356 recorded offences of theft of a vehicle in the Northumbria police force area in 1991, 19,275 vehicles were recovered. The corresponding figures for the Durham police force area were 8,640 and 4,383 respectively. Information is not collected centrally on whether or not the recovered vehicles were damaged.

  Duty Psychiatrist Schemes
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement on the role of duty psychiatric rota schemes for defendents with mental health problems; and when the relevant legislation is due to come into force;

  (2) how many duty psychiatric rota scheme applications have been received by his Department to date; how many have been approved; how much of his Department's allocation is committed to diversion schemes in the current financial year; and how many courts will have the benefit of new schemes by 1 October;
  778
  (3) what sum he has allocated for expenditure on duty psychiatric rota schemes in magistrates courts in England and Wales after April;

  (4) what efforts his Department has made to publicise the availability of moneys from duty psychiatric rota schemes to courts and others who may wish to apply for grants to finance such schemes.

  Mr. Jack
  Duty psychiatrist schemes are local initiatives which entail a psychiatrist attending a magistrates court, on call or on a regular sessional basis depending on demand, to examine defendants thought to have some mental disorder and to advise the court on a suitable outcome. Typically, this may involve discontinuing proceedings or diversion to the health or social services. In addition, such schemes help to reduce the need for lengthy remands in custody to await psychiatric assessment. Implementation of duty psychiatrist schemes is not dependent on new legislation.

  A recent survey of magistrates courts and the probation service identified 19 schemes in operation. To facilitate the development of further schemes throughout England and Wales, funding of £4 million over a three-year period will be available. Of this, £500,000 has been allocated for expenditure in the current financial year.

  We are currently discussing the arrangements for administering these payments with the Department of Health. As soon as these have been decided, we will publicly invite properly costed bids for a share of this funding.

  This initiative is one of several in which the Home Office and the Department of Health are involved to promote the diversion of mentally disordered offenders from the criminal justice system.

  Neighbourhood Watch
  Mr. Lawrence
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what reductions in levels of recorded crime have been achieved by the introduction of neighbourhood watch schemes.

  Mr. Jack
  There are many factors that can have a bearing on changes in the level of recorded crime. However, in one carefully researched area in Kirkholt, Greater Manchester, it was demonstrated that neighbour hood watch was a major contributory factor in reducing the number of burglaries by 75 per cent. Similarly, in Wythenshawe, Manchester, following the introduction of neighbourhood watch on a large council estate the number of burglaries reduced by 25 per cent. and this fall has since been maintained. Studies elsewhere have shown that neighbourhood watch schemes have contributed to a reduction in crime and fear of crime. Data from the British crime survey have also shown that members of neighbourhood watch schemes are more likely than others to take crime prevention measures.

  Mr. Andrew Ohene
  Mr. Bernie Grant
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will list the prisons, with dates, which Mr. Andrew Ohene had been in during the course of his sentence; and if he will make a statement on the reasons for the transfers;

  (2) what were the circumstances surrounding the death of Andrew Ohene, prison number RA0954, at Swaleside prison, Kent on 13 June;
  779
  (3) for what reason Mr. Andrew Ohene was in isolation in Swaleside prison immediately before his death;

  (4) how many times Mr. Andrew Ohene complained about his conditions and treatment; and if he will give dates and brief details about the complaints and what was done about them;

  (5) what requests or complaints Mr. Andrew Ohene made during the 48 hours prior to his death in Swaleside prison, and to whom; and if he was under unimpeded observation during this time.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The circumstances of this very sad death will be fully and openly investigated at the coroner's inquest. It would not be right for me to comment on matters which may be relevant to the cause of death until the jury has reached its verdict.

  Racial Discrimination, Swaleside
  Mr. Bernie Grant
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints of racial discrimination there have been at Swaleside; and what the conclusions of the resulting inquiries were.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Since records began in 1991, there has been one complaint from a prisoner alleging racial discrimination at Swaleside prison. This complaint was investigated but not substantiated.

  Explosives
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will refer to the explosives inspectorate of the Health and Safety Executive the question of the storing, security and registration of supplies of ammonium nitrate and associated substances suitable for the making of explosives.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I understand that ammonium nitrate is classified, in line with United Nations recommendations, as an oxidising substance rather than as an explosive. It is in widespread use in agriculture, and the Health and Safety Executive has published guidance on its safe storage. I do not believe that further controls would be workable. Accordingly, I have no plans to refer the matter to the explosives inspectorate.

  Prisoners
  Mr. Bernie Grant
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps are taken to ensure that prisoners who make complaints to their Members of Parliament are not intimidated by prison staff or prison authorities.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  No staff should intimidate prisoners for this or any other reason. Any prisoners who consider they are being intimidated can use the prison service requests and complaints system to approach the governor, area manager, chairman of the board of visitors, or a range of individuals and bodies outside the prison service.

  Prisoners, Swaleside
  Mr. Bernie Grant
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many deaths there have been in custody at Swaleside prison during the last five years; and what was the ethnicity of the prisoners.
  780
  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Swaleside prison opened in July 1988. Since then two prisoners have died at Swaleside prison. Both were black. One was of Afro-Caribbean origin and one was of African origin.

  Public Interest Immunity Certificates
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on public interest immunity certificates and state(a) who issues them, (b) who authorises them, (c) their frequency of use, (d) the number of trials in which they have been used and (e) what authority drew up the rules relating to them; and what these rules are.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the former Home Secretary, my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Waddington, to a question from the hon. Member for Don Valley (Mr. Redmond) on 1 November 1990, at column 746.

  Prison Escapes
  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the numbers of those prisoners who escaped from detention and who have not been recaptured in each of the last 10 years.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The table gives the available information, detailing the numbers of prisoners who have escaped from penal establishments, or while being escorted outside penal establishments, and the numbers of escaped prisoners who have been recaptured or who have surrendered. The information is available from 20 June 1988, when a new centralised system for recording incident details was introduced.

  Escapers from penal establishments

  Escapers from escort

  Recaptured/surrendered prisoners

  20 June 1988 to 31 December 1988

  110

  55

  43

  1 January 1989 to 31 December 1989

  179

  112

  115

  1 January 1990 to 31 December 1990

  197

  119

  142

  1 January 1991 to 31 December 1991

  311

  145

  251

  1 January 1992 to 11 July 1992

  140

  63

  109

  Primates
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will withdraw or amend licences to supply primates for United Kingdom laboratories to prevent the supply of wild-caught primates and those captive-bred in their country of origin.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  While the purpose-breeding of primates in this country for use in research meets some of the demand for the supply of such animals, the numbers and species bred does not meet all the demand. Where the use of primates in research is justified under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, there may be no alternative to the use of wild-caught primates or those
  781
  captive-bred abroad. Inspectors do, however, encourage the use of primates purpose-bred in this country where such animals are available.

  We have no plans to withdraw or amend the certificates of designation of breeding and supplying establishments issued under section 7 of the 1986 Act to prevent the supply of wild-caught primates or those captive-bred abroad.

  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will initiate a review of the care and use of primates in research in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The use of primates in research is strictly controlled and special justification is required under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 before the use of primates in research is allowed. The special considerations applying to the housing and care of laboratory primates are recognised in the Home Office code of practice.

  The Home Office is carrying out a survey of large non-human primates holding facilities this year. One of the main aims of this special survey will be to examine the progress made in improving holding facilities since an earlier review carried out in 1988.

  I understand that the Animal Procedures Committee intends undertaking a review of laboratory primates later this year as part of its continuing interest in this area. The Government look forward to receiving the conclusions of this review in due course.

  Passport Applications
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make it his policy for passport application forms to be made available at sub-post offices.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  This has been passed to the chief executive of the Passport Agency who will reply shortly. A copy of his reply will be placed in the Library.

  Firearms
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to implement the European Community directive on the control of the acquisition and possession of weapons; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I have today laid before Parliament draft regulations under the European Communities Act 1972. These regulations will, if approved, transpose the directive into law in Great Britain. Domestic controls on firearms will remain substantially unchanged. However the private possession of firearms disguised as other objects will be lawful only for museums, collectors and others duly authorised. We intend to make arrangements for ex-gratia payments to people who as a result of these regulations surrender such firearms before 1 January 1993 which were lawfully held by them on or before 16 July 1992. Further details of these arangements will be announced in the autumn.

  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will lay before Parliament the third annual report of the Firearms Consultative Committee.
  782
  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I have placed a copy of the annual report of the Firearms Consultative Committee in the Library of both Houses today.

  Police Responsibilities and Rewards
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will make a statement about financial provision for the inquiry on police responsibilities and rewards.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  On 20 May 1992 I announced my intention to set up an inquiry to look at police responsibilities and rewards, reporting to me by the end of May 1993. Parliamentary approval for this new service will be sought in a winter supplementary estimate for the Home Office administration, immigration and police support services, England and Wales vote—class IX, vote 3. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £334,000 will he met by repayable advances from the contingencies fund.

  Young Offenders
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what arrangements are proposed for the committal of young persons sentenced to periods of detention in young offender institutions following the implementation of the Criminal Justice Act 1991.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The Criminal Justice Act 1991, which comes into effect on 1 October, changes sentencing arrangements for those under 18 years of age and replaces the juvenile court by a new youth court to deal with all young persons up to the age of 17.

  These changes will be reflected in the way in which the prison service manages the sentenced young offender population. Two new age bands will be introduced of 15 to 17 years for juveniles, as opposed to 14 to 16 years at present, and 18 to 20 years for young adults.

  The proposed arrangements for the committal of male young offenders sentenced to periods of detention in a young offender institution will be as follows. Juveniles will in future be taken direct from the court of sentence to one of six designated juvenile institutions at Deerbolt, north Yorkshire, Feltham in London, Guys Marsh, Dorset, Onley, Warwickshire, Werrington, Staffordshire, and Whetherby, west Yorkshire. A further young offender institution, Thorn Cross near Warrington in Cheshire, will also hold juveniles who are considered suitable to be housed in open conditions.

  Further consultation will now take place with other criminal justice agencies in respect of the catchment areas each establishment will serve. All young adults will be committed to an allocation unit in the nearest remand centre or local prison serving the court. Those serving short sentences, who are currently subject to separate direct committal arrangements, will be allocated to a young offender institution at the earliest opportunity. Closeness to home will be an important consideration in the allocation decision.

  It is not proposed to make any changes to the committal arrangements for young women who will be affected by the new provisions. They will continue to be held in the most appropriate female establishment closest to their homes.

  Unconvicted Prisoners
  Sir John Wheeler (Westminster North)
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what progress has been made in developing the separate statement of principle for unconvicted prisoners, referred to in paragraph 7.5 of the White Paper "Custody, Care and Justice."

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The prison service has adopted a statement in the following terms:"Unconvicted prisoners are presumed to be innocent. Subject to the duty to hold them and deliver them to court securely and to the need to maintain order in establishments, they will be treated acordingly and, in particular, will be allowed all reasonable facilities to—

  seek release on bail

  preserve their accommodation and employment

  prepare for trial

  maintain contact with relatives and friends

  pursue legitimate business and social interests

  obtain help with personal problems

  They will receive health care appropriate to their needs. They will have opportunities for education, religious observance, exercise and recreation and, where possible, for training and work."

  The statement will be included in the material issued for the information of new unconvicted prisoners and will feature in the training material of new prison officers.

  The statement of the task of the prison service set out in the "Prison Service Management Manual" and guidance in that manual for preparation of governors' contracts with their area managers have been expanded to reflect the separate status of unconvicted prisoners and the revised guidance will he issued shortly.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Auditing
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many times in 1989, 1990 and 1991 company auditors filed a statement in respect of sections 390(2)a and (2)b of the Companies Act 1985.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The number of notices of auditors' resignations received by the registrars of companies for England and Wales and for Scotland was as follows:

  Year

  Number of notices

  1989

  9,452

  1990

  12,494

  1991

  15,787

  Until 31 March 1990 notices were sent in accordance with section 390(3) of the Companies Act 1985, as originally enacted. Subsequently notices were sent in accordance with section 392(3) of the Companies Act 1985, as substituted by the Companies Act 1989.

  Air Pollution
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to provide specialist assistance to small businesses suffering economic hardship arising from 784
  the new requirements to comply with the part I air pollution process controls under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  Mr. Leigh
  In framing air pollution controls under part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, local authorities are, however, required to apply the principles of best available techniques not entailing excessive costs which requires companies to use the best available techniques provided these do not entail excessive costs. Individual authorisations are a matter for the companies and local authorities concerned. My Department has been involved in discussions over the guidelines which inform local authorities.

  My Department operates a number of schemes of assistance and provides information and advice to help large and small firms to develop and adopt the technologies and practices which will enable them to remain competitive in the face of rising environmental standards. In particular, the Department's environmental inquiry point offers free advice on a range of environmental issues; and it is open to small firms to use the consultancy initiatives to obtain assisted consultancy help on specific environmental problems. I have also recently announced that my Department will be piloting "one-stop shops" to provide small firms with initial guidance on all matters relevant to their competitive position, including environmental matters.

  Share Option Schemes
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he proposes to review the extent and nature of executive share option schemes; and what discussions he has had with the Association of British Insurers about its guidelines for the exercise of executive share options.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  I am aware of the association's guidelines and would support it in urging companies to link share options to sustained underlying growth of the company. This does not require any change to the Companies Act provisions affecting those participating in share option schemes.

  Consulting Grants
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what consulting grants are available through the enterprise initiative; and if he will publish a table showing the number of grants taken up, and their cost in each standard region during the last three financial years.

  Mr. Leigh
  Under the enterprise initiative consultancy help scheme, the DTI pays up to two thirds of the cost of consultancy projects, for small and medium-sized enterprises, in the following areas: business planning, design, financial and management information systems, manufacturing and services systems, marketing and quality. Details of the numbers of assisted projects in each region during the last three financial years, and the associated financial contribution from DTI, are as follows:
  785

  Enterprise initiative consultancy scheme: Expenditure by region

  Financial year 1989–90

  Financial year 1990–91

  Financial year 1991–92

  Region

  Completed projects

  DTI contribution (£ thousands)

  Completed projects

  DTI contribution (£ thousands)

  Completed projects

  DTI contribution (£ thousands)

  North East

  540

  1,709

  583

  2,287

  765

  3,119

  North West

  1,964

  6,192

  2,032

  7,002

  2,165

  6,905

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  1,157

  3,987

  1,172

  4,723

  1,482

  5,969

  West Midlands

  1,332

  4,343

  1,236

  4,963

  1,680

  6,912

  East Midlands

  726

  2,136

  781

  2,654

  1,017

  3,694

  South West

  894

  2,491

  1,028

  2,981

  1,182

  3,795

  East

  725

  1,922

  828

  2,316

  1,032

  3,227

  South East

  2,355

  6,905

  2,834

  7,751

  3,302

  11,157

  Scotland

  1,054

  3,631

  806

  3,137

  1,007

  4,248

  Wales

  644

  2,278

  633

  2,418

  755

  3,108

  Total

  11,391

  35,594

  11,933

  40,232

  14,387

  52,134

  Commonwealth Development Corporation
  Mr. Wells
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the cost of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission's report on the Commonwealth Development Corporation.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The cost to the Monopolies and Mergers commission of carrying out the inquiry into the Commonwealth Development Corporation is estimated at £570,000.

  Breathing Equipment
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps his Department will be taking to encourage British manufacturers to produce in quantity breathing-gas-based passenger protective breathing equipment meeting the EUROCAE ED-65 specification published on 1 April 1991, for placement by operators of British-registered passenger transport aircraft.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  None. This is a matter for the commercial judgment of the companies concerned.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Department and his policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. Leigh
  The Government continue to help small businesses, through improvements to the business climate, through deregulation and through specific programmes of support and assistance.

  Measures operated by my Department to assist small businesses include:
  The enterprise initiative consultancy help scheme. In the year ended March 1992, 23,342 applications were received and 17,996 were approved.
  The small firms merit award for research and technology (SMART) scheme. Last year 180 grants, the maximum number on offer, were made.
  Support for products under research (SPUR) which helps small firms develop new products and processes. In the first 12 months of the scheme, to February 1992. 100 grants were offered worth over £9 million.

  For the future, I intend to establish a network of first stop shops to act as a central signposting and referral
  786
  service for small firms to all the business support measures available in an area from all sources. As a first step, 10 to 15 pilot projects will be established as quickly as possible.

  The loan guarantee scheme enhances smaller firms access to finance. In the 12 months to 30 May 1992, 2,916 loans were guaranteed to a value of £69 million.

  A guide to sources of venture capital under £250,000 was published. This comprises a booklet which aims to take some of the mystery out of venture capital and a directory which lists more than 200 organisations throughout the country which offer smaller amounts of venture capital.

  Informal investment demonstration projects have been established by five training and enterprise councils in partnership with other local organisations. They help bring together potential investors and small businesses seeking investment. The projects, which were established with pump-priming money from the Employment Department, were established in January 1992 and will run for two years.

  New measures were announced at the time of the 1992 Budget to help small firms. These include new Government contracting terms requiring those companies awarded Government contracts to pay their subcontractors promptly; consideration of changes to company reporting requirements to oblige large companies to state their payment terms and performance in annual reports and accounts; improvements to court procedures for debt recovery and financial assistance for trade associations to develop new prompt payment initiatives.

  The Department monitors all its programmes and also commissions external evaluations which are published. In May 1992 the Employment Department published "Small Firms in Britain" which was sent to all Members of Parliament. This report surveys developments in the sector, including key statistical indicators and outlines overall Government policy towards small firms.

  RETEX Grants
  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the representations he has received concerning the allocation of RETEX grants to parts of areas designated for objective 1, 2 or 5(b) of the structural funds in Lancashire.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Representations have been received from a number of local interests.

  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps he will take to consult interested
  787
  parties on the allocation of RETEX grants within areas designed for objective 1, 2 or 5(b) of the structural funds in Lancashire.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  The actual allocation of RETEX grants, as with other Community structural funds initiatives and programmes, will be a matter for special committees established for the purpose, under the terms of operational programmes. The United Kingdom and other member states have until December 4 to present these to the Commission.

  The Government are currently considering what arrangements are appropriate for the drawing up and implementation of the programmes. The views of local authorities, trade associations and other interested parties have been and will continue to be taken into account.

  Coal Industry
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list(a) the collieries operative in Wales and (b) the number of miners employed in (i) Wales and (ii) Great Britain, in (1) 1971, (2) 1981 and (3) 1991.

  Mr. Eggar
  There are currently four British Coal collieries operating in Wales—Betws, Taff Merthyr and Tower in south Wales and Point of Ayr in north Wales. The total number of men on colliery books employed by British Coal in Wales and Britain in 1971–72, 1981–82 were as follows:

  South Wales

  North Wales

  Britain

  1971–72

  36,100

  2,500

  274,000

  1981–82

  24,300

  1,200

  212,800

  1991–92

  890

  455

  43,800

  In addition, British Coal currently licences about 140 deep mines, about 100 of which are in south Wales. The licensed sector employs around 1,500 men, of whom about 800 are employed in south Wales. Figures for 1971–72 and 1981–82 are not readily available.

  Regional Assistance
  Mr. William Powell
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list each recipient company and the level of grant provided through regional selective assistance since 1984–85 in the Corby area.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Details of offers of regional selective assistance are normally made public only after the company has made a claim and has been paid. Since 1984–85 there are 58 companies in the Corby travel-to-work area who have benefited from regional selective assistance. The firms and the offers made and accepted for £5,000 and above are as follows:

  Name of company

  Offer value

  (£)

  A. G. Thompson (UK) Ltd.

  5,000

  Advanced Textile Printers Ltd.

  125,000

  Albion Group Ltd.

  25,000

  Alfred Engelmann Ltd.

  230,000

  Aluminium Shapes Ltd.

  140,000

  Applied Printed Systems Ltd.

  6,500

  Aqua-Gas Manuf Ltd.

  75,000

  Austin Productions Ltd.

  350,000

  Bambo Ltd.

  25,000

  Blandburgh Nemo Ltd.

  150,000

  788

  Name of company

  Offer value

  (£)

  Blaze Advertising & Marketing Ltd.

  10,000

  BPCC Corby Ltd.

  100,000

  Ceramic Developments (Midlands) Ltd.

  18,000

  Certech International Ltd.

  160,000

  Cheminex Laboratories Ltd.

  25,000

  Corby Bottlers plc.

  65,000

  Corby Polymex Ltd.

  180,000

  County Powder Coaters Ltd.

  18,000

  Curver Consumer Products Ltd.

  1,500,000

  Drilltec (UK) Ltd.

  65,000

  DU Bois plc.

  122,000

  Dulmison (UK) Ltd.

  180

  Field, Sons & Co. Ltd.

  250

  Fixit (Adhesive) Ltd.

  120,000

  Heditos Ltd.

  20,000

  Hedemora Eng Ltd.

  13,000

  Honicel UK Ltd.

  136,495

  Impress Printers

  25,000

  Interoll Ltd.

  280,000

  Ion Deposition Ltd.

  50,000

  J. Dyson & Co. Ltd.

  15,000

  Jarratt Brushes Ltd.

  20,000

  Johnsen & Jorgensen (Plastics) Ltd.

  180,000

  Liftcran & Co. Ltd.

  115,000

  Lincolt Ltd.

  25,000

  Merley Paper Converters Ltd.

  15,000

  Mezzanine Floor Co. Ltd.

  25,000

  Midland Battery Distribution

  38,000

  N.C.T. & S. Ltd.

  100,000

  Newteam Ltd.

  184,610

  Oxford University Press

  70,000

  Peavey Electronics (UK) Ltd.

  90,000

  Perfil Ltd.

  210,000

  Powdertech (Corby) Ltd.

  15,000

  Premier Python Products Ltd.

  25,000

  Roscope Ltd.

  25,000

  Sias Foods (UK) Ltd.

  450,000

  Solway Foods Ltd.

  50,000

  Supermix Systems Ltd.

  34,000

  Suretred (UK) Ltd.

  100,000

  Taurostone Ltd.

  20,000

  Tradesource Ltd.

  90,000

  Unit Two Glass Ltd.

  95,000

  Weldon Stone Enterprises Ltd.

  12,000

  White Welding & MFG Inc. (Powerbrace)

  160,000

  Willett Systems Ltd.

  25,000

  Woodman Developments Ltd.

  12,000

  Zeller Plastik UK Ltd.

  150,000

  Radio
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the Government's response to the recommendations contained in the report of the radio spectrum review committee stage 2: 3,400 MHz to 30 GHz, published in September; and when the response will be published.

  Mr. Leigh
  Following publication of the report, I and my colleagues have had the opportunity to consider the recommendations in detail. We are in full agreement with their intended aim to strengthen the management of the radio spectrum in the interests of more efficient use of this valuable resource.

  When the report was published on 30 September 1991, my predecessor announced the Government's response to two of the recommendations and stated that the Government intended to publish a consultative document on the future management of the radio spectrum in the United Kingdom. Some of the issues raised in the report

  789
  would benefit from wider consultation and therefore it is my intention that they be included in the consultative document.

  The Government's written response to the recommendations is now available from the Library, Radiocommunications Agency, Room 605, Waterloo Bridge house, London SE1 8UA. Telephone 071 215 2352/2140.

  I have placed copies of the response in the Library of the House.

  International Investment
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the United Kingdom's performance in attracting internationally mobile investment projects in 1991–92.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  My Department's Invest in Britain Bureau—IBB—announced in its annual report published today that 1991–92 was another good year for inward investment and jobs in the United Kingdom.

  Between 1 April 1991 and 31 March 1992, 332 direct investment projects by foreign-owned companies into the United Kingdom were recorded by the IBB. On the basis of information supplied by the companies at the time of the announcement, it is estimated that these projects will create or safeguard over 50,000 jobs.

  These results demonstrate, yet again, the attractiveness of this country to foreign investors. It is very pleasing that our lead position within the European Community as a partner to foreign investors has remained despite the world recession.

  The results are also evidence of the successful partnership my Department has with many public and private sector organisations involved in the promotion of inward investment both at home and abroad.

  I am arranging for a copy of the report to be placed in the House of Commons Library.

  EC Company Law
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what progress is being made on the implementation of the EC 11 th company law directive and the bank branches directive.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The Department of Trade and Industry has today issued a consultation document inviting comments on draft regulations to implement the EC 11th company law directive and the bank branches directive.

  These draft regulations represent a major step towards full implementation of both.

  The 11th company law directive deals with the disclosures, including accounting documents, to be made by the branches established in a member state of companies registered in another member state or non-EC country. The bank branches directive complements the 11th directive by setting special requirements regarding the disclosure of the accounting documents of a credit of financial institution which has established a branch in a member state, but has its head office outside that member state.

  The Government have also taken the opportunity provided by these regulations to deal with two other minor matters relating to the accounts of banks. These are
  790
  amendments to sections 255A and 255B of the Companies Act 1985 as inserted by the Companies Act 1985 (Bank Accounts) Regulations 1991.
  Copies of the consultation document have been placed in the Library. Views are invited by 23 September 1992.

  Company Inspections
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps are taken to maintain confidentiality when pre-publication copies of reports into the affairs of companies by inspectors appointed under section 432 of the Companies Act 1985 are provided to certain persons referred to in such reports; and what assessment he has made of their effectiveness.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The Secretary of State has discretion under the legislation to provide copies of unpublished reports of inspectors to persons referred to in the report. When, in the interests of fairness, the Department exercises its discretion to do so, it requires those concerned, including advisers, to give strict undertakings to preserve the report's confidentiality. Where these undertakings exceptionally appear to have been breached, the Department has and will continue to take firm action. It may seek an injunction from the court to prevent further unauthorised disclosure. Where advisers are found to have breached undertakings, the Department will, where appropriate, pursue the matter with the professional body concerned. The Department has recently drawn one such case to the attention of the Law Society and it has concluded its proceedings, which are confidential, in favour of the Department.

  Petroleum Licensing
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement about further onshore petroleum licensing.

  Mr. Eggar
  I have placed in the Libraries of both Houses the text of a notice, which will be published as soon as possible in the Official Gazette, inviting companies to apply for exploration licences in respect of unlicensed areas in Great Britain and certain near-shore waters. The notice specifies that applications should be made on Wednesday 21 October 1992. Application forms and guidance notes will be available from my Department.

  I shall separately be inviting holders of production licences to apply to transfer exploration acreage within their existing licences to the new style exploration licences, subject to agreement being reached on a satisfactory work programme for the area.

  Successful applicants will be offered exploration licences containing the conditions set out in the Petroleum (Production) (Landward Areas) Regulations 1991. The licences will grant rights for a term of six years and entitle the licensee to carry out seismic surveys and deep drilling subject to the need to obtain the requisite permission from the appropriate mineral planning authorities and landowners and occupiers.

EMPLOYMENT

  Training and Enterprise Councils
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many training and enterprise councils had not had their budgets for 1992–93 finalised by 1 July; and if she will publish a list of those TECs.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  On 1 July 1992 nine TECs had not signed a contract with the Department and therefore had not had their budgets for 1992–93 finalised. The TECs concerned were:

  AZTEC

  Central London TEC

  City and Inner London North TEC

  London East TEC

  North London TEC

  North West London TEC

  SOLOTEC

  South Thames TEC

  West London TEC

  However all these TECs have now indicated their willingness to sign contracts subject only to small points of detail. I anticipate that most of these contracts will be signed in the next few days.

  Global Warming
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make a statement on the research being conducted by the Health and Safety Executive into the effects of climate change attributable to the consequences of global warming.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Health and Safety Executive is not conducting any research into the effects of climate change attributable to the consequences of global warming. Research into the effects of climate change is outside the normal remit of the Health and Safety Executive. Government-funded research on this topic is the responsibility of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make a statement on the achievements of her Department and her policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if she will publish the performance indicators by which her Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Government continue to place a high priority on helping small businesses, through improvements to the business climate, through deregulation and through specific programmes of support and assistance.

  Following this year's general election, policy responsibility for some services for new and small businesses has been transferred from this Department to the Department of Trade and Industry. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade detailed the successes of this Department over the last 12 months in helping small businesses in answer to a similar question from my hon. Friend.

  Measures that continue to be operated by the Department to assist small businesses include business
  792
  start-up—the enterprise allowance scheme—which provides an allowance in the early months of trading and on-going support to unemployed people who start their own businesses. The performance of this programme is measured in terms of numbers taking up support and the survival rate of these businesses. From April 1991, training and enterprise councils have been able to adapt the scheme to suit local economic needs. TECs are now placing greater emphasis on increasing the quality of the businesses they support in an effort to improve survival. More than 60,000 people were awarded an allowance in the 1990–91 financial year, and just under 50,000 in 1991–92. Survey evidence has consistently shown that of those people completing the full term of the allowance approximately 76 per cent. are still trading six months later, that is, 18 months after start-up.

  The Department makes significant funds available to TECs to enable them to support the development of small businesses. TECs provide a varied range of help including consultancy support, advice and guidance and training audits. More than 100,000 businesses were assisted in the 1991–92 financial year. TECs increasingly are linking this support to achievement of the Investors in People national standard. Investors in People sets a standard for the training and development of people—a vital requirement for any business large or small. Of the 67 employers that have met the standard so far, 32 are employers with fewer than 200 employees. There are more than 1,100 employers committed to achieving the standard, including many small businesses.

  The Department monitors all its programmes and also commissions external evaluations which are published. In May 1992 we published "Small Firms in Britain" which was sent to all Members of Parliament. This report surveys developments in the sector, including key statistical indicators and outlines overall Government policy towards small firms.

  Travel-to-work Areas
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list the total population covered by each travel-to-work area, together with(a) the numbers unemployed, (b) the percentage unemployed on the broad definition, and (c) the percentage unemployed on the narrow definition, for April 1984, November 1984, April 1990, April 1992 and May 1992, setting out the travel-to-work areas in order of percentage unemployed on the broad definition, and in order of percentage unemployed on the narrow definition for each date.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The latest available population data for travel-to-work areas are from the 1981 census of population. These and the other information requested can be obtained from the NOM IS database in the Library.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list the travel-to-work areas covering the 35 per cent. of the United Kingdom population with the highest percentage unemployment using the broad definition on April 1984, November 1984, April 1990, April 1992 and May 1992, distinguishing between those travel-to-work areas covering the top 15 per cent. and those covering the next 20 per cent.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information requested can be obtained from the NOMIS database in the Library.
  793
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list for the United Kingdom by travel-to-work area, or the smallest area available, the economic activity rate according to the 1981 census data and according to estimates for June 1984, June 1990 and the latest available date.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The latest available data on economic activity rates for travel-to-work areas are from the 1981 census of population. These can be obtained from the NOM IS database in the Library.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) if she will list the travel-to-work areas covering the 35 per cent. of the United Kingdom population with the lowest percentage of employees in employment as a percentage of the June 1979 figure, with the lowest percentage first, and distinguishing between the 15 per cent. with the lowest percentages and the next 20 per cent. for June 1984, June 1990, June 1991 and the most recent date available;

  (2) if she will list for the United Kingdom by travel-to-work area, or the smallest area available the number of employees in employment as a percentage of the number in employment in June 1979, June 1984, June 1990, June 1992 and the most recent date available listing the travel-to-work areas in descending order with the highest percentage first.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Information available for employees in employment in local areas, including travel-to-work areas, is from the censuses of employment for 1981, 1984, 1987 and 1989, as at September of each of those years. This can be obtained from the NOMIS database in the Library.

  Quarrymen
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many quarrymen were employed in(a) Wales and (b) Great Britain in (1) 1971, (2) 1981, and (3) 1991, respectively; and if he will list the quarries operative in Wales in (i) 1971, (ii) 1981 and (iii) 1991.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  From the 1971 census of population, the number of males in the occupation classification"surface workers not elsewhere classified (n.e.c.)—mines and quarries"
  was 2,200 in Wales and 16,270 in Great Britain. From the 1981 census of population, the number of males under the occupation classification
  "Miners (not coal), quarrymen and well drillers"

  was 930 in Wales and 15,520 in Great Britain. Occupation data from the 1991 census of population should be available in the first half of 1993. The number of operational quarries in Wales in 1991 has been provisionally estimated by the Central Statistical Office to be 262. No equivalent figures are available for 1971 and 1981.

  Employment Agencies
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many applications for new licences were received from employment agencies in April 1992; and in what proportion of these cases a licence was offered to the applicant within eight weeks.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  In April 1992, a total of 376 applications for new licences were received, 86·7 per cent. of which resulted in a licence being offered to the applicant within eight weeks.

  Work Permits
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many applications for a work permit to employ a non-EC national were received in April; what proportion of these applications were decided within eight weeks; and what proportion of applications on behalf of entertainers, sportspeople and models were decided within four weeks.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  A total of 3,498 applications for work permits were received in April 1992. Of the 3,390 cases processed in that month, 90·3 per cent. had been decided within eight weeks of receipt.

  Six hundred and twenty-three of the total applications decided in April 1992 were for entertainers, sportspeople and models; 85·4 per cent. of these cases were decided within four weeks and 97·4 per cent. within eight weeks of receipt.

  This exceeds the Department's published standard of 75 per cent. within eight weeks and was achieved at a time when the section responsible for work permits was in the process of relocating to Sheffield.

  Redundancy Payments Service
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what proportion of letters received by the redundancy payments service from members of the public since 1991 have had a reply within five working days;

  (2) what proportion of claims received by the redundancy payments service since 18 November 1991 have been paid within 14 weeks.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Since the publication of the redundancy payments service charter in November 1991, 97 per cent. of letters have been replied to within five days, and 84 per cent. of claims have been paid within 14 weeks.

  Wages Inspectorate
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many complaints from employees were received by the wages inspectorate in March, April and May 1992; and in how many of these cases the inspectorate's investigation was completed within four weeks.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information is as follows:

  Number of complaints received

  Number of complaint inspections completed within four weeks

  1992

  March

  121

  79

  April

  112

  70

  May

  108

  63

  Employees are told the results of investigations into their complaint. If the investigation cannot be completed within four weeks the employee is told about the progress of the investigation.

  Noise
  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what was the implementation date of the Noise at Work Regulations 1989; what action is taken by
  795
  the Health and Safety Executive to ensure that employers comply with them; how many employers have been prosecuted under the regulations for each year since they came into force; and if she will specify the regulations involved in each case;

  (2) what groups are exempt from the requirements of the Noise at Work Regulations 1989;

  (3) how many employees are estimated by the Health and Safety Executive to be exposed to noise at or above 85 dB(A).

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Noise at Work Regulations 1989 came into force on 1 January 1990. Since their introduction, health and safety inspectors have promoted awareness of and compliance with the regulations through widespread advisory and enforcement action. Wide publicity has been achieved through a series of free leaflets and extensive guidance. One employer has been prosecuted for breaches of regulations 4, 8, 9 and 11. In addition, 948 improvement notices and 54 prohibition notices have been issued.

  The Health and Safety Executive estimates that about 1·7 million workers are exposed to noise levels above 85 dB(A).

  The regulations apply to all workers covered by the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974, except the crews of sea-going ships and aircraft or hovercrafts moving under their own power. They do not apply to workers in the offshore industry.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many Health and Safety Executive inspectors are specialists in noise control.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Health and Safety Executive has 12 specialist noise inspectors. They are supported by administrative and research staff with special qualifications in noise. All general Health and Safety Executive inspectors have received training in noise control.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how much revenue has been received from the sale of literature and videos published by the Health and Safety Executive related to the Noise at Work Regulations 1989.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Revenue received by the Health and Safety Executive from the sale of publications related to the Noise at Work Regulations 1989 up to 1 July 1992 amounts to approximately £68,000. No videos have been produced by the HSE relating to these regulations.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) how the requirements in the noise directive on audiometry are being implemented in the United Kingdom;

  (2) what measures the Health and Safety Executive has taken to ensure that employees exposed to noise at or above 85 dB(A) know they are entitled to a free hearing test through the national health service.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  EC directive 86/188/EC on the protection of workers from noise at work requires that workers exposed to 85 dB(A) or more should have access to hearing checks by a doctor. Anyone who is worried about any aspect of his or her health, including his or her hearing, already has access to the full range of NHS services.
  796
  The Health and Safety Executive has published a free leaflet for employees outlining the main requirements of the regulations and advising them about the risks to hearing of noise at work. The leaflet contains advice to workers to consult their doctor if they think there is something wrong with their hearing. The HSE's noise guide No. I also draws attention to employers' responsibilities to provide information and advice to employees.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what plans exist in the Health and Safety Executive or European Commission to reduce the first action level of the Noise at Work Regulations 1989; and what level is proposed.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The European Directive on which the Noise at Work Regulations are based is to be reviewed by 1994. The European Commission is considering a proposal for a directive on the protection of workers from physical agents. This would replace the directive on noise and require a revision of the Noise at Work Regulations.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if the Health and Safety Executive will update its publication, "100 Practical Solutions of Noise Control at Source".

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Health and Safety Executive is currently examining whether a second edition of its publication titled "100 Practical Applications of Noise Reduction Methods" would be useful.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what noise surveys have been carried out in her Department's buildings, since the enactment of the Noise at Work Regulations 1989.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  There are nearly 2,000 buildings in the Employment Department group. The information requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Health and Safety
  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what legislation her Department is proposing to ensure that workers who exercise their rights under article 8(4) of the framework directive (89/391/EEC) are not disadvantaged.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Victimisation of workers who raise safety issues is totally unacceptable. The Government intends to include in a Bill to be introduced later in the current session of Parliament provisions which will go beyond the requirements of article 8(4) of the EC framework directive.

  These provisions will include protection for all employees, regardless of length of service or hours of work, against victimisation if they leave their workplace or otherwise take appropriate action in the face of serious and imminent danger.

  Safety Directives
  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment which Minister was responsible at the time(a) the manual handling of loads directive 90/269/EEC, (b) the display screen equipment directive 90/270/EEC,

  797
  (c) the carcinogens directive 90/394/EEC, (d) the biological agents directive 90/679/EEC, (e) the temporary or mobile construction sites directive and (f) the temporary workers' directive 91/383/EEC were agreed; how the United Kingdom voted at the meeting the directives were agreed; and on what date they were agreed.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The information is as follows:

  Directive

  Date of adoption

  90/269/EEC

  29 May 1990

  90/270/EEC

  29 May 1990

  90/394/EEC

  28 June 1990

  90/679/EEC

  26 November 1990

  91/383/EEC

  25 June 1991

  Construction sites1

  24 June 1992

  1 No directive number yet allocated.

  All the directives, except 90/394/EEC, were agreed during meetings of the Labour and Social Affairs Council. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, who was the then Secretary of State for Employment, represented the United Kingdom at the Councils up to and including 25 June 1991. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment represented the United Kingdom at the 24 June 1992 Council.

  Directive 90/394/EEC was adopted at the Telecommunications Council. The United Kingdom was represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth), the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, acting on advice from Employment Department Ministers in respect of that directive.

  The proceedings of the Council of Ministers are confidential.

  Fertilisers
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what discussions she has had with the Fertiliser Manufacturers Association concerning the safe storage and recording of deliveries of ammonium nitrate and other fertilisers and associated substances which might be used in the making of explosives;

  (2) what instructions or advice she has given to farmers in Great Britain concerning the safe storage and recording of stocks of ammonium nitrate and other fertilisers which might be used in the manufacture of explosives.

  Mr. McLouglin
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has not had discussions with the Fertiliser Manufacturers Association or given advice to farmers on these matters.

  Earlier this year, a deputy director general of the Health and Safety Executive and other senior officials met representatives of the Fertiliser Manufacturers Association. Their concern over the apparently unsatisfactory storage of some imported ammonium nitrate fertilisers was discussed. As a result, Health and Safety Executive inspectors are making special visits to a number of places, including farms, to examine conditions of storage.

  A guidance note on the storage and handling of ammonium nitrate has been published by the Health and Safety Executive. During visits, inspectors are drawing attention to this and other published guidance. A
  798
  prohibition notice has been issued in one case, where large quantities of ammonium nitrate fertiliser were being imported under unsafe conditions.

  Working Time Directive
  Mr. Jenkin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what direct consequences for public expenditure would arise if the latest proposed draft of the EC working time directive is implemented in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: No directive on working time has been adopted by the EC Council. The Government do not accept the need for such a directive and reserve the right to challenge it, if adopted, in the European Court of Justice. The proposed directive as currently drafted would require member states to implement it within three years of its adoption but does not contain specific requirements on administration and enforcement. It is likely that there would be some administrative costs for public authorities. These cannot be precisely quantified, but would be small compared to the potential cost of compliance for employers, which the Government have previously estimated at about £5 billion. This cost would be substantially reduced as a result of the agreements reached at the Social Affairs Council on 24 June. Any remaining costs of compliance to employers in the public sector cannot yet be estimated. Any effect on public expenditure would depend on the arrangements for financing such costs within the overall framework of public expenditure control.

  Disability Living Allowance
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what account is taken in receipt of the mobility component of the disability living allowance in determining the provision of assistance under the fares-to-work scheme; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: When determining grants under the assistance with fares to work—FTW—scheme, the higher and lower rate mobility component of the disability living allowance—DLA—are taken into account in the following ways. Recipients of the higher rate mobility component who are able to drive and use it to resolve their mobility problems by driving themselves do not qualify for the FTW grant. Exceptionally, where a client's car is temporarily unavailable due to servicing or breakdown, they may qualify for the grant on a temporary basis. Other instances when the FTW grant can be made available on a temporary basis to such clients are where they are learner drivers or where they are making arrangements to obtain a car through Motability or another source.

  Recipients of the higher rate mobility component who are legally barred from driving or medically advised not to drive may be entitled to an FTW grant. The grant, however, would be abated by one third of the mobility component. In all cases where FTW recipients receive the lower rate mobility component, the FTW grant, if payable, is also abated by one third. These abatements carry forward, in respect of DLA, a policy which applied in respect of the mobility allowance and which was designed to avoid double funding. A number of organisations have

  799
  made representations arguing that the abatement should not apply, and we are considering the points they have made.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Household Incomes
  Mr. Horam
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer to the right hon. Member for Selby (Mr. Alison) on 8 June,Official Report, column 51, when in July the next edition of the households below average income statistics will be published.

  Mr. Lilley
  The new edition of the households below average incomes—HBAI—statistics, covering the years 1979 to 1988–89, has been published today. Copies have been placed in the Library.

  In order to improve the statistical accuracy of the results, this edition combines data from the years 1988 and 1989. It also incorporates methodological changes which were the subject of consultation with a range of independent experts in 1991, and takes into account recommendations of the Social Security Select Committee.

  Like its predecessors, this edition of HBAI is based on the family expenditure survey, FES. The primary purpose of the FES is to provide data for the construction of the retail prices index. Both its sample size and its method of compilation limit its usefulness as a source of data on family incomes, especially for small sub-groups of the population. Analysts in my Department have sought to overcome these limitations so far as possible—for example, by combining data from two consecutive years to enlarge the sample size—but it has become increasingly clear that the only real solution was to improve the data base itself. I have therefore authorised the establishment of a new family resources survey—FRS—which will in due course replace the FES as the main source of income and expenditure data for DSS purposes. Survey data for the FRS will begin to be collected in October 1992 and will in future years both improve and speed up the preparation of analyses such as the HBAI statistics.

  Lodgers
  Mr. Jon Owen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on the reasons for the different treatment as regards benefits of men and women aged 60 years who take lodgers.

  Miss Widdecombe
  Differences in treatment could arise from the unequal state pension ages of men and women. The Government are committed to equalising state pension age and are now actively considering how best to achieve this.

  Elderly People
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what representations he has received on the effects on elderly people receiving income support of the recent letter circulated by the Benefits Agency saying that they will lose their support grant if they fail to give their consent to the agency's requirements; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  The administration of incomes support is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the 800
  Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member and copies will be placed in the Library and the Public Information Office.

  Unemployment Benefits
  Sir Malcolm Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the cost to public funds of(a) unemployment benefit and (b) related social security benefits paid to the unemployed in the financial year 1991–92.

  Mr. Burt
  The information for 1991–92 is not yet available. However, the estimated costs are set out in tables 1 and 5 of the second departmental report—"Social Security, The Government's Expenditure Plans 1992–93 to 1994–95", Cm 1914, published in February 1992.

  Myalgic Encephalomyelitis
  Ms. Abbott
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will amend section 12 of the disability living allowance handbook with regard to the latest scientific knowledge on myalgic encephalomyelitis.

  Mr. Scott
  The Disability Living Allowance Advisory Board, which has been given the function of advising on the topicality and usefulness of the "Disability Handbook", is continuing to monitor the situation with regard to chapter 12 in the Handbook, which deals with myalgic encephalomyelitis.

  Unemployment Benefit
  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will publish a table showing the value of unemployment benefit for a couple with two children aged under 11 years in relation to prices and earnings since 1976.

  Mr. Burt
  The information is in the table.

  Date

  Total Unemployment Benefit

  Unemployment Benefit1 at April 1992 Prices3

  Benefit as a percentage of gross average earnings4

  £

  £

  November 1976

  27·50

  90·82

  36·0

  April 19775

  26·50

  80·48

  33·7

  November 1977

  30·30

  88·53

  36·3

  April 1978

  28·20

  79·35

  31·6

  November 1978

  29·20

  78·96

  30·5

  April 1979

  27·20

  69·53

  26·8

  November 1979

  33·35

  76·83

  29·2

  November 1980

  35·90

  71·72

  26·6

  November 1981

  38·00

  67·80

  25·4

  November 1982

  41·05

  68·93

  25·6

  November 1983

  44·05

  70·55

  25·6

  November 19842

  46·00

  70·20

  24·5

  November 1985

  49·25

  71·27

  24·7

  July 1986

  49·80

  70·88

  23·6

  April 1987

  50·85

  69·33

  22·7

  April 1988

  52·95

  69·47

  21·5

  April 1989

  56·10

  68·12

  20·8

  April 1990

  60·40

  67·01

  20·4

  April 1991

  66·95

  69·82

  21·0

  April 1992

  69·70

  69·70

  20·7

  1 Over 70 per cent of those registered as unemployed receive income support.

  2 Child dependency additions were abolished from 26 November 1984.

  3 Benefit has been calculated at April 1992 prices for comparison.

  801
  4 Gross average weekly earnings are those of adult males for all occupations (new earnings survey) for the month in question.

  5Child dependency addition for the eldest child was adjusted to take account of child benefit.

  Pension Funds
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will take steps to ensure that auditors of pension funds are totally independent of the employer and do not provide other services to the company, its associates or its owner;

  (2) if he will propose legislation under which actuaries of pension funds would be required to obtain independent corroboration of the accuracy of the information on which they base the opting-out certificate for the Occupational Pensions Board;

  (3) what consideration his Department has given to the proposal that the Occupational Pensions Board should have the power to place the assets of a scheme under the control of an approved trustee if it believes that those assets are at risk;

  (4) if he will take steps to ensure that changes in the contributions to pension funds by either employers or employees are quickly notified to each member of the fund;

  (5) if he will extend the responsibilities of the Occupational Pensions Board to include supervision of the training of pension fund trustees;

  (6) if he will introduce legislation to ensure that the advance authority of a majority of the trustees of a pension fund is required before any transaction with the employer, individual trustees or persons connected with them is permitted;

  (7) if he will draw up proposals to establish a pensions tribunal to consider cases of pensions disputes beyond those which are the proper concern of the pensions ombudsman;

  (8) what plans he has to extend the responsiblity, powers and resources of the Occupational Pensions Board;

  (9) if he will draw up proposals under which pension funds trustees who find themselves in the minority on a trust board would have the right to seek independent expert advice;

  (10) if he will draw up proposals under which auditors of pension funds would be required to append a statement to the accounts to the effect that the custody and signing procedures were satisfactory;

  (11) if he will draw up proposals to amend pensions legislation to incorporate a practical system of fines and penalties against those who do not comply with the law;

  (12) what plans he has to require pension fund trustees to (a) publish the annual report and accounts of the fund within seven months of the end of the accounting period and (b) file the report and accounts with the Occupational Pensions Board;

  (13) if he will propose legislation under which the responsibilities of pension fund auditors would be extended to include a review of the trustees' report;

  (14) if he will introduce legislation to restrict the freedom of management of companies to wind up pension schemes prematurely and unilaterally.

  Miss Widdecombe
  I refer the hon. Member to my reply to him on 14 July.
  802
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will introduce legislation under which each member of a pension scheme would have the right, to be exercised at least annually, to acquire information on the value of their particular holding in their pension fund's portfolio.

  Miss Widdecombe
  In its response on 29 June to the Select Committee report on the operation of pension funds, the Government reaffirmed their manifesto commitment to give every member of an occupational scheme the right to an annual statement of the value of their savings.

  Disability Working Allowance
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many claims for disability working allowance had been received at the last date for which figures are available; how many had been adjudicated; what percentage of those adjudicated had been successful; if he will break down the numbers of unsuccessful claims by reasons for rejection; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  The number of claims received up to 10 July, the last date for which figures are available, was 14,219 of which 13,463 have been adjudicated, and 9·5 per cent. of those were successful. The table shows the reason for unsuccessful claims.

  Number

  Capital in excess of £16,000

  9

  Not in remunerative work

  7,133

  Income exceeds level at which Disability Working Allowance payable

  1,170

  In receipt of Family Credit

  294

  No qualifying benefit

  3,420

  Others

  403

  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will break down awards of disability working allowance according to whether the recipient was(a) previously in employment or (b) in receipt of an incapacity benefit; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  Information is not available centrally to say how many disability working allowance recipients were previously in employment. We estimate that up to the end of May 123 awards were made to people who had been receiving invalidity benefit or severe disablement allowance in the 56 days before the date of claim.

  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will break down awards of disability working allowance by qualifying benefit; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  I refer the right hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) on 13 July at columns 452–53.

  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will break down awards of disability working allowance by(a) amount of award, (b) age, (c) sex and (d) marital status; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  I refer the right hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) on 13 July at columns 452–53. The average amount of awards is £30.

  Cold Weather Payments
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many households in East Kilbride constituency qualify for payments under the cold weather payments scheme.

  Mr. Scott
  The administration of the social fund is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member with such information as is available and copies will be placed in the Library and the Public Information Office.

  Night Attendance Allowance
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on the progress of the claim for night attendance allowance, submitted by Mrs. T. Johnston, of Summerlands court, Summerlands close, Brixham; and whether Mrs. Johnston is entitled to an interim payment while her claim is being considered.

  Mrs. Scott
  The administration of attendance allowance is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to my hon. Friend and copies will be placed in the Library and the Public Information Office.

  Hardship Payments
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the estimated cost of implementing the recommendation of the Social Security Advisory Committee that hardship payments to young people aged 16 to 17 years should be available as soon as it is accepted that hardship exists without the need for a further claim and interview with a social fund officer.

  Mr. Burt
  The information requested is not available. Immediate help is, however, already available to those at risk of severe hardship through the social fund crisis loan. Also, Benefits Agency offices are taking steps to simplify the claiming process.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what statements have been made to the Social Security Advisory Committee by his local office staff concerning the value of requiring young people eligible for hardship payments to apply for a crisis loan for the first one to two weeks; and what action he proposes to take.

  Mr. Burt
  The chairman and members of the Social Security Advisory Committee make frequent visits to local offices. Their conversations with staff members are not monitored or subjected to scrutiny by the Department or the Benefits Agency.

  Disability Premium
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether, following the Commissioner's decision CIS/121/1991, he will amend the income support regulations so that a person who chooses to sleep in the open rather than in a tent does not lose entitlement to a disability premium; and if he will explain his reasons.

  Mr. Burt
  We have no plans to do so. People who choose to sleep in the open generally incur lower living costs, and do not, therefore, qualify for premiums. Once 804
  they have found accommodation, and incur a liability for rent, people who have been sleeping in the open can claim housing benefit to meet reasonable accommodation costs.

  Boarder's Premium
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his policy in respect of amending the income support regulations to provide for a boarder's premium.

  Mr. Burt
  Income support, like all benefits, is continuously kept under review, subject to the Government's public expenditure and other priorities.

  National Insurance Benefits
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth)Official Report, columns 85–86, what were the savings in expenditure for 1991–92 resulting from the changes made to national insurance benefits since 1979, taking into account their cumulative effects.

  Miss Widdecombe
  It is not possible to provide a reliable estimate of the cumulative 1991–92 savings resulting from the changes to national insurance benefits listed in my reply of 6 July because since the measures were introduced there have been significant changes in the number and characteristics of beneficiaries, and in general economic circumstances.

  Mrs. Ethel Pearse
  Mr. Whitney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he intends to appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment in the case of Mrs. Ethel Pearse given on 12 June; and if he will make a statement.

  Miss Widdecombe
  We have decided not to appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment. The effect of the judgment is that a married woman who has received her graduated retirement benefit may also be entitled, for the same period, to earn increments to her category B retirement pension if that is deferred. This is contrary to the way in which the legislation had previously been interpreted. Arrangements are in hand to identify all cases which may benefit from the ruling and, where appropriate, to pay the arrrears of benefit. It is hoped that this will be completed by the end of this financial year. We propose to change the regulations so that, for future cases, the receipt of graduated retirement benefit will preclude increments.

  Information Technology
  Mr. Rowe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when the annual report and accounts of the Information Technology Services executive agency for 1991–92 will be published.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The annual report and accounts for the Information Technology Services Agency were published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Warble Fly
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the number of cases of warble fly and the number of herds affected, by region, in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Soames
  There were two confirmed cases of warble fly in 1992, one in Cumbria and one in north Yorkshire.

  There were no confirmed cases of warble fly in 1991.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will outline his Ministry's guidelines on the procedure for the treatment of warble fly.

  Mr. Soames
  Warble fly is a notifiable disease, the presence or suspicion of which must be immediately reported to the local divisional veterinary officer.

  If signs of infestation are found in any herd, it and all others within 3 km must be treated with an approved warblecide. Until treatment has been carried out, cattle movements are restricted.

  Slurry Storage
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what investigations he has made into extending grant aid to roofing enclosed stock areas to reduce the required capacity for slurry storage.

  Mr. Curry
  The coverage of the grant scheme was carefully considered when it was introduced three years ago. It was decided to offer a high rate of grant focused on the core facilities which most farmers would need. In this way we are able to offer a 50 per cent. grant when the EC norm for this type of grant is 35 per cent. It was precisely because we did not grant aid roofing that we were able to persuade the EC Commission to accept our exceptionally high rate of grant. I have received no indications from the industry that it would be prepared to accept a lower rate of grant in order to allow the scheme to be extended.

  Bee Diseases
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what measures Her Majesty's Government have adopted to(a) investigate the causes of varroa jacobsoni, (b) combat the spread of the disease and (c) compensate those bee keepers whose livelihood has been affected as a result of the disease; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  (a) We have established from extensive investigations of infected premises that the mite, varroa jacobsoni is likely to have been in the United Kingdom for four to five years. The cause is most likely to have been an illegal importation of bees from an infected area.

  (b) Following the discovery of varroasis in the United Kingdom on 5 April controls were put in place to minimise the spread of the disease and an extensive survey of apiaries carried out to check the extent of the infestation. An infected area has been declared and movement into and out of that area is prohibited except under licence. Inspection and sampling outside the infexted area revealed no evidence of the varroa mite. We are aware, however, that the mite is difficult to detect in the early stages of
  806
  infestation. We are, therefore, continuing to keep the situation under close review and are prepared to amend the infected area if the disease is found outside its boundaries. The approval of veterinary medicines for the control of varroasis is being expedited and I hope that a licensed product will be available very shortly.

  (c) It is not Government policy to offer compensation to bee keepers.

  Fisheries Protection
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) how many fishing protection vessels the United Kingdom was employing at the latest available date; and how many fisheries protection personnel were engaged on such duties;

  (2) if he will give the number of fisheries inspectors employed in the United Kingdom, at the latest available date.

  Mr. Curry
  The Royal Navy's fishery protection squadron currently comprises 13 ships, six to seven of which are likely to be engaged on fishery protection duties at any one time. The Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency (SFPA) has six civilian vessels and the Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland has one.

  The total number of Government fisheries inspectors—including SFPA marine officers with inspectorate duties but excluding staff on inland duties in Northern Ireland—is 184.

  Fish Catch
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the sale value of the total United Kingdom fish catch for the latest year for which figures are available.

  Mr. Curry
  The sale value of the total United Kingdom fish catch in 1991, including estimates for landings abroad, was £494 million. Landings into the United Kingdom by United Kingdom vessels amounted to £434 million.

  Fisheries Management
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations have been made by his Department to non-EC Baltic and Mediterranean countries to improve effective regional fisheries management.

  Mr. Curry
  The Government have not made direct representations to non-EC Baltic and Mediterranean countries; competence for fisheries negotiations with third countries lies with the European Community. Fisheries in the Baltic are run by the International Baltic Sea Fisheries Commission in which the EC participates and in our presidency role this year we will co-ordinate views of other member states. In the Mediterranean EC member states are taking steps to improve fisheries management within their waters.

  Further, on 9 June the EC Fisheries Council agreed initiatives should be taken to enable the other Mediterranean coastal states and a number of non-coastal third states whose fleets fish in the area to participate in the efforts to conserve and manage resources. The United Kingdom is always very supportive of moves to improve fisheries management.

  Sea Mammals
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the total number of small cetaceans caught in fishing nets(a) in British fishing waters and (b) by British fishing vessels in each year since 1975.

  Mr. Curry
  No detailed or complete statistics are available. A voluntary reporting scheme for incidental catches of marine mammals was introduced on 1 January 1992 to help provide information on these matters.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Department and his policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. Curry
  The Government continue to place a high priority on helping small businesses, through improvements to the business climate, through deregulation and through specific programmes of support and assistance.

  This Department has continued to contribute significantly to this process. The agreement reached in May 1992 on reform of the common agricultural policy reflected this Government's insistence that support policies under the CAP should increasingly be geared to the needs of the real market and establishes a framework for farmers to plan ahead. United Kingdom producers will particularly benefit from the Government's success in securing the removal from the package of the elements in the original proposals which would have discriminated against them. The measures agreed also ensure continuing support for those farming in some of our most difficult areas.

  We are continuing to improve the opportunities for farmers to diversify into alternative income-generating activities by means of such schemes as the farm and conservation grant scheme, the farm diversification grant scheme, the farm woodland premium scheme and the environmentally sensitive areas scheme. There will also be scope for additional action arising from the agrienvironmental action programme agreed as part of the wider CAP reform package.

  All the schemes operated by this Department are closely monitored. Reports on particular schemes are published from time to time.

  Dolphins
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, pursuant to his answer of 12 June,Official Report, column 320, what efforts are currently being undertaken by his Department to encourage worldwide measures to ban dolphin encirclement in all fisheries.

  Mr. Curry
  The United Kingdom has always strongly supported measures to protect cetaceans in international fora. The practice of encirclement is carried out by purse-seine fishermen in the eastern tropical Pacific, and no United Kingdom or Community vessels are involved. I welcome a recent agreement by the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, involving 13 countries with an interest in the eastern tropical Pacific yellow-fin tuna fishery, to reduce drastically the level of dolphin mortality by 1999.

  Civil Servants' Shareholdings
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food what guidance, other than the civil service pay and conditions of service code and the establishment officers' guide, his Department provides relating to civil servants' shareholdings; if he will list the number of occasions within the last five years on which civil servants have reported shareholdings to establishment officers in his Department; what regulations apply to the staff of the next steps agencies within his Department; what mechanisms are in place to prevent potential conflicts of interest; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  Guidance in the Ministry's staff manual asks staff to notify their personnel point/establishment officer of any shareholdings they hold which represents more than 10 per cent. of the issued share capital in any agricultural, food or fishery businesses or of any shareholdings directly related to the area in which they work. Staff should consult their personnel point/ establishment officer about the desirability of acquiring or retaining a shareholding if there is any question of possible conflict with the interests of the Department. Information on the number of notifications given within the last five years cannot be provided without disproportionate cost. Next steps agencies follow this guidance but may draw up their own separate guidance to avoid any possible conflict of interest in their area of responsibility.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what visits he has made to his EC counterparts in each member state to discuss deregulation matters since 18 April; what agreements came out of such meetings; and what plans he has for making further progress in deregulation matters during the United Kingdom presidency of the EC.

  Mr. Curry
  Deregulation considerations are an aspect of all policy discussions. The Minister and I have had a large number of meetings with our EC counterparts since 18 April and deregulation aspects have formed part of our discussions on many policy items. We are particularly conscious of the need to minimise burdens placed on MAFF industries by the EC and during the United Kingdom presidency we will continue to take every opportunity to reinforce this message with our EC counterparts and the Commission.

  Departmental Objectives
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will set out the objectives of each division and branch of his Department.

  Mr. Curry
  My Department's objectives are set out in its departmental report entitled "The Government's Expenditure Plans 1992/93 to 1994/95; Departmental Report by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Intervention Board" (Cmnd. 1903, February 1992). Divisions and branches are organised in accordance with these aims. A more detailed breakdown of objectives is available in "Ministerial Information in MAFF" (MINIM). Copies of both documents are in the Library of the House.

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has for his Department to celebrate in 1993 the European Year of the Elderly; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  I refer the hon. Member to the written reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 13 July 1992,Official Report, column 430.

  Sheep Scab (Revocation) Order 1992
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if he will outline the advice he sought when drawing up the Sheep Scab (Revocation) Order 1992; and if he will place it in the Library;

  (2) if he will list the organisations he consulted when drawing up the Sheep Scab (Revocation) Order 1992; and if he will show which of those agreed with his final proposals.

  Mr. Soames
  I have placed a copy of our letter of 6 January 1992 on the future of sheep scab control in the Libraries of the House, together with a list of organisations consulted. Individual responses remain confidential.

  Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the total number of confirmed cases of BSE for each year since 1986 and each month in 1992 in(a) Dyfed, (b) Wales and (c) Great Britain.

  Mr. Soames
  There were 847 cases of BSE confirmed in Great Britain prior to the disease becoming notifiable on 21 June 1988. Of these, 55 were in Wales, 33 of which were in Dyfed. Since then the number of confirmed cases is as follows, by year of report:

  Dyfed

  Wales

  Great Britain

  1988

  63

  131

  2,185

  1989

  238

  506

  7,136

  1990

  583

  1,078

  14,179

  1991

  1,256

  2,232

  25,013

  January 1992

  196

  318

  3,420

  February 1992

  156

  302

  2,871

  March 1992

  197

  351

  3,100

  April 1992

  187

  294

  2,771

  1992 figures are incomplete due to the time between cases being reported and confirmation by histopathology.

  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the total number of confirmed cases of BSE to date(a) in other countries of the European Community and (b) world-wide.

  Mr. Soames
  The following confirmed cases of BSE in other countries have been reported:

  Number

  France

  5

  Republic of Ireland

  55

  Switzerland

  17

  In addition, there have been cases in Oman—two—and the Falkland Islands—one—in animals exported from the United Kingdom.

  Pesticides
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when the Advisory Committee on Pesticides' final report on lindane and pentachlorophenol will be available.

  Mr. Soames
  It is anticipated that the Advisory Committee on Pesticides' evaluation document on lindane will be published before the end of 1992. A full review of pentachlorophenol is being undertaken by the Health and Safety Executive. It is expected that the results of the review will be published by mid-1995.

  Fisheries Policies
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will introduce to the Council of Ministers proposals for improving the consideration given to environmental effects of draft fisheries policies.

  Mr. Curry
  Given EC treaty obligations, environmental matters should be considered in the development of fisheries policies.

  Battery Cages
  Mr. Clapham
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will use the period of the United Kingdom's presidency of the EC to persuade his European counterparts to introduce measures for a European-wide phase-out of the battery cage.

  Mr. Soames
  The EC Commission is to propose later this year revised welfare standards for laying hens in battery cages together with new welfare standards for alternative systems. The Government believe that the current Community standards for battery cages are inadequate and we will be pressing for the best possible welfare standards whatever the system of husbandry.

  Shellfish Poisoning
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the projects relating to research into paralytic shellfish poisoning and associated problems to which his Department has contributed in the last three years or plans to support in the present financial year; and if he will indicate the amount contributed or to be contributed in each case.

  Mr. Curry
  During the financial years 1989–90 to 1992–93, £1·7 million will have been contributed to research into paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) and diarrhetic shellfish poisoning (DSP) as follows:

  preliminary investigation into the distribution of dinoflagellate cysts in the sediments in the Ardtoe region—£2,000;

  study of Alexandrium cysts off the east coast of Britain—£111,500;

  culture of toxic dinoflagellates—£15,800;

  detection of sodium channel-blocking toxins in British coastal waters—£51,300;

  immunodetection of toxic dinoflagellates—£47,000;

  isolation and purification of PSP toxin—£156,300;

  development of reliable, sensitive and specific analytical methods and rapid assay procedures—£500,000 (PSP); £575,000 (DSP);

  the effects of processing, storage, and cooking of shellfish containing PSP on the composition and toxicity of the toxin—£250,000.

  811
  Additionally, a surveillance programme is maintained, at a cost in the current financial year alone of £110,000.

  Further work worth £1·3 million has been commissioned on scombrotoxin and phytoplankton research.

  Dioxin
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his Department intends to issue guidelines to local people in the area surrounding the Coalite plant in Derbyshire on eating home grown vegetables; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  It is unlikely that vegetables would pose any hazard to consumers provided that they are washed or peeled as appropriate in the normal manner. The Department does not therefore propose to issue any guidelines.

  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action his Ministry intends to take following the findings concerning the level of dioxin found in the blood of one of the farming families living near the Coalite plant in Derbyshire.

  Mr. Sackville
  I have been asked to reply.

  Department of Health representatives, together with the local consultant in communicable disease control from North Derbyshire health authority, have already visited the family involved to give them the results and explain their significance.

  Although the level of dioxins are higher than normal background levels, they are most unlikely to cause adverse health effects. The family is no longer exposed to the source of the dioxins as they no longer consume their own farm milk, and their blood dioxin levels are expected to decline in the future.

  Sheep Dipping
  Mr. Mills
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made on the extent to which sheep dipping will continue after the removal of the statutory requirement; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  We anticipate that unnecessary dipping will cease. It is impossible to estimate future dipping patterns.

  Agriculture Council
  Mr. Whittingdale
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food what was the outcome of the Agriculture Council held on 13 and 14 July; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  I chaired this meeting of the Council. My hon. Friend the Minister of State and my noble Friend the Parliamentary Secretary in my Department represented the United Kingdom.

  Decisions were taken on a number of proposals relating to food quality, forest protection, veterinary checks, prevention against Newcastle disease and organic farming. The food quality proposal had been extensively amended to remove its undesirable features and was accordingly acceptable to the United Kingdom.

  The Council had a first discussion on the very important draft regulation specifying how member states should ensure that the reformed CAP is properly
  812
  controlled. This is important in terms of preventing fraud, and work will be taken forward urgently during the United Kingdom presidency.

  European Agriculture Council
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what matters arising from the decisions taken at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development are due to be discussed at the European Agriculture Council on 13 and 14 July.

  Mr. Curry
  None at this Council. However, the integration of environmental considerations into agricultural policy will be a priority for the United Kingdom presidency in line with UNCED conclusions.

  Fishery Protection
  Mr. John Home Robertson
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, pursuant to his answer of 25 June,Official Report, column 387, if he will set out the information available to his Ministry on the performance by private-contracted vessels of the maritime fishery protection service in Scotland.

  Mr. Curry
  Surface fishery protection duties in Scotland are carried out partly by the Royal Navy and partly by the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency (SFPA) using civilian vessels. The SFPA will shortly publish its first annual report. This will analyse performance and the effectiveness of the fisheries protection services provided. A key indicator of fisheries protection performance is the number of boardings achieved. The number of boardings of fishing vessels by civilian-manned vessels of the SFPA has increased from 1,125 in 1985–86 to 2,100 in 1991–92.

  Surplus Food
  Mr. Whittingale
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the outcome of the invitation to organisations to participate in the 1992 surplus food scheme in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  Pursuant to my written answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester, South and Maldon on 10 July 1992,Official Report, column 395, I am placing a revised list of organisations designated under the EC surplus food scheme in the Libraries.

  Farmers' Returns
  Mr. Marland
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on what terms the June returns from individual farmers are made available to public or private sector organisations; if he will list the organisations; and what distinction is made between returns of members of the Tenant Farmers' Association and others.

  Mr. Curry
  June agricultural and horticultural census returns from individual farmers are protected by the Agricultural Statistics Act 1979. Census forms can be released to a public or private sector organisation only with the prior written consent of the person by whom the information was furnished, and any other person with a financial interest in the holding. No distinction is made between respondents.

  Fish (Ozone Depletion)
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment his Department has made on the effect of ozone depletion on fish yields.

  Mr. Curry
  I have been asked to reply.

  The effect, if any, of changes in ozone levels may well fall within the wide range of natural fluctuations,n fish populations. The Government monitor ozone levels and we are keeping the matter under review.

DEFENCE

  Armoured Vehicles
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's requirement for new tracked and wheeled light tactical combat armoured vehicles; which currently operated vehicles are to be replaced; how many of these vehicles are currently in service; when he proposes to brief industry on the requirement; what are the approximate costs of the new requirement; over what time scale new vehicles are to be procured; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Aitken
  The future requirement for new tracked and wheeled tactical combat armoured vehicles is under review. We plan to replace the majority of the tracked combat vehicle reconnaissance—CVR(T)—with a new vehicle in the early years of the next century; exact quantities will depend upon the results of a feasibility study and developing concept work. An industrial briefing on the new vehicle will be held on 16 September and the project is likely to cost around £2 billion. In addition, we are considering the replacement of the remaining CVR(T), FV430 series' vehicles and the combat engineer tractor (CET) early in the next century. The numbers of these vehicles currently held are:

  Number

  FV430 series

  2,536

  CVR(T)

  1,701

  CET

  140

  Trident
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proposals his Department has received in regard to establishing the Trident refitting facility project—RD 57—at the Rosyth royal dockyard; and when he expects to take a decision on the project.

  Mr. Aitken
  The RD 57 project at Rosyth royal dockyard is designed to accommodate refits to Vanguard class and other nuclear submarines. Work on the project commenced in October 1987. It is now in the preparatory phase for the main design and build phase. Babcock Thorn Ltd., the management company at Rosyth royal dockyard, has recently put forward proposals for reducing the costs of the facility. These proposals will be considered as part of the current review of future requirements for fleet support, decisions on which are expected later this year.

  Rosyth Dockyard
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what period of time he expects cores removed from nuclear-powered submarines to be stored at the Rosyth royal dockyard.

  Mr. Aitken
  It is normal practice for nuclear submarine used fuel cores to be held in the dockyards for a few months prior to their earliest practicable dispatch to BNFL Sellafield. These cores will continue to be held safely at the dockyards, in storage facilities approved by the nuclear installations inspectorate, until a licensed mode of transport is available. Our aim is to achieve this as quickly as possible.

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for his Department to celebrate in 1993 the European Year of the Elderly; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Prime Minister on 13 July,Official Report, columns 430–31. Participation by the Ministry of Defence is not planned.

  Nuclear Contamination, Australia
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer on 29 June to the hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes),Official Report, columns 417–18, what current participation scientists from his Department have in the Anglo-Australian technical assessment group monitoring the former nuclear test sites at Maralinga, Emu Fields and Monte Bello in Australia.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  None. The Anglo-Australian technical assessment group has completed its work, and its report was published in November 1990. It has now been disbanded.

  CIS Forces
  Mr. William Powell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is Her Majesty's Government's estimate of the number of Commonwealth of Independent States or Russian forces currently stationed in each of the countries, excluding the CIS, of the former Warsaw pact.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  There are currently estimated to be some 195,000 Russian forces in Germany, 18,000 in Poland, 116,000 in the Baltic republics and 49,000 in Georgia.

  United States Air Bases
  Mr. Cann
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the United States of America air force bases Woodbridge and Bentwaters in Suffolk will revert to his Department's control.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  On current plans the United States Air Force will return RAF Bentwaters and RAF Woodbridge to full Ministry of Defence control by September 1993.

  Britannia
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what consideration he has given to offering Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia for use as a hospital ship in support of humanitarian aid to the former Yugoslavia.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  None.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been the annual cost of maintaining Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia for each of the last 10 years; and from which subheads of which votes these costs are taken.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The annual cost of maintaining Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia is as follows:

  £ million at outturn prices

  1983–84

  8·905

  1984–85

  5·843

  1985–86

  6·943

  1986–87

  4·749

  1987–88

  22·364

  1988–89

  9·542

  1989–90

  6·998

  1990–91

  9·272

  1991–92

  11·466

  1992–931

  8·602

  1 Estimate.

  Expenditure falls mainly to subheads 1A, 1G, 1H, 2F4 and 5A3.

  Royal Family
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been the cost borne by his Department for the transport of members of the royal family for each of the last 10 years; and from which subheads of which votes these costs are taken.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The tranport costs for members of the royal family are not kept centrally and could not be provided without disproportionate cost and effort.

  WE177 Bomb
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his Department intends to do with the fissile material retrieved from the dismantling of WE177 now declared to be surplus to requirements.

  Mr. Aitken
  Fissile material recovered from dismantled WE177 warheads will be retained for defence purposes.

  Defence Statistics
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will reconsider his decision to issue "Defence Statistics" as a non-parliamentary paper.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  No. "Defence Statistics" has been established to provide for the regular publication of statistical information on defence matters. As an independent Government Statistical Service publication it is not appropriate to produce it as a parliamentary paper. Copies of the 1992 edition of "Defence Statistics" are available in the Library of the House, and through Her Majesty's Stationery Office, on the same basis as other Government Statistical Service publications.

  Royal Tournament
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy to take additional measures to ensure that off-duty service men and service women in London for the royal tournament do not get involved in violent conflicts with the local civilian population.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Service personnel are fully aware of the high standard of behaviour that is expected of them at all times, on duty or off duty, in attending the royal tournament and elsewhere. Any breaches of discipline that may occur are investigated and action is taken against individuals whenever there is evidence of an offence. No additional measures are necessary.

  Nuclear Weapons
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence in what circumstances British nuclear weapons are declared to(a) the Western European Union, (b) the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, (c) the North Atlantic Co-operation Council, (d) the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe and (e) the United Nations.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  British nuclear weapons are declared to NATO. The final decision on their use would in all circumstances rest with the British Government.

  Low Frequency Raido Transmission
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his United States counterpart on the use of United States extremely low frequency radio transmission systems for communicating with British submarines.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  As part of normal information exchanges officials from my Department have discussed the capabilities of such a system.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which submarines in the service of his Department are capable of receiving extremely low frequency radio signals.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I have nothing to add to my answer of 15 February 1991,Official Report, column 592, to my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro).

  Porton Down
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many scientific procedures have been carried out on animals at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down in each of the last 10 years.

  Mr. Aitken
  This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive of CBDE to write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the site of special scientific interest agreement with English Nature in relation to Porton Down.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive of the CBDE to reply direct to the hon. Member.

  Queen's Flight
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been the annual cost of maintaining the Queen's flight for each of the last 10 years; and from which subheads of which votes these costs are taken.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The annual cost of maintaining the Queen's flight is as follows:

  £ million at outturn prices

  1983–84

  4·763

  1984–85

  4·770

  1985–86

  4·776

  1986–87

  4·752

  1987–88

  5·507

  1988–89

  5·952

  1989–90

  6·229

  1990–91

  6·745

  1991–92

  6·863

  1992–931

  7·316

  1 Estimate.

  Expenditure falls mainly to subheads 1C, 1D, 1E, 1H and 2M.

  Public Record Office
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 22 June,Official Report, column 71, how many papers withdrawn by his Department from the Public Record Office in the last five years have been retained by his Department.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  None.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the achievements of his Department and his policies in helping small businesses over the last 12 months relative to the previous 12 months; and if he will publish the performance indicators by which his Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. Aitken
  Further to the reply given to my hon. Friend on 24 July 1991, at column 452, I can inform him that our new suppliers service has given marketing advice to about 2,500 companies over the past 12 months. Dealings are by post or telephone and at various seminars, exhibitions and meet-the-buyer events around the country.

  In February 1992, the MOD introduced a new, fortnightly contracts bulletin setting out works services opportunities for property management and construction. This has been very well received by the construction industry and is proving to be an invaluable aid to small companies which might otherwise be unaware of the MOD's requirements in this sector.

  During 1991–92, about 35 defence research contracts, with a total value of £966,000, were placed under our small firms research initiative. Details of other payments made to small firms during 1991–92 are not yet available, but during 1990–91, 6,109 small companies secured headquarters contracts valued at a total of £1·15 billion, of which about half was paid to companies with fewer than 50 employees. In the same period, Ministry of Defence establishments awarded 226,173 local purchase orders, valued at around £103 million, to small companies.

  Prisoners of War
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has been given from sources in Seoul and Panmunjom about British prisoners seen in prisoner of war camps during the Korean conflict but not after the cessation of hostilities.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Information was received from these sources at the time of the post-hostilities repatriations of British prisoners of war. We have not received any further information recently and have seen no evidence to support claims that British prisoners of war were detained in Korea or elsewhere after the post-armistice repatriations.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library the information he has received from the United States Senate relating to British prisoners of war captured during the Korean war; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  To date we have received no material from the United States Senate on this subject.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library the accounting procedure guidelines by which missing men, or known prisoners of war from the Korean war, are declared dead.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  My noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence will write to the hon. Member.

  Scientific Instruments
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to offer ships and aircraft as platforms for scientific instruments.

  Mr. Aitken
  Under the "Joining Forces for the Environment" initiative launched by my noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence on 1 July, Her Majesty's ships and aircraft could be made available as platforms for scientific instruments provided that the request for assistance has been endorsed by the Natural Environment Research Council, involves no additional costs to MOD and is compatible with operational training requirements.

  Departmental Land
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what scientific study Her Majesty's Government are making of Ministry of Defence land which has not for many years been ploughed, sprayed or artificially fertilised.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  No scientific studies are currently being undertaken. Where possible, and subject to operational requirements, the Ministry of Defence is prepared to make such land available for scientific studies.

  Aerial Photography (Research)
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what aerial photography and hydrographic readings are to be made available for research.

  Mr. Aitken
  Provided there are no security or copyright restrictions, aerial photographs and associated material
  819
  can be obtained from the RAF film library at RAF Brampton and hydrographic readings from the Hydrographic Office's data centre in Taunton. Charges are made according to the type of request.

  Disciplinary Proceedings (Documents)
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether he has any plans to amend Royal Air Force service rules to allow documents used in any proceedings against service personnel to be made available to any person nominated by him other than a solicitor;

  (2) if he will list those proceedings against members of the Royal Air Force where documents involved in those proceedings cannot be disclosed to anyone other than the officer involved and his solicitors.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  In the case of disciplinary proceedings, disclosure of documents involved is made to the defence as part of current criminal law practice. In the case of administrative proceedings, disclosure of special narrative reports made under certain of the Queen's Regulations for the RAF is restricted to the subject, officer or airman, or to another member of the RAF selected by the subject or to his solicitor, to assist the subject to prepare a statement in reply to the report.

  There are no plans to extend the facility to anyone else.

  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received about the disclosure of documents used in any proceedings brought against RAF service personnel to persons other than solicitors.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I am not aware of any recent representations other than those from the hon. Member.

  Radiation Doses
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish figures for the annual individual radiation dose equivalents for 1991 and the cumulative radiation dose equivalents for personnel at Devonport dockyard, Rosyth dockyard, HMS Defiance, HMS Vulcan, Clyde submarine base, Devonport naval base and combined figures for the naval nuclear propulsion programme and for all of his Department's personnel, except the Atomic Weapons Establishment.

  Mr. Aitken
  I refer the hon. Member to my reply of 25 June 1992 to the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Mr. Bennett),Official Report, column 297.

  Departmental Objectives
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will set out the objectives of each division and branch of his Department.

  Mr. Aitken
  The Department's objectives were set out in its 1992 departmental report, Cm 1901, copies of which are available in the Library of the House. These top-level objectives are broken down into subsidiary objectives in the internal management plans of several hundred budget holders within the Department, each of whom may control several divisions and branches. It would involve disproportionate time and effort to collate them. However, the objectives of agencies are set out in their framework documents, obtainable from the chief executive. Additional to those addresses given in Cm 1901 are:820

  Naval Aircraft Repair Organisation DSA

  Royal Naval Yard Fleetlands

  Gosport

  Hants PO13 O8W.

  Duke of York's Military School Dover

  Kent CT15 SEQ.

  Queen Victoria School

  Dunblane

  Perthshire

  SK 15 OJ7.

  Defence Postal and Courier Service DSA

  Inglis Barracks

  Mill Hill

  London NW7 1PX

  Defence Operational Analysis Centre DSA

  Broadoaks

  Parvis Road

  West Byfleet

  Surrey KT14 6LY.

  Defence Analytical Services Agency

  DSA Room 307

  First Avenue House

  High Holborn

  London WC1V 6HE.

  Dumping at Sea
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has on the quantity of arms dumped at sea off the United Kingdom coast in each of the last five years, indicating the proportion dumped by the various armed services.

  Mr. Aitken
  The MoD does not dump redundant ammunition and stocks off the coast of the United Kingdom. The only dump site used for disposal at sea lies in the Atlantic some 400 miles off Lands End at a depth of some 4,500 m. The information requested is as follows:

  tonnes

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  11992

  Navy

  3,000

  280

  882

  114

  2,750

  Army

  70

  1,165

  893

  936

  5,031

  RAF

  174

  99

  nil

  43

  624

  Total

  3,244

  1,544

  1,775

  1,093

  8,405

  1 Figures given for 1992 reflect the total tonnage planned in this year's sea dumping programme.

  Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty
  Mr. Colin Shepherd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to conduct and receive inspections under the provisions of the conventional forces in Europe treaty.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The parties to the conventional forces in Europe—CFE—treaty decided at the Helsinki CSCE summit that the treaty should be provisionally applied from 17 July, for 120 days or until the final state party deposits its instrument of ratification.

  Under the treaty, each of the 29 participating states has the right to conduct a number of inspections on the territory of other parties, with the purpose of verifying the number of items of treaty-limited equipment they hold, monitoring the destruction of equipment to match permitted levels of holdings and clarifying any doubts

  821
  about compliance with the treaty. During the initial 120-day baseline validation period we are obliged to receive around 30 inspections, and expect to make about the same number ourselves. Inspectors from the joint arms control implementation group—JACIG—will conduct CFE inspections on behalf of the United Kingdom, starting soon after the treaty enters into force. JACIG personnel will also escort inspections of facilities in the United Kingdom. We will co-operate fully with such inspections and welcome the opportunity to demonstrate our compliance with the CFE treaty.

  South Atlantic Fund
  Mr. Colin Shepherd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has about the future of the South Atlantic Fund.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The South Atlantic Fund is an independent body, for which its own trustees are responsible. I understand from the trustees that they are today announcing that the fund is to close on 31 December 1992. The balance of money in the fund will be disbursed, in appropriate shares, to the single service benevolent funds, which have given assurances that they will use this money to meet any future needs arising out of the Falklands conflict for as long as it is necessary.

  Military Survey Defence Support Agency
  Mr. Colin Shepherd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the key performance targets for the Military Survey defence support agency for 1992–93.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The key performance targets are as follows:

  1. To maintain the operational readiness of the Military Survey defence support agency in accordance with the Army standards and to respond, as appropriate, to emergency and operational requirements.

  2.To meet resourced targets for production, training and development for time scale, quantity and standard, as laid down in approved plans.

  3. To provide the necessary support for the implernentation of the Military Survey modernisation project and to initiate training.

  4. To achieve a 2 per cent. increase in efficiency in year while remaining within budget.

  5. To implement appropriate phases of the "Options for Change" and manpower reductions in accordance with forecast manpower planning targets.

  6. To continue to improve the costing and management of geographic requirements.

  7. To implement improved costing and budget systems and identify selected performance measures by 1 April 1993.

ENVIRONMENT

  Water Quality
  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on progress in implementing the investment programmes to improve water quality.

  Mr. Maclean
  During 1991–92 the water companies invested more than £3,000 million, an increase in real terms over 1990–91 of more than 15 per cent. The Director General of Water Services will publish a fuller assessment as soon as he has analysed the July returns from companies.
  822
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on drinking water quality.

  Mr. Maclean
  The chief drinking water inspector's report for 1991 will be published shortly. It will confirm that water supplies in England and Wales continue to he of very high quality.

  Water Extraction
  Mrs. Gillan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he last reviewed the mechanism for granting permission for water extraction; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  The water abstraction licensing system was last reviewed when the Water Act 1989 was passed.

  Urban Development Corporations
  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his latest estimated dates for the winding-up of urban development corporations.

  Mr. Redwood
  I shall confirm the wind-up dates for the urban development corporations following the end of the annual corporate planning round which is currently under way.

  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what grant has been paid to the London Docklands development corporation since 1987–88; and what was the total grant to the other nine urban development corporations in England.

  Mr. Howard
  Since 1987–88, the London Docklands development corporation has received grant in aid of £1,006·650 million. The total grant paid to the other English urban development corporations for the same period is £819·396 million.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what guidance has been given to urban development corporations on the allocation of funds from their budget, for community development and grant aid work with local community groups, in relation to organisations which are an extension of the development corporation itself; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Redwood
  Urban development corporations themselves decide which community initiatives and groups they wish to support but refer to the Department if the projects are outside their delegated spending authority or raise particular issues.

  Standard Spending Assessments
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what recent representations he has received regarding standard spending assessments.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  We receive a large number of representations on standard spending assessments throughout the year and these are all given very careful consideration.

  Water Prices
  Mr. Nicholls
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to alter the constant K in the RPI plus K formula for water price increases.
  823
  Mr. Maclean
  The Director General of Water Services is responsible for setting limits on water price increases. He will undertake a periodic review of K for all the companies at the first opportunity, and the revised limits will take effect from 1 April 1995.

  Mr. Jon Owen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what account the Office of Water Services takes of the level of rainfall in each water company area when agreeing proposed water charges.

  Mr. Maclean
  Water companies have a duty to ensure that they have sufficient supplies of water available to meet demands from customers. The Director General of Water Services has a duty to ensure that the companies are properly able to finance their functions. In setting new price limits he will take account of factors which influence the costs of companies in different areas.

  Mr. Jon Owen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to require water companies to charge more equal rates to consumers across England and Wales.

  Mr. Maclean
  The Director General of Water Services is responsible for ensuring that companies can finance their functions and that in setting their charges they do not give undue preference to or unduly discriminate against any class or group of customers. Expenditure by individual companies on the provision of services necessarily varies and each must be able to set charges which reflect its own costs.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. George Howarth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his latest estimate of the amount of capital receipts being held by local authorities in England and Wales.

  Mr. Redwood
  It is currently estimated that English local authorities held about £0·8 billion of usable capital receipts at the end of March 1992. In addition, authorities are estimated to hold over £5 billion of capital receipts which have been set aside as provision to meet credit liabilities.

  Figures for Wales are a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales.

  Mr. Enright
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the proposed financial settlement for local authorities for 1993–94.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given by my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Inner Cities on 21 May 1992,Official Report, column 195.

  Enterprise Zone, Barrow-in-Furness
  Mr. Hutton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement on his policy with regard to creating an enterprise zone in Barrow-in-Furness.

  Mr. Redwood
  Our policy remains that the creation of new enterprise zones will be considered only in exceptional circumstances. We are looking at the case for a zone in Barrow.

  Darwin Initiative
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made in implementing the Darwin initiative and biodiversity undertakings given at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.

  Mr. Howard
  The Darwin initiative is still in its early stages. We are currently discussing with interested organisations the best way to proceed with the development of this Initiative.

  The United Kingdom is already well placed to discharge its responsibilities under the biodiversity convention, in relation to its own biodiversity. The convention will require us to keep our systems under review and we will do so.

  Carbon Dioxide Emissions
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list his plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

  Mr. Maclean
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave earlier to the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Mrs. Roche).

  Housing, Leicester
  Mr. Janner
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the number of local authority houses in Leicester in 1979, 1989 and 1991.

  Sir George Young
  Leicester city council reported a total of 35,945 council dwellings in its April 1979 housing investment programme return. Corresponding figures reported in 1989 and 1991 were 31,639 and 30,172 respectively.

  Water Conservation
  Mr. John Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he intends to take for the conservation of England's water resources.

  Mr. Maclean
  The statutory responsibility for conserving water resources lies with the National Rivers Authority, and my Department maintains close liaison with the NRA. We shall shortly be publishing a consultation paper to obtain views on a wide range of options for bringing about the more efficient use of water.

  Enterprise Zones, Free Ports
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what funds have been allocated by his Department to enterprise zones in free ports during each of the last three years.

  Mr. Redwood
  None. There are and have been no enterprise zones in free ports or free zones.

  Council Tax
  Mr. Salmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what recent discussions he has had with local authorities on the implementation of the council tax; and if he will make a statement.
  825
  Mr. Robin Squire
  We are holding regular discussions with local authorities at both ministerial and official level and are pleased to see that good progress is being made in the preparations for the council tax.

  EC Presidency
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the initiatives on environmental policy to be undertaken by his Department as part of the United Kingdom's six months' presidency of the European Community.

  Mr. Howard
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given orally today to the hon. Member for York (Mr. Bayley).

  "Competing for Quality in Housing"
  Mr. Simpson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many responses he has so far received to his consultation paper "Competing for Quality in Housing".

  Sir George Young
  Five.

  Environmental Issues
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the help he proposes to give to local authorities to promote environmental issues.

  Mr. Maclean
  It is for local authorities to decide how to promote environmental issues, in the light of local circumstances and their overall environmental strategies, and in consultation with all sections of the community.

  Low River Flows
  Mr. Bellingham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he next expects to meet the chairman of the National Rivers Authority to discuss low river flows.

  Mr. Maclean
  The authority's plans for dealing with water resource problems including low river flows were among matters raised at my recent meeting with my hon. and noble Friend to discuss the authority's 1992 corporate plan.

  Gravel Extraction
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what discussions he has recently had with environmental groups on the problems arising from the twin industries of gravel extraction and tipping of waste in landfill sites.

  Mr. Baldry
  My recent discussions with environmental groups have not covered gravel extraction and landfill of waste.

  Homelessness
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, what was(a) the total expenditure and (b) the additional specific allocation for tackling homelessness which was provided in the latest financial year with a breakdown by (i) region and (ii) local authority.
  826
  Mr. Baldry
  Total capital expenditure on measures for tackling homelessness is not separately identifiable. However, in 1990–91 and 1991–92 the Government made £300 million available to local authorities and housing associations in the areas of England with the highest homelessness pressure for schemes to create permanent lettings. A total of £236 million of this was allocated to local authorities. An additional £11 million was allocated in 1991–92 for local authority cash incentive schemes to release council properties for homeless families. These measures seem likely to produce more than 17,000 new lettings. The latest available figures for 1990–91 outturn and 1991–92 allocations, (excluding the additional cash incentive allocation which is not separately identifiable), are given in the table.

  Homelessness SCA allocations

  Authority

  1990–91

  1991–92

  Outturn

  Allocation

  (£'000)

  (£'000)

  London

  Barnet

  414

  620

  Bexley

  1,031

  —

  Brent

  4,593

  5,278

  Bromley

  436

  1,000

  Camden

  5,891

  5,983

  Croydon

  2,562

  3,331

  Ealing

  3,825

  4,549

  Enfield

  1,988

  2,433

  Greenwich

  3,392

  3,109

  Hackney

  4,884

  4,762

  Hammersmith

  4,132

  4,506

  Haringey

  5,261

  6,576

  Harrow

  1,000

  950

  Havering

  27

  250

  Hillingdon

  2,250

  2,317

  Hounslow

  2,727

  2,832

  Islington

  4,832

  5,033

  Kensington

  2,491

  3,424

  Kingston

  1,300

  700

  Lambeth

  4,252

  5,260

  Lewisham

  2,771

  2,568

  Merton

  500

  500

  Newham

  4,809

  4,176

  Redbridge

  500

  440

  Richmond

  1,243

  1,120

  Southwark

  4,.008

  3,771

  Sutton

  459

  1,020

  Tower Hamlets

  4,043

  4,113

  Waltham Forest

  2,067

  2,943

  Wandsworth

  3,075

  2,925

  Westminster

  4,174

  4,511

  Total

  84,937

  91,000

  South East

  Adur

  —

  134

  Arun

  80

  80

  Ashford

  —

  120

  Basingstoke

  199

  —

  Bracknell

  —

  150

  Brighton

  808

  983

  Canterbury

  437

  220

  Chichester

  —

  150

  Crawley

  —

  202

  Cherwell

  80

  100

  Dartford

  —

  200

  Dover

  186

  1,013

  Eastbourne

  243

  300

  East Hampshire

  425

  350

  Eastleigh

  —

  200

  Elmbridge

  130

  180

  Fareham

  238

  175

  Gillingham

  282

  321

  Gosport

  400

  300

  Guildford

  688

  378

  827

  Authority

  1990–91

  1991–92

  Outturn

  Allocation

  (£'000)

  (£'000)

  Hart

  150

  175

  Hastings

  526

  424

  Havant

  590

  285

  Horsham

  194

  200

  Hove

  100

  200

  Lewes

  80

  150

  Maidstone

  215

  450

  Mole Valley

  —

  200

  Newbury

  —

  57

  New Forest

  940

  720

  Oxford

  391

  556

  Portsmouth

  1,884

  1,360

  Reading

  522

  610

  Reigate

  760

  165

  Rother

  242

  200

  Runnymede

  100

  100

  Rushmoor

  281

  457

  Sevenoaks

  —

  368

  Shepway

  413

  243

  Slouth

  44

  500

  Southampton

  567

  1,306

  South Oxford

  130

  177

  South Wight

  73

  —

  Spelthorne

  700

  165

  Swale

  —

  200

  Tandridge

  —

  192

  Test Valley

  388

  200

  Thanet

  250

  290

  Tunbridge Wells

  360

  600

  Vale of White Horse

  115

  120

  Waverley

  —

  220

  Wealden

  150

  220

  West Oxford

  95

  47

  Windsor

  313

  220

  Winchester

  60

  29

  Woking

  165

  200

  Wokingham

  28

  200

  Worthing

  529

  255

  15,549

  17,616

  Eastern

  Aylesbury Vale

  500

  120

  Basildon

  485

  438

  Braintree

  280

  564

  Brentwood

  —

  10

  Broxbourne

  439

  —

  Colchester

  700

  500

  Dacorum

  —

  500

  East Herts

  250

  315

  Harlow

  500

  750

  Luton

  685

  500

  Milton Keynes

  700

  —

  North Bedfordshire

  135

  379

  North Hertfordshire

  —

  100

  Rochford

  —

  270

  St. Albans

  —

  740

  South Bedfordshire

  330

  108

  Southend

  656

  403

  Stevenage

  660

  525

  Tendring

  185

  40

  Three Rivers

  —

  50

  Thurrock

  110

  92

  Watford

  —

  120

  6,615

  6,524

  Dioxin
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the daily intake of dioxin in a human being at which Her Majesty's Government would take action to stop the source of such pollution; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  I have been asked to reply.

  The tolerable daily intake—TDI—for dioxins is 10 picograms toxic equivalents per kilogram body weight per day. This TDI was recommended by a World Health Organisation regional office for Europe expert group in 1990 and subsequently endorsed by the United Kingdom committee on the toxicity of chemicals in food, consumer products and the environment.

  It is Government policy that when intakes of any contaminant are found to regularly exceed the TDI, action is taken to investigate the problem and, wherever possible, to reduce exposure to the contaminant.

  Spent Nuclear Fuel
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to ensure all liquid and gaseous radioactive wastes created in the reprocessing of imported spent nuclear fuel at Sellafield are collected at discharge sources and returned to the country of origin of the irradiated foreign fuel.

  Mr. Maclean
  Before liquid wastes are discharged from Sellafield, almost all the radiologically significant material is removed by effluent cleaning plants. The solid wastes and sludges produced by these plants are subject to the normal return arrangements. The remaining liquid and gaseous wastes, which are of little radiological significance, are disposed of under an authorisation from the regulatory authorities, the chief inspector of Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution and the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

  Radiation Monitoring
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to extend the scope of RIMNET—the radiation incident monitoring network to the Isle of Man; and if he will make a statement on progress made in establishing RIMNET to date.

  Mr. Maclean
  There has been a monitoring station at Ronaldsway on the Isle of Man since RIMNET commenced operating at the end of 1988. Details of the system currently in operation are contained in the HMSO booklet "The National Response Plan and Radioactive Incident Monitoring Network (RIMNET) N ET) Phase 1", copies of which are available in the Library of the House. A contract to upgrade and extend RIMNET was let in March 1991, and is due for completion later this year.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether his Department routinely receives and examines the annual report on radioactivity monitored in the environment by the Isle of Man Government.

  Mr. Maclean
  No. A copy of this report goes to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food at Lowestoft.
  829
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what communications his Department has had with the Argus project on monitoring radioactivity in the environment.

  Mr. Maclean
  Officials within my Department are aware of the Argus project and have discussed its operation with the system operator.

  Council Debts
  Mr. Simon Coombs
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the 20 non-metropolitan councils in the order of the level of their indebtedness, with the relevant figures in each case.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The 20 non-metropolitan district and county councils reporting the highest levels of indebtedness are shown in the table.

  Credit ceiling1 at 31 March 1991

  £ million

  Lancashire

  377

  Nottingham

  373

  Kingston-upon-Hull

  328

  Bristol

  308

  Leicester

  272

  Staffordshire

  260

  Cleveland

  256

  Kent

  250

  Essex

  227

  Derbyshire

  214

  Berkshire

  210

  Leicestershire

  206

  Devon

  192

  Cheshire

  190

  Middlesbrough

  183

  Nottinghamshire

  177

  Hampshire

  176

  Blackburn

  166

  Humberside

  165

  Derby

  156

  1 The credit ceiling represents the difference between an authority's outstanding credit liabilities and any provision made to meet those liabilities.

  Source: Local authority returns. No data are available for Embridge DC.

  Pollution Inspectorate
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many staff there are in Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution; how many of those are qualified inspectors; where they are located; and what is their annual budget.

  Mr. Maclean
  There are currently 309 staff in post in Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution, of whom 162 are inspectors and 147 administrative staff.

  The approved complement for 1992–93 has been increased to 377·5 staff. HMIP is currently recruiting additional staff up to this complement.

  HMIP staff are located as follows:

  Numbers

  Bedford

  33·0

  Birmingham

  3·5

  Bristol

  42·0

  Cardiff

  15·5

  830

  Numbers

  Chelmsford

  2·5

  Darlington

  8·0

  East Grinstead

  2·5

  Lancaster

  18·0

  Leeds

  28·5

  Lincoln

  7·5

  London

  1121·0

  Newcastle-under-Lyme

  1·0

  Runcorn

  16·0

  Sheffield

  10·0

  1 Including 18 staff due to move to Reading in autumn 1992.

  HMIP's forecast expenditure for 1992–93, on a full economic cost basis, is £27·5 million, including £7·5 million research expenditure.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many(a) inspections and (b) prosecutions have been undertaken as part of the work of HM inspectorate of pollution in each of the last five years.

  Mr. Maclean
  The number of inspections carried out by HMIP is as follows:

  Visits to works (England and Wales)

  Number

  1987–88

  10,164

  1988–89

  9,782

  1989–90

  7,887

  1990–91

  3,867

  1991–92

  6,327

  Note: These figures include visits to or in connection with scheduled and non-scheduled works by inspectors and sampling teams, and visits regarding radioactive emissions to air by inspectors and sampling teams. In addition to the above visits there were a number of meetings with companies in connection with scheduled work but not involving site inspection.

  The number of prosecutions taken by HMIP over the last five years are as follows:

  Number

  1987–88

  3

  1988–89

  2

  1989–90

  4

  1990–91

  1

  1991–92

  11

  All prosecutions except one in 1989–90 resulted in convictions.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution has made of each of the nine proposals for power plants and incinerators in the east London corridor; and what assessment is had made about them cumulatively.

  Mr. Maclean
  Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution has received five applications under the terms of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to operate new power plants and incinerators in the east Thames corridor and is scrutinising them to satisfy itself that they meet the requirements of the Act. So far, one has been determined. HMIP is aware that other applications might be made and is carrying out an assessment of the possible effect on air quality in east London of each individual plant and the cumulative effect of them all.

  Hazardous Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 7 July,Official Report, column 152, if he will set out the actions Her Majesty's Government intend to take to fulfil the requirements set out in the amendments to chapter 20 of "Agenda 21" on hazardous wastes as agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.

  Mr. Maclean
  We are currently looking at the implications for United Kingdom policy of "Agenda 21", including chapter 20.

  Sites of Special Scientific Interest
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to establish further marine biological sites of special scientific interest in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Maclean
  There is no such designation and we have no plans to introduce one. I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 8 July 1992 to my hon. Friend the Member for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kynoch) at column 252.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to ensure automatic public inquiries for all proposals affecting sites of special scientific interest where there is an outstanding objection from the statutory country conservation agency.

  Mr. Maclean
  No.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what penalties are currently employed by his Department for the damage or destruction of a site of special scientific interest; and if he has any plans to extend such penalties.

  Mr. Maclean
  English Nature is empowered to enforce the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 in cases of damage to sites of special scientific interest. The levels of fines is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary, but there are no plans for changes.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the current monitoring system utilised for sites of special scientific interest; how much is allocated for such monitoring by his Department; and what plans he has to upgrade such monitoring.

  Mr. Maclean
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 11 June 1992,Official Report, column 260. During 1992–93 English Nature has budgeted to spend £18·1 million on the safeguarding of designated sites, including monitoring activities.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will establish a United Kingdom-wide system of positive incentives for sites of special scientific interest management.

  Mr. Maclean
  English Nature's wildlife enhancement scheme is a pilot project to assist owners and occupiers to undertake land management which is beneficial to the wildlife interests of SSSIs. English Nature will also be giving grants to county wildlife trusts under its reserves 832
  enhancement scheme for a similar purpose. These are important initiatives, but they will need to be evaluated before decisions are taken on whether they should be available more generally.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his practice to include specific references in environmental statements deposited under Standing Order 27A (environmental assessment) to each site of special scientific interest affected by works proposed in private Bills.

  Sir George Young
  The preparation and content of environmental statements deposited with private Bills under SO 27A is a matter for the promoters of the Bill, subject to the requirement that the statement shall generally contain, in relation to the works authorised by the Bill, the information set out in schedule 3 to the Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988. This includes information about the site and the likely effects of the proposed development on the environment by reference to its possible impact on flora, fauna, soil, water and the landscape. While there is no specific requirement for environmental statements to identify SSSIs likely to be affected by the development proposed, they are expected to do so.

  Contaminated Land
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what representations he has received from local authorities about the compilation of the contaminated land register;

  (2) what is the current number of registrations on the contaminated land register; and what is the expected eventual size of the register;

  (3) what provision exists for the removal of names from the contaminated land register;

  (4) how it is intended to fund the decontamination of contaminated land.

  Mr. Maclean
  During the 1991 consultation exercise on registers of land which may be contaminated, which local authorities are to compile under section 143 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, some 200 responses were received from local authorities and their representative associations. Many further letters on aspects of registers have been received since the end of consultation.

  The statutory requirement for local authorities to compile registers has not yet commenced, so no sites have been entered on registers. It is not possible at this stage to forecast the number of sites which will be registered.

  Registers are to record all land which is, or has been, subject to specific contaminative uses to be listed in regulations. Sites will not be removed from registers unless it is shown that the entry was due to a factual error concerning the site's use.

  Government financial assistance for treatment of contamination at derelict sites is available under derelict land grant. The criteria for this grant give a high priority to schemes involving treatment of severe contamination. The Government are also making resources available to local authorities by means of supplementary credit approvals for investigation and treatment of contamination of land where it is not practicable to recover the costs of these works from those responsible.
  833
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 14 May,Official Report, column 198, to the hon. Member for Newport. West (Mr. Flynn), when he expects to publish the contaminated land register; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  Local authorities will be required under section 143 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to compile public registers of land which may be contaminated and in due course to publish them. The detailed specifications for registers are still under consideration, but an announcement on how the Government intend to proceed will be made shortly.

  Compliance Monitoring
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many cases of compliance monitoring are currently being undertaken by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution of those previously having been found to have been in breach of pollution standards; and what is the average frequency in such cases.

  Mr. Maclean
  Compliance monitoring is carried out on all processes authorised under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and the Radioactive Substances Act 1960. The prescribed inspection frequency depends on the type of process, the operator competence ratings and the pollution release potential of the process.

  House Condition Survey
  Sir Malcolm Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to publish the results of the 1991 house condition survey; and whether he will now make a preliminary statement on its findings.

  Mr. Baldry
  The results of the 1991 English house condition survey will be published in 1993. No findings are yet available as data are still being collected and processed.

  Grants
  Sir John Hannam
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how much money was allocated for improvement and repairs grants to each local authority in England for 1991–92 and 1992–93.

  Sir George Young
  Resources are not allocated to local authorities solely for expenditure on grants for repairs and improvements. Each authority receives an overall allowance for specified capital grant, as part of its annual housing investment programme allocation, to support private sector renewal work, including house renovation grants. This covers the Exchequer contribution towards their expenditure—75 per cent. in the case of grants. Figures for specified capital grant received by each local authority for 1991–92 and 1992–93 are given in the HIP allocation tables for the local authorities in England, copies of which are available in the Library.

  Sir John Hannam
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment for each quarter from July to September 1990 onwards, what was the number of(a) applications and (b) approvals in England for (i) renovation grants, (ii) disabled facilities grants and (iii) minor works assistance.

  Sir George Young
  Figures for the numbers of approvals of mandatory and discretionary renovation 834
  grants and disabled facilities grants, together with approvals of minor works assistance, in England are shown in the quarterly publication "Housing and Construction Statistics: Part 2"—tables 2.17, 2.19 and 2.21 respectively. Copies of this publication are in the Library.

  The latest edition of this publication gives figures up to the December quarter 1991. Figures for the March quarter 1992 are as follows:

  Applications approved: England: March quarter 1992

  Numbers of grants

  Renovation grants:

  Mandatory

  8,700

  Discretionary

  1,300

  Disabled facilities:

  Mandatory

  5,000

  Discretionary

  60

  Minor works assistance

  7,800

  There are no corresponding figures available for the number of applications for these grants.

  Sir Malcolm Thornton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will provide a table setting out the value of home improvement grants in the private sector for each year between 1981 and 1991.

  Sir George Young
  Figures showing the amount of housing renovation grants paid to private owners and tenants for each year between 1981 and 1991 are published in "Housing and Construction Statistics". Figures for 1981 to 1988 are in the annual version "Housing and Construction Statistics 1980–1990: Great Britain", table 7.3.

  Figures for 1989–91 are in the quarterly version "Housing and Construction Statistics, December Quarter 1991, Part 2: Great Britain". Grants made under the Housing Act 1985 are in table 2.18 and grants made under the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, effective from July 1990 in England and Wales, are in table 2.17.

  Sir John Hannam
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how much was spent by local authorities in England on mandatory renovation grants, discretionary renovation grants, mandatory disabled facilities grants, discretionary disabled facilities grants, minor works assistance-staying-put grants, minor works assistance-thermal insulation, minor works assistance patch-and-mend and minor works assistance-elderly relative, for each quarter since July 1990.

  Sir George Young
  Figures for final payments of mandatory and discretionary renovation grants and disabled facilities grants in England are published in the quarterly publication "Housing and Construction Statistics: Part 2"—tables 2.17 and 2.19 respectively. It also gives information about final payments of minor works assistance as a whole, table 2.21. Copies of this publication are in the Library.

  The latest edition gives figures up to the December quarter 1991. Figures for the March quarter 1992 are as follows:

  Final payments: England: March quarter 1992:

  £ thousands

  Renovation grants

  Mandatory

  72,808

  Discretionary

  5,337

  835

  £ thousands

  Disabled facilities grants

  Mandatory

  14,262

  Discretionary

  281

  Minor works assistance

  4,803

  The only information about the different types of minor works assistance available relates to the financial year 1990–91. The figures for final payments are as follows:

  Final payments: England: 1990–91

  £ thousands

  Minor works assistance:

  Elderly householder to "stay put"

  6,328

  Thermal insulation

  1,610

  Elderly person to become or remain resident

  315

  Temporary improvement of property to be cleared

  1

  The Department provides a 75 per cent. Exchequer contribution towards local authorities expenditure on grants. The exception to this is for disabled facilities grants to council tenants; expenditure on these grants is eligible for 100 per cent. subsidy from the housing revenue account.

  Sir John Hannam
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what percentage of renovation grants in 1991–92 were paid to(a) owner-occupiers and (b) tenants.

  Sir George Young
  The only figures currently available about the tenure of persons receiving renovation grants relate to the financial year 1990–91. During that period, 93 per cent. of grants went to owner-occupiers with virtually all of the remaining 7 per cent. going to private sector landlords and housing associations as landlords.

  Waste Disposal
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his policy towards waste disposal being(a) recycled and (b) localised; what action he is taking to give recycled and localised waste disposal advantages over (i) non-recycled and (ii) major centralised waste disposal respectively; and what relevant statistics he has for each category both (1) at present and (2) for the year 2000.

  Mr. Maclean
  It is Government policy that the production of solid waste should be minimised. Failing that, waste should be reused, recycled or incinerated with energy recovery. It should only be landfilled as a last resort. The provision of waste disposal facilities, whether small and local or large and centralised, is a matter for waste disposal authorities in consultation with the planning authority. Waste collection authorities are also under a duty to prepare recycling plans which are due to be submitted in draft to my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment by 1 August. Our target is that 25 per cent. of household waste should be recycled by 2000, compared with about 5 per cent. at present. The collection of statistical information on waste recycling and disposal is currently under review.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what guidance he has issued to ensure that the actual and full costs of waste disposed by(a) landfill and (b) incineration are reflected in (a) the charges levied by waste disposal authorities and (b) the calculation for recycling credits.
  836
  Mr. Maclean
  Waste disposal authorities, except for the statutory waste disposal authorities which are a special case, do not levy charges in respect of waste disposal. The statutory joint authorities' power to make levies on their constituent councils is set out in the Waste Regulation and Disposal (Authorities) Order 1985, SI 1985 No. 1884. The method to be used for setting the values of recycling credits is set out in the Environmental Protection (Waste Recycling Payments) Regulations, SI 1992 No. 462. Guidance to authorities on operating the system of recycling credits is provided in circular 4/92.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those waste disposal authorities which have set up local authority waste disposal companies in conjunction with the private sector; and in the case of each authority, which private company has been the successful bidder.

  Mr. Maclean
  No LAWDCs have yet been established.

  Waste Incinerators
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment on which dates the toxic waste incinerator proposed for Howdon-on-Tyne, and the clinical waste incinerator for Felling-on-Tyne, were called in by him; on what dates the inquiries were held; and what factors determine the length of time before his decision is announced.

  Mr. Mclean
  Neither of these proposals was called in by the Secretary of State. Both are the subject of planning appeals which were recovered for determination by the Secretary of State. The Howdon appeal was lodged on 28 December 1989 and was recovered on 18 May 1990. The other appeal, at Follingsby was lodged on 15 February 1991 and was recovered on 14 March 1991. The inquiry into the Howdon appeal was one of three linked inquiries held between 11 September 1990 and 1 March 1991. The site-specific inquiry into the Howdon proposals was held between 8 and 31 January 1991. The inquiry into the Follingsby appeal was held between 9 April and 3 May 1991.

  The target handling times for appeal cases where the Secretary of State takes the decision are published in planning policy guidance note 1. The aim is to decide 80 per cent. of cases within eight weeks of receiving the inspector's report, although as each case must be considered on its own merits, more complex cases may take longer than eight weeks. The inspectors' report on the linked inquiries which included the Howdon appeal was received on 10 December 1991. It raises many complex issues all of which need to be carefully considered before a decision can be issued. Good progress is being made and the decision will be issued as soon as it is practicable to do so.

  The inspectors' report on the Follingsby appeal has not yet been received. It is expected to be received shortly.

  Energy Proposals, London
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how each of the nine proposals for power generation and incinerators in the east London corridor are affected by his Department's document, "Planning and Pollution Control"; and if he will make a statement.
  837
  Mr. Baldry
  This document has been issued for public consultation only. Once finalised, it will be taken into account by local planning authorities in the preparation of development plans, and may be a material consideration in individual decisions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

  Dolphins
  Mr. Ward
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps have been taken to investigate the cause of the strandings of dolphins on the Cornwall coasts earlier this year.

  Mr. Maclean
  My Department has had a contract with the Institute of Zoology—IOZ—since August 1990, to co-ordinate the investigation of cetacean strandings in England and Wales. One of the objectives of this contract is to allow for a swift and thorough investigation of stranding incidents. In the first three months of 1992, 105 common dolphins were washed up on the north and south coasts of Cornwall and Devon—substantially more than those recorded in previous years. The IOZ examined the evidence from 38 individual post-mortems conducted by the institute itself and by the MAFF investigation centre at Polwhele. The IOZ has also conducted or arranged tests for evidence of disease and contaminants.

  The institute has submitted a report on the incident to my Department which is being placed in the Library of the House. The post-mortem examinations suggest that fisheries entanglement may have been the principal cause of this incident. The animals appeared to be in a good nutritive state and free of serious disease. Tests for a range of contaminants, including heavy metals and PCBs, have shown nothing unusual. There was no evidence of he seal virus which has been known to affect cetaceans elsewhere. There is, however, some evidence of an increase in the number of common dolphins present in south-western waters at the time of the incident.

  Water (Environmental Costs)
  Mr. Jon Owen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will propose legislation by which the environmental costs of water extraction would be(a) reflected in the charges to the consumer or (b) taken out of the profits made by the water companies.

  Mr. Maclean
  I am considering the possibility of incentive charging for both effluent discharges to water and water abstraction. I hope to issue a consultation paper later in the year.

  Waste Tips (Groundwater)
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made in monitoring groundwater beneath waste tips; and if his Department will establish a database on the level of pesticide waste in each waste tip.

  Mr. Maclean
  A research programme is under way to provide a review of the extent and type of groundwater contamination in England and Wales associated with the landfilling of controlled waste. The work will enable the Department to form conclusions about the significance of contamination in relation to drinking water quality standards, contaminant background levels in groundwater 838
  and contamination from non-landfill sources. It will result in guidelines for monitoring requirements and complements a broader programme of monitoring groundwater sources being sponsored by the National Rivers Authority.

  The results of the study will be in the form of a database which is likely to contain waste input data by broad classification, but not details of pesticide or any other particular waste inputs to individual sites.

  Another project currently being carried out is to compile a database of the composition of the liquids produced within landfills and to investigate the occurrence of compounds of environmental significance, including certain pesticides, within these liquids.

  Radioactive Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he plans to take during the United Kingdom presidency of the European Community to co-ordinate and promote a common information strategy for the public on radioactive waste, as set out in point 6 in the annex to the Council resolution of 15 June on the Community action plan on radioactive waste, published in the Official Journal of the European Communities No. C 158/3–5, 25 June.

  Mr. Maclean
  It is expected that the EC Commission will take forward the recommendations of research studies which it has undertaken in this field. In doing so it will be advised by the advisory committee on programme management for the Community plan of action in the field of radioactive waste. The United Kingdom is represented on this advisory committee. The United Kingdom can provide examples of good practice, for example, the highly successful Sellafield visitor centre. The United Kingdom is also implementing the European Community directive on the freedom of access to information on the environment—90/313/Euratom.

  Leather Processing
  Mr. Fry
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give urgent consideration to redefining leather processing from part A of Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution regime to a part B process under the environmental protection legislation.

  Mr. Maclean
  No. We are satisfied that control of pollution from leather processes is more appropriate to integrated pollution control, regulated by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution, than to local authority air pollution control.

  Halon Gas
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what regulations exist governing the use of halon gas in retail products.

  Mr. Maclean
  EC regulation 594/91 controls the production and consumption—defined as production plus imports minus exports—of halons rather than their use in particular products, reflecting the approach of the Montreal protocol. With the EC, we are proposing that the protocol should phase out halons by the end of 1995, with an 85 per cent. cut by the end of next year. We will also be pressing for a complete phase-out of halons within the Community by the end of 1994.

  Sustainable Development Corporation
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to encourage the involvement of non-governmental organisations in the Sustainable Development Corporation according to United Nations Conference on Environment and Development accreditation and not to Economic and Social Council accreditation.

  Mr. Maclean
  The United Kingdom will encourage the General Assembly, at an early stage, to examine ways of enhancing the involvement of non-governmental organisations within the United Nations system in relation to the UNCED follow-up process, and the establishment of the best procedures for such an expanded role.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make representations to the Secretary-General of the United Nations to ensure the establishment of a formula for deciding the membership of the Sustainable Development Corporation which ensures that membership is not limited to Economic and Social Council members.

  Mr. Maclean
  The United Kingdom will seek to ensure that the General Assembly, at its 47th session, establishes a basis for membership of the Sustainable Development Commission which pays due regard to equitable geographical distribution and the interests of those who are not Economic and Social Council members.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to make representations to ensure that the newly established Sustainable Development Corporation has the strongest available and highest qualified secretariat.

  Mr. Maclean
  The United Kingdom will ask the United Nations Secretary-General to ensure that the Sustainable Development Commission has a highly qualified and competent support structure within the framework of the United Nations secretariat. We do not believe that a new, independent secretariat should be created.

  Recycling
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will assess the restrictions placed on local authorities' spending on recycling and reconsider the standard spending assessment formula to enable local authorities to be assured of sufficient resources to produce the recycling plan.
  840
  Mr. Robin Squire
  Standard spending assessments make proper provision for the whole range of services for which local authorities are responsible. Provision for waste recycling was taken into account in the 1992–93 local government finance settlement. It is for local authorities to determine their own spending priorities in the light of local circumstances.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will list those local authorities which(a) have submitted their recycling plan within the time scale laid down by his Department and (b) have not yet submitted their recycling plan;

  (2) of those authorities which have not submitted a recycling plan, what reasons have been given for failure to submit one within the time scale.

  Mr. Maclean
  Local authorities are not due to submit their draft recycling plans until 1 August 1992.

  By 13 July 1992 plans had been received from:

  London boroughs

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  Kensington and Chelsea

  Metropolitan boroughs

  Calderdale

  Kirklees

  Leeds

  District councils

  Adur

  Arun

  Bassetlaw

  Braintree

  Broadland

  Chelmsford

  Chester City

  Craven

  Crawley

  King's Lynn and West Norfolk

  Leicester City

  Malvern Hills

  North Devon

  North Kesteven

  North Warwickshire

  Nottingham City

  Restormel

  St. Albans

  St. Edmunsbury

  Shepway

  Southend-on-Sea

  South Wight

  Suffolk Coastal

  Waverley

  West Lindsey

  841
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his current targets for recycling of(a) domestic and (b) commercial waste; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  The Government are maintaining the target set out in the 1990 White Paper on the environment, "This Common Inheritance", Cm 1200, the recycling of half our recyclable household waste by the end of the century. That translates to about 25 per cent. of all household waste. We have no specific targets for recycling commercial waste where the increasing costs of waste disposal are expected to act as a sufficient incentive to encourage waste producers to look for alternative ways of dealing with their waste. The proposed EC directive on packaging is expected to lead to the adoption of further targets for waste minimisation and recycling.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what economic inducements he has given to creating markets for recycled waste; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  It is expected that the Environmental Protection Act 1990 will lead to increasing costs of landfilling and incinerating waste. In most cases, this will provide a significant economic inducement to alternative methods of waste treatment, including recycling. To ensure that the market is operating correctly in these areas, the Government are currently undertaking studies of landfill pricing and of economic instruments, the results from which are expected during the summer. In addition, grants to assist in the development of new processes and facilities are available, and have been given, to the recycling industries under the environmental technology innovation scheme and other routes. Some of these projects are concerned with identifying and overcoming technological barriers to market development.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what criteria were used when determining the successful supplementary credit approvals for recycling issues; and by what means those criteria were made known to local authorities;

  (2) if he will give his reasons for rejecting Newcastle-under-Lyme's application for supplementary credit approvals: and if he will now reconsider his decision.

  Mr. Maclean
  The criteria against which local authorities' bids for supplementary credit approvals—SCAs—for recycling schemes for 1992–93 were assessed were set out in the Department's letter of 23 December 1991 inviting local authorities to submit bids.

  Priority was given to schemes which: could be shown to produce material for which there is a guaranteed market; involved partnership with the private sector, or a significant element of private finance; presented opportunities for offering employment to people with learning difficulties.

  Priority was also given to the further development of schemes which has been awarded SCAs for 1991–92, including those which were justifiably delayed in that financial year.

  In announcing allocations to local authorities on 27 April 1992, we made it clear that we had favoured schemes to collect chlorofluorocarbons for recycling, but had given low priority to "bank" schemes where we consider that
  842
  industry should be pressed to provide the equipment and to new kerbside schemes pending the outcome of the existing pilot kerbside schemes.

  Applications from more than 140 authorities worth more than £31 million in total were received for the £15 million of SCAs available for 1992–93. Allocation of project approvals from the total resources available was determined on the basis of a careful examination of every bid, paying particular attention to the priorities set out in the bidding letter.

  Resources for recycling SCAs for 1992–93 are fully committed. We shall write to local authorities by Christmas inviting bids for SCAs for 1993–94 for recycling schemes.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the extent to which charges for recycling credits agreed by waste disposal authorities meet the guidelines of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  Mr. Maclean
  Section 52(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 requires a waste disposal authority to pay recycling credits to a waste collection authority in respect of waste retained for recycling of such amounts representing its net saving of expenditure on the disposal of the waste as the waste disposal authority determines. Non-compliance with this duty is a matter for the district auditor.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the charges for recycling credits agreed by each waste disposal authority.

  Mr. Maclean
  This information is not available centrally. Ways in which such information might be collected nationally are currently being considered as part of the Department of the Environment's wider review of waste management statistics.

  Ozone-depleting Substances
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many times the Government have utilised the powers to prevent emissions of ozone-depleting substances from industrial processes since the passing into law of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  Mr. Maclean
  The Environmental Protection Act (Prescribed Processes and Substances) Regulations 1991 set out the industrial processes and the main substances to be controlled under part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  The regulations are enforced by HM inspectorate of pollution and local authorities which are required to ensure that industry uses best available techniques not entailing excessive cost for preventing, or minimising the release of prescribed substances. The substances prescribed for release into the air includes oxides of nitrogen, organic compounds and halogens and their compounds, which are ozone-depleters.

  Provisional figures for the first nine months since the regulations came into force show that some 3,000 applications had been received in England and Wales. Details of all these applications are not held centrally.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to introduce a mandatory recovery scheme for the recycling of chlorofluorocarbons.
  843
  Mr. Maclean
  The Government have already put in place legislation to control the environmentally damaging disposal of controlled waste. In most cases, CFCs become controlled wastes when they are removed from equipment during maintenance or on disposal of equipment containing them. Section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 makes it illegal to dispose of controlled wastes in a manner likely to cause pollution to the environment or harm to human health.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment who will be representing his Department at the forthcoming meeting to be held in Geneva between 8 to 17 July to review the working of the Montreal protocol; and what papers or oral submissions his Department will be presenting for consideration at the meeting.

  Mr. Maclean
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) in which I outlined the United Kingdom and EC's proposals for bringing forward the phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons, carbon tetrachloride, halons and 1,1,1 trichloroethane and for control of hydrochloro-fluorocarbons. My Department is being represented by five officials at the Geneva meeting.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to utilise the chlorine loading method when assessing the potential effect of HCFCs on the ozone layer.

  Mr. Maclean
  The advantages and limitations of the chlorine loading potential method for estimating the impact of ozone-depleting substances were detailed in the 1990 and 1991 reports of the Department's stratospheric ozone review group. The Department will continue to use the most appropriate methods according to the best scientific information available, including chlorine loading potential.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish the estimated production and release levels for CFCs, methyl chloraform and halons in the United Kingdom from the present to 1 January 1996 in terms of thousands of tonnes.

  Mr. Maclean
  This information is not available.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will review the effectiveness of the Government-supported ICI recycling scheme for recovering CFCs.

  Mr. Maclean
  There are a number of companies in the United Kingdom that offer CFC recycling facilities. It is for the operators of each scheme to determine its effectiveness.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what research work has been undertaken by his Department about the atmospheric behaviour of the CFC substitute HFC 134a and how it is likely to be broken down.

  Mr. Maclean
  The Department supports studies of the atmospheric behaviour and degradation of HFC 134a and other potential CFC substitute compounds under a collaborative programme by the Harwell laboratory and the universities of Oxford and Cambridge. The compound 844
  is broken down in the atmosphere by the hydroxyl radical and by reaction with oxygen. The results of the studies will be published, and will improve estimates of the impact of HFC 134a as a greenhouse gas and identify breakdown products which may have a role in lower atmosphere pollution.

  Director General of Water Services
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has received the report of the Director General of Water Services for 1991.

  Mr. Maclean
  Yes. The report was placed in the Library of the House on 9 June 1992.

  Business Concern, Sheffield
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what guidance he has given to Sheffield development corporation as to whether Business Concern is to be treated as a separate organisation from the development corporation; from which internal budget heading such activity should he provided; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Redwood
  The Department advised Sheffield development corporation that Business Concern should be offered grant support only if it was an independent organisation. Funding has been provided from the budget heading covering support for voluntary organisations.

  Relocation
  Mr. Gould
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what is the difference in cost between moving staff from Marsham street in 1994 rather than 1993; and if he will publish the value for money study carried out on the proposed move to docklands:

  (2) what has been the cost, including consultancy fees, of the process of finding alternative accommodation for his Department; and what will be the final cost;

  (3) pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks), of 9 July, Official Report, column 149, on redundancies arising from the demolition of the Marsham street building, if he will list the non-mobile grades; and if he will estimate the number and total costs of redundancies in each of those grades;

  (4) by what date his Department has been recommended to vacate its current premises in Marsham street;

  (5) what accommodation is available to relocate his Department on the Government estate;

  (6) what estimate has been made of the cost of refurbishing Marsham street so that his Department can remain there;

  (7) what estimate has been made of the comparative costs of remaining in Marsham street, moving to another location on the Government estate, moving to another building in Westminster or moving to docklands;

  (8) how many buildings of more than 100,000 sq ft are available to rent (a) in Westminster, (b) in the City of London and (c) elsewhere in inner London;

  (9) what accommodation other than that in docklands has been or is being considered as a possible location for his Department.

  Mr. Howard
  On 2 June, I announced,Official Report, column 707, that some 2,000 civil servants in my

  845
  Department would move to docklands, subject to fully commercial terms giving value for money for the taxpayer. My advisers are continuing their consideration of accommodation in docklands, and further work is being undertaken by consultants and officials in my Department. I will make a further announcement in due course.

  Home Energy Efficiency Scheme
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many households in the network installer area including the Shettleston constituency have benefited from home energy efficiency scheme grants since its inception in 1991.

  Mr. Maclean
  Within the network installer area which contains the hon. Member's constituency, 4,828 homes have benefited from HEES grant since 1 January 1991.

  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many houses have been improved under the home energy efficiency scheme since its inception in 1991 in the network installer area including East Kilbride.

  Mr. Maclean
  Within the network installer area which contains the hon. Member's constituency, 7,073 homes have benefited from HEES grant since 1 January 1991.

  Community Charge
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he proposes to advise local authorities to deduct outstanding community tax arrears directly from income support so as to avoid the expense of committal proceedings.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  It is for individual authorities to decide on the most appropriate method of recovering arrears of community charge and council tax. We believe authorities should consider methods of recovery such as attachment of earnings or deductions from income support in preference to distress as an initial enforcement option; and we have so advised in our practice note, "Recovery and Enforcement of Council Tax".

  Greenhouse Gases
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the reasons for his delegation's objection to a side declaration reaffirming targets on greenhouse gases at the recent earth summit meeting.

  Mr. Maclean
  We believe that international efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions should concentrate on the United Nations Framework convention on climate change, which the United Kingdom and more than 150 other countries signed during UNCED. The President of the European Community, in signing the convention, made a statement on behalf of the Community and its member states which, amongst other things, reaffirmed the objective for Community carbon dioxide emissions as originally stated in Council conclusions of 29 October 1990. In common with many other countries, we did not consider that other side declarations were appropriate for UNCED, which was the occasion to bring countries together in making environmental commitments.

  Sustainability Plan
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment with which organisations he will consult on the establishment of a sustainability plan in the United Kingdom; and when he expects such a plan to be established.

  Mr. Maclean
  The United Kingdom will consult relevant non-governmental, business, scientific and local government organisations on the United Kingdom's national report to the Sustainable Development Commission, which we aim to make in 1993.

  Fair Rents
  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many objections there were to rent officers' registrations of fair rents in London in(a) 1988, (b) 1989, (c) 1990 and (d) 1991; and what were staffing levels for the processing of these cases in each of these years.

  Mr. Baldry
  Objections by landlords or tenants to fair rents registered by London rent officers are considered by independent rent assessment committees drawn from the London rent assessment panel. The number of such cases received by the panel and the average staffing level of the panel's secretariat during the years in question were as follows:

  Year

  Cases received

  Average number of staff

  1988

  6,121

  39

  1989

  4,656

  37

  1990

  4,887

  35

  1991

  7,944

  35

  During the first six months of 1992 the panel received 3,728 cases and there were 39 staff in post at 30 June 1992.

  Sulphur Dioxide Emissions
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the amount of sulphur dioxide emissions monitored from power stations at(a) Ince in Cheshire and (b) Richborough in Kent in each year since 1988; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  The amount of sulphur dioxide in tonnes emitted from the power stations at Ince in Cheshire and Richborough in Kent for each year since 1988 was as follows:

  Ince

  Richborough

  1988

  3,822

  0

  1989

  3,954

  485

  1990

  6,999

  3,926

  1991

  8,207

  15,186

  Both stations have permission from Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution to burn limited amounts of orimulsion under legislation which preceded the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Future operations at these power stations will require authorisation from HMIP under the 1990 Act. PowerGen applied for authorisation in April 1991. The applications are the

  847
  subject of an appeal to my right hon. and learned Friend about commercial confidentiality. They cannot be determined until after the appeal decision, which will be made as soon as possible.

  Orimulsion
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement regarding the proposed burning of orimulsion at Pembroke power station.

  Mr. Maclean
  National Power has applied for an authorisation under part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to burn orimulsion at its Pembroke power station. This application is currently being considered by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution. and it would not be appropriate for me to comment further at this stage.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether power stations in the United Kingdom currently allowed to burn orimulsion are required to have flue gas desulphurisation equipment; whether this equipment will be required of power plants requesting permission to burn orimulsion in future; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  Two power stations, Ince in Cheshire and Richborough in Kent, operated by PowerGen are allowed to burn limited amounts of orimulsion under the legislative provisions which preceded the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Neither is required to have flue gas desulphurisation equipment.

  Applications under the 1990 Act have been made to Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution for these stations and for two others operated by National Power, at Pembroke in Wales and Padiham in Lancashire, and are being considered. In determining these applications, Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution will consider the environmental implications of releases from the processes to all three media: air, water and land. In view of my right hon. and learned Friend's appellate role it would not be appropriate for me to comment further.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what submissions have been made to Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution as to the amount of orimulsion expressed in(a) tonnes and (b) monetary value that will be used at Pembroke power station if permission is granted.

  Mr. Maclean
  (a) 3,760 kilo tonnes per annum; (b) No submissions have been made as to value other than a general comment that it would be linked to a basket of international coal prices.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what criteria will he evaluated by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution in coming to a decision regarding the burning of orimulsion at Pembroke power station; whether that decision is subject to appeal and within what length of time; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  The criteria used by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution in its determination of an application are set out in the Environmental Protection Act 1990, and related statutory instruments, and span a variety of subject areas.
  848
  The recipient of an authorisation under the Environmental Protection Act may appeal to the Secretary of State within a period of six months from the date of issue.

  Bearing in mind that Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution has yet to determine the application for Pembroke power station, I have no plans to make a statement at this time.

  Environmental Information
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment since 1 March(a) what new classes of environmental information held by his Department have been made available to the public, (b) what new rights to participate in the decision-making process on environmental issues have been extended by his Department to the public and (c) what new rights to seek remedies in the event of breach of environmental laws or failure to provide environmental services have been introduced by his Department for the public.

  Mr. Maclean
  The booklet "Green Rights and Responsibilities", published in February, summarised the current environmental rights and responsibilities of individuals. As was announced following the Prime Minister's seminar on 19 June, my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State proposes to work with local government to develop a charter for local authority environment services, and in doing so he will review those rights.

  Acid Rain
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how much acid rain was monitored in each year from 1988 to 1991; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  The mean concentrations of the contaminants, which contribute to the acidity of rain across the United Kingdom. from 1988 to 1991 are as follows:

  Mean precipitation concentration, µeq/l

  Contaminant

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  Hydrogen ion

  27·4

  23·9

  19·6

  24·0

  Ammonium

  24·3

  26·5

  22·8

  29·4

  Chloride (non-marine)

  7·2

  4·3

  4·8

  1·3

  Sulphate (non-marine)

  40·6

  37·07

  31·8

  38·5

  Nitrate

  21·4

  21·3

  17·0

  22·5

  Major reductions are anticipated in rain concentrations of sulphate and nitrate in future years following reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions secured through the implementation of the European Communities large combustion plants directive and directives on vehicle exhaust emissions.

  Dr. David Slater
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when his Department was informed of the shareholding of Dr. David Slater in DNV Technica; what consideration was given to possible conflict of interest in(a) appointing Dr. Slater as chief inspector of Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution and (b) awarding a contract to DNV Technica by single tender in August 1991; and if he will make a statement.
  849
  Mr. Howard
  Dr. Slater has never held shares in DNV Technica. His interests in the predecessor company Technica Ltd., of which he was a full-time director, were fully disclosed to the Department when he applied for the post of chief inspector of HMIP early in 1991. He made clear in the course of the recruitment process that if he was successful he would sever all connection with Technica Ltd. immediately. As soon as he was declared successful he accordingly divested himself of all interests in Technica Ltd. on 27 March 1991, before taking up his appointment as chief inspector on 1 May 1991.

  Technica Ltd. was subsequently purchased by DNV and reconstituted as a wholly owned subsidiary, DNV Technica.

  The circumstances of the award of a contract by the Department to DNV Technica in August 1991 were described in my answer to the hon. Member on 2 June at column 388. That contract was awarded by a different part of the Department and HMIP was not involved or consulted in any way about it. HMIP has never let any contracts to DNV Technica.

  Telecommunications
  Mr. Thomason
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to introduce amendments to part 24 of schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1988 and to publish the draft revised planning policy guidance note on telecommunications.

  Mr. Baldry
  My right hon. and learned Friend and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales have today published a draft revision of planning policy guidance—PPG—note 8, "Telecommunications", for public consultation, and propose to lay before Parliament shortly amendments to part 24 of schedule 2 to the GDO. The amendments and the guidance take account of the public response to the consultation paper on telecommunications, which was issued in the autumn last year.

  Modern telecommunications are an essential and beneficial element in the life of the local community and in the national economy. They are good for business; they attract new firms to an area and are equally important for broadcasting and new forms of employment. They can enrich life at home and offer new choices in education and entertainment, in shopping and banking. Through facilitation of homeworking, telecommunications can benefit the environment through reducing the need to travel, and hence by reducing vehicle emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants. Planning policy must not only provide for the continued growth of such services but also ensure that other developments do not impede the performance of current broadcasting and telecommunications services.

  The amendments to the GDO will take into account the rapid growth of the telecommunications industry and technology over the last few years. We recognise the need for operators to be able to provide an efficient and competitive service. The amendments will therefore seek to satisfy the needs of the telecommunications industry by reducing a number of current planning constraints, while at the same time allowing planning authorities sufficient control to protect amenity from serious damage.

  The main deregulatory changes are the granting of permitted development rights, for the first time, for apparatus on buildings below 15 m and for radio
  850
  equipment housing, subject to given limits, and the removal of the limit of two antennas on ground-based radio masts. However, there will be no relaxation of controls in designated areas, such as conservation areas and areas of outstanding natural beauty.

  These changes would be complemented by a determination procedure in respect of masts, radio equipment housing and public callboxes. Before such apparatus can be installed under permitted development rights, the code system operator will have to apply to the local planning authority for a determination as to whether the prior approval of the authority will be required to the details of the siting and appearance of the apparatus.

  The installation will be able to go ahead after 28 days from the authority's receipt of the application according to the submitted or agreed details, unless the authority refuses to grant prior approval within that period. There can be no grounds for refusal under this provision other than siting or appearance; the permitted development right itself cannot be taken away.

  The 28-day time limit is the same as which now applies to the current notification procedure under schedule 4 to licences issued under the Telecommunications Act 1984. The Secretary of State expects the greater majority of installations will he able to go ahead, as they do now, without the planning authority needing to intervene, and that intervention should only take place to prevent serious impact on amenity. Early consultation between operators and local planning authorities should help to ensure that the details of siting and appearance are acceptable.

  The draft revised PPG updates the current PPG on telecommunications and explains the GDO regulations governing code system operators—part 24—and the location of satellite television and other antenna—parts 1 and 25. It provides guidance to planning authorities on the importance of development plans in providing for telecommunications development, and on the planning considerations that should be taken into account in their development control functions. Early consultation and sufficient information are both important for proper planning decisions. The guidance continues to stress the importance for operators to share masts and buildings wherever practicable, and for planning authorities to ensure that large new buildings do not create radio interference.

  MINIS 13
  Mr. Nicholls
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will publish his Department's MINIS 13 documents.

  Mr. Howard
  I am today publishing the MINIS 13 documents and a set has been placed in the Library.

  Opencast Coal Mining
  Mr. Trotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has yet reached a decision on whether to review the planning guidelines on opencast coal in minerals planning guidance—MPG—3; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  My Department and the Welsh Office have recently completed a wide-ranging consultation exercise on the practical operation of the planning guidelines for opencast coal in MPG3. Copies of a summary of the responses have been placed in the Library.
  851
  The Government are concerned to ensure that the highest environmental standards apply to the minerals industry generally. Whilst I am satisfied that the guidelines in MPG3 have generally worked well, in the light of the responses to consultation, I have concluded that the guidelines will need revision to reflect changes in the legislative and policy framework since 1988. In addition, the Government announced on 9 March their intention to bring forward amendments to the General Development Order 1988, to revise British Coal's permitted development rights for underground working and opencast coal exploration. I believe that it would be right for revised guidelines to deal with all aspects of coal extraction, including deep-mined coal and the disposal of colliery spoil. I therefore propose to bring forward draft revised planning guidelines on coal extraction generally for public consultation in the autumn.

  Housing Management
  Mrs. Lait
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has for developing pilot schemes for compulsory competitive tendering of housing management; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir George Young
  Compulsory competitive tendering for housing management can make a major contribution to improving the service provided by local authorities to their tenants, and it is therefore important that central and local government co-operate closely in developing effective procedures. I have already invited six local authorities, Newham, Westminster, Rochdale, Derby, East Staffordshire and Mid Suffolk, to be pilot authorities. My Department will be discussing with the authorities over the coming months how this project should be carried forward. I expect to invite further authorities to participate in due course.

  Mole Valley District Council
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what use he intends to make of his sanction powers under part I of the Local Government Act 1988 in relation to Mole Valley district council.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  On 6 February 1992, my right hon. and learned Friend served two notices under section 13 of the Local Government Act 1988 on Mole Valley district council, setting out his view that in 1991–92 the authority had acted anti-competitively in carrying out work falling within the defined activities described in section 2(2)(f) and (ee) of the Act—ground maintenance work and the management of sport and leisure facilities respectively.

  My right hon. and learned Friend has now considered the responses which the authority has made to the section 13 notices, but he remains of the opinion that the authority acted in an anti-competitive manner in awarding this work to its own work force. He has concluded that the authority's action is such as to justify further use of sanction powers. He has therefore today made two directions under section 14 of the 1988 Act. The effect of the direction given in relation to ground maintenance work is to prohibit the authority from carrying out the work in question beyond 1 July 1993. The direction given in respect of the management of sport and leisure work permits the authority's direct service organisation to bid for the work in a retendering exercise to be completed by 1 July 1993, but requires the authority to seek the
  852
  Secretary of State's consent if they propose that their in-house work force should carry out the work beyond that date.

  Endangered Species
  Mr. Elletson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made on the recommendation from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee that a number of species of endangered animals and plants should be added to schedules 5 and 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  Following recommendations made by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and consultation with other bodies, I have decided that we should add the following species of animals to schedule 5—protected animals—of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and also amend schedule 8—protected plants—of that Act as follows:

  Animals to be added to Schedule 5

  3 species of beetle (Graphoderus zonatus, Hypebaeus flavipes and paracymus aeneus)

  Lesser silver water beetle

  Mire pill beetle

  High brown fritillary butterfly (already partially protected)

  Northern hatchet shell

  Lagoon snail

  De Folin's snail

  Tentacled lagoon worm

  Sussex emerald moth

  Pink sea fan

  Lagoon sea slug

  Sturgeon

  Plants to he added to Schedule 8

  Blackwort

  Snow caloplaca

  Tree catapyrenium

  Laurer's catillaria

  Slender centaury

  Upright mountain cladonia

  Meadow clary

  Lizard crystalwrt

  Broad leaved cudweed

  Shore dock

  Marsh earwort

  Norfolk flapwort

  Pointed frostwort

  Dune gentian

  Early gentian

  Blunt leaved grimmia

  Elm gyalecta

  Northroe hawkweed

  Shetland hawkweed

  Weakleaved hawkweed

  Churchyard lecanactis

  Tarn lecanora

  Copper lecidea

  Arctic kidney lichen

  Ciliate strap lichen

  Coralloid rosette lichen

  Earlobed dog lichen

  Forked hair lichen

  Golden hair lichen

  Orange fruited elm lichen

  River jolly lichen

  Scaly breck lichen

  Stary breck lichen

  Lindenberg's leafy liverwort

  Alpine copper moss

  Baltic bog moss

  Blue dew moss

  Blunt leaved bristle moss

  Bright green cave moss

  853

  Cordate beard moss

  Cornish path moss

  Derbyshire feather moss

  Dune thread moss

  Glaucous beard moss

  Green shield moss

  Hair silk moss

  Large yellow feather moss

  Multifruited river moss

  Millitmetre moss

  Knothole moss

  Nowell's limestone moss

  Rigid apple moss

  Round leaved feather moss

  Schlricher's thread moss

  Triangular pygmy moss

  Vaucher's feather moss

  Welsh mudwort

  Stalked orache

  Lapland marsh orchid

  Caledonia pannaria

  New Forest parmelia

  Oil stain parmentaria

  Perfoliate penny cress

  Alpine moss pertusaria

  Southern grey physcia

  Ground pine

  Ragged pseudocypellaria

  Rusty alpine psora

  Spiked rampion

  Western rustwort

  Serpentine solenopsora

  Bearded stonewort

  Turpswort

  Plants to be deleted from Schedule 8

  Recurved sea lavender

  St. David's sea lavender

  Purple spurge

  I will be placing an order before Parliament shortly which will bring these changes into effect. Further consideration is being given to three other recommendations made by the JNCC concerning the giant goby, the basking shark and the wild cat hybrid.

  Access to Information
  Mr. Coe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will publish the responses received to the Government's consultation paper on proposals for implementation of EC directive 90/313/EC on the freedom of access to information on the environment.

  Mr. Maclean
  I have today placed copies of responses in my Department's library. A list of respondents has also been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

  My Department is carefully considering the responses received. We will consult widely on the proposed regulations to implement the directive and on the guidance we are preparing to accompany the regulations.

  Tyne and Wear Development Corporation
  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the number of jobs created by Tyne and Wear development corporation, for each year since 1988, distinguishing(a) permanent new jobs, (b) permanent jobs relocated from (i) within the city of Sunderland boundary, (ii) the northern region and (iii) elsewhere, (c) temporary jobs in (x) construction and related trades and (y) other trades on the development schemes at (1) Hylton Riverside, (2) former Southwich
  854
  shipyard, (3) North Dock, (4) North Sands, (5) St. Peters way, (6) Hylton park (excluding (1) and (2)), (7) Sunderland forge and (8) Deptford Riverside.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: The attached table provides the information requested under sections (a) and (c) of the question.

  Of the 319 permanent new jobs in the specified areas, 84 were from expansion within Sunderland city council administrative area, 37 were created as a result of expansion from within the northern region and 198 as a result of inward investment from outside the region. A detailed breakdown of this information by site is not available.

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  Permanent New Jobs

  (1) Hylton Riverside (exc. 6)

  —.

  —

  —

  (2) Former Southwick Shipyards

  —

  —

  6

  (3) North Dock

  —

  —

  1

  (4) North Sands

  —

  —

  —

  (5) St. Peters Way

  —

  —

  —

  (6) Hylton Park

  —

  30

  31

  (7) Sunderland Forge

  —

  —

  —

  (8) Deptford

  102

  149

  —

  Temporary Jobs in Construction and Related Trades

  (1) Hylton Riverside (exc. 6)

  17

  33

  19

  (2) Former Southwick Shipyards

  —

  —

  8

  (3) North Dock

  7

  15

  22

  (4) North Sands

  —

  7

  95

  (5) St. Peters Way

  —

  —

  —

  (6) Hylton Park excluding 1 and 2

  —

  —

  —

  (7) Sunderland Forge

  —

  —

  5

  (8) Deplford

  7

  4

  —

  Temporary Jobs in Other Trades

  (1) Hylton Riverside (exc. 6)

  —

  —

  —

  (2) Former Southwick Shipyards

  —

  —

  —

  (3) North Dock

  —

  —

  7

  (4) North Sands

  —

  —

  —

  (5) St. Peters Way

  —

  —

  3

  (6) Hylton Park

  —

  —

  —

  (7) Sunderland Forge

  —

  —

  —

  (8) Deptford

  —

  —

  —

  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment which traditional industries on Wearside have received assistance from Tyne and Wear development corporation in each year from 1988 to the present; and if he will make a statement on the overall level of support provided.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: In the period 1 April 1988 to 31 March 1992 Tyne and Wear development corporation provided £2,983,749 in support to industry on Wearside. The breakdown between financial years is as follows:

  £

  1987–88

  Nil

  1988–89

  22,714

  1989–90

  673,357

  1990–91

  825,197

  1991–92

  1,642,480

  This support has been given to a range of different industries on Wearside.

  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the names of all companies which have tenancies at the Tyne and Wear development
  855
  corporation development scheme at Hylton riverside, the total number of employees with each company indicating (a) permanent new jobs created, (b) relocated jobs and (c) temporary jobs since these companies became tenants.

  Total employers

  Permanent new jobs

  Relocated jobs

  Temporary jobs

  J. L. Automation

  8

  6

  2

  —

  Sokkisha

  7

  7

  0

  —

  Coniston Computers

  23

  10

  13

  —

  Regional Tech Centre

  13

  7

  6

  —

  Applied Imaging

  73

  31

  42

  —

  In addition three other firms, not in receipt of financial assistance from Tyne and Wear development corporation, are operating from Hylton riverside. These firms provide approximately 25 jobs in total.

  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list all members of the board of Tyne and Wear development corporation giving(a) annual remuneration of each position, (b) period of office of each position, (c) body, company or organisation represented, (d) town, city or village of residence of each office holder and (e) the office held by each office holder.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: The current members of the board of Tyne and Wear development corporation and the date of expiry of their appointments are as follows:

  Name and office

  Date of expiry of appointment

  Paul Nicholson—Chairman

  14 May 1993

  John Ward OBE—Deputy Chairman

  14 May 1993

  Graeme Anderson CBE

  14 May 1993

  John Barnsley

  14 May 1993

  Eric Bramfitt

  6 November 1993

  Tony Flynn

  6 November 1993

  Ian Gordon OBE

  14 May 1993

  Ian Gibson OBE

  14 May 1993

  Professor Patsy Healy

  6 November 1993

  Dr. Ralph Iley

  14 May 1993

  Joe L. Mills

  14 May 1993

  Albert Moore OBE

  14 May 1993

  Frank Sharratt

  14 May 1993

  Details of remuneration are given in the development corporation's annual report for 1990–91, which is held in the Library of the House. It is not the convention to reveal the places of residence of individual board members.

  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the names, position and salary of all senior executives employed by Tyne and Wear development corporation and indicate which executives are seconded, whether from government or other bodies, and the period of time of each secondee.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: The table below shows the names, positions and salary ranges of the chief executive and second-tier officers of Tyne and Wear development corporation.
  856
  Mr. Robin Squire
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: The table lists companies operating from Hylton riverside, which have received financial assistance from Tyne and Wear development corporation.

  Name and position

  Salary band

  Chief Executive—Alastair Balls

  Within salary band £45,000 to £50,000

  Director of Marketing and Business Development (Deputy Chief Executive)—Gordon Ramsey

  Individual salary bands within the range £39,000 to £47,000

  Director of Development—John Scally

  Director of Operations—Tom Macpherson

  Director of Finance—Neil Mundy

  The chief executive is seconded from Government service. The current secondment period ends in July 1993.

  Wild Birds
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will provide a complete list of the numbers of licences granted for the taking of birds of prey from the wild and the numbers of birds of prey taken under such licences, by species in each case, for each of the last five years;

  (2) how many quarry licences for falconry were issued in each of the last five years; and what quarry species were involved;

  (3) by species of avian predator, and for each of the last five years, what was the number of licences granted for taking and the number of birds so taken from the wild;

  (4) how many licences for taking wild peregrine falcons have been issued in each of the last five years;

  (5) what was the number of falconry licences issued during each of the last five years, giving the categories and numbers of prey species involved.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: Details of these licences are given in the United Kingdom's annual derogation reports to the European Commission under the terms of the EC directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds. Copies of each report for the years 1987 to 1991 have been placed in the Library of the House.

  Rural Development
  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what Government support programmes or finance are available to rural development areas; and what are the basic services that his Department treats as being necessary for assessing grants to rural development areas.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: In addition to the wide range of national and regional assistance which is available from Government Departments the rural development areas receive

  857
  additional assistance from the Rural Development Commission which is sponsored by my Department. This includes the provision of workspace, grants for the conversion of redundant buildings, a business advice service, grants and loans for small rural businesses and support for community groups and projects. Grant applications are assessed on their merits, taking into account the needs of the area, the rules of the grant scheme and the views of funding partners.

  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list for each local authority which contains a rural development area the level of(a) rural development programme, (b) rural housing programme and (c) rural transport development fund for each year from 1987–88 at current prices and at 1987–88 prices.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The detailed information requested on the rural development programmes and the rural transport development fund could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, the total sum spent on these is as follows:

  At 1992–93 prices

  At 1987–88 prices

  Rural Development Programme

  1987–88

  19,831

  14,344

  1988–89

  20,734

  14,997

  1989–90

  18,232

  13,187

  1990–91

  17,344

  12,545

  1991–92

  11,292

  8,168

  Rural Transport Development Programme

  1987–88

  796

  576

  1988–89

  624

  451

  1989–90

  711

  515

  1990–91

  290

  209

  1991–92

  413

  299

  The rural housing programme has been in operation only since 1991–92. Its schedule of allocations for the first two years with a break-down by local authority can be found in the Library of this House.

  Environment Agency
  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to establish an environment agency.

  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to introduce legislation to establish an environmental protection agency.

  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he plans to introduce legislation to enable the creation of the environmental agency.

  Mr. Howard
  The Prime Minister announced last year that the Government had decided to set up a new,858
  independent environment agency for environmental protection and enhancement. We issued a public consultation paper on our proposals and we have been considering the submissions made to us.

  The consultation exercise showed that there is widespread support for our proposal to establish a single agency to unify the key regulatory pollution control functions affecting air, Iand and water. In creating this body, we have been concerned to ensure that there is no weakening in the protection and effective management of the water environment as represented by the well-proven concept of integrated river basin management.

  We have therefore decided that the agency should bring together all the functions of the National Rivers Authority, Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution and the waste regulation functions of local authorities to form an integrated body.

  The agency will cover England and Wales. The Government do not intend to make any changes in existing ministerial policy responsibilities including those of my right hon. Friends the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretary of State for Wales for the activities to be carried out by the environment agency. The agency will report on its activities in Wales to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales, and the Government will be considering further the detailed arrangements that will be needed to ensure an appropriate agency presence in Wales. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland will be making an announcement in due course about the arrangements for Scotland.

  We propose that local authorities should retain their present responsibility for controlling air pollution from the less polluting industrial processes. However, we shall ensure that close liaison is achieved and maintained between the agency and local authorities in the implementation of part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  In the light of' the comments received, we have decided that the distinctive role of the drinking water inspectorate in protecting the health and safety of water consumers should be maintained and its independence enhanced. We are considering how best to do this. It will not, therefore, transfer from my Department to the environment agency.

  The agency will be a substantial new public body responsible for major expenditure and resources. We will be looking for ways to ensure that it provides effective protection to the environment, and good value for money.

  We are now proceeding with drafting the necessary legislation to create the agency and define its scope. The Government intend to establish the new body as soon as possible. Legislation will therefore be introduced at the earliest opportunity.

Preamble
The House met at half-past two of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Worcester.

Lord Weatherill
The Right Honourable Bruce Bernard Weatherill, having been created Baron Weatherill, of North East Croydon in the London Borough of Croydon, for life—Was, in his robes, introduced between the Baroness Hylton-Foster and the Lord Colnbrook.

Lord Wilson of Tillyorn
Sir David Clive Wilson, GCMG, having been created Baron Wilson of Tillyorn, of Finzean in the District of Kincardine and Deeside and of Fanling in Hong Kong, for life—Was, in his robes, introduced between the Lord MacLehose of Beoch and the Lord Richardson of Duntisbourne.
The Duke of Atholl—Took the Oath.

Design Council: Policy
3.1 p.m.
Viscount Caldecote Viscount Caldecote asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their policy for the future development of the Design Council.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Baroness Denton of Wakefield): My Lords, the Design Council has played a major role in promoting the importance of design in improving our industrial performance. The Government will continue to place great emphasis on this vital area.
Viscount Caldecote: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. In view of the importance which she obviously attaches to the work of the Design Council, can she confirm that the grant-in-aid to the Design Council for the next financial year will be at least as great as it has been during the current financial year?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, my noble friend recognises the importance which I attach to design. In return I praise the work that he did in establishing the Design Council and giving it the charisma which made an enormous difference in those years. Of course, any incoming Government and new Minister will seek to develop many aspects of policies and will continue to examine the work planned. The level of grant will be consistent with the council's corporate objective and its programme of work.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, cannot the noble Baroness give a straight answer to a straight question? Will the grant-in-aid next year at least remain the same?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, the straight answer, as I tried to indicate in the first part of my answer, is that until the policy and work are sorted out it is impossible to say either yes or no.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, in giving that perfectly straight answer, is the noble Baroness admitting that the grant could be cut?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, perhaps it will help the noble Lord if I explain that the constant policy of the Government is to ensure value for the money which they spend. As a new Minister I am analysing the whole of the expenditure in the design area. Noble Lords can be certain that we support enormously the aim of encouraging industry to take advantage of the great skills which design brings.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the Answer that she gave to the noble Lord opposite is the only possible and proper answer for a Minister? I was very glad to hear her give it.

Pregnant Women: Employment Rights
3.3 p.m.
Earl Russell Earl Russell asked Her Majesty's Government:
What plans they have to implement their manifesto commitment to amend the law relating to the employment rights of pregnant women, to give effect to the EC Directive on Pregnant Workers and to give the right to at least 14 weeks' maternity leave and protection against dismissal on grounds of pregnancy.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Employment (Viscount Ullswater): My Lords, the Government will of course fulfil their manifesto commitment. The EC Pregnant Workers' Directive however has yet to be adopted.
Earl Russell: My Lords, I thank the noble Viscount for that reply. I believe that in general we are of one mind on this matter. Perhaps I may ask him more specifically whether he agrees that it is difficult to use the Sex Discrimination Act to prohibit dismissal on grounds of pregnancy because it is hard to find a comparable male condition? Would he therefore consider extending the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 to provide protection against unfair dismissal on grounds of pregnancy during the first two years of employment?
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, I think that the answer to the noble Earl's first question is "No". There are other occasions which would be equally applicable to men as to women. After all, we are talking about time off from work and there are other occasions which would apply equally to men as to women.
The answer to the noble Earl's second supplementary question is that the situation about the directive

219
is as I told him. It is a question of waiting to see what happens to the directive before we take any steps towards its implementation or otherwise.
Baroness Turner of Camden: My Lords, is the Minister aware that last year the Government promised Sub-committee C of the Select Committee on the European Communities that they were willing to abandon the two-year qualifying period for pregnancy leave? When may we expect to see that assurance fulfilled?
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, as the noble Baroness will know, we made a manifesto commitment to implement the EC directive. At the moment that directive has run aground, perhaps on the insistence of Italy, but we need to make progress on that before it is adopted and then we shall fulfil our manifesto commitment.
Baroness Turner of Camden: My Lords, perhaps I may come back on that. A definite promise was made to the Select Committee in November 1991. I am not at all certain that we need to wait for the directive before that assurance is fulfilled.
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, I believe that the manifesto commitment commits the Government to what is said in that manifesto commitment. I do not think that there is any change in circumstances.
Lord Monson: My Lords, does not the noble Viscount agree that an employer should be neither better off nor worse off financially as a consequence of employing somebody of one sex rather than another? Therefore, if 14 weeks' paid maternity leave is to be brought into effect, should not the burden—and it is a burden—fall upon the state rather than upon the employer?
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, we shall have to look very carefully at implementing the EC directive if it is adopted. At the moment we have comprehensive payment agreements and maternity allowances which are paid to pregnant women by the Department of Social Security, and those are very satisfactory.
Lord Rochester: My Lords, does not the noble Viscount agree that, irrespective of the fate of the European directive, it is up to the Government to implement their election manifesto commitment?
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, while we have a live directive it is better to wait and see what happens to that rather than to anticipate it.
Lord Desai: My Lords, can the Minister tell the House how well this country compares to other members of the European Community in relation to pregnancy leave?
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, overall the package of maternity rights in the United Kingdom is very substantial. Legislation provides for the longest period of maternity absence in the European Community and, unlike in many other member states,
220
it gives the right to paid time off for ante-natal care. Also, unlike most member states the UK provides completely free medical care throughout childhood.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that so far his replies smack of sleight-of-hand? Is he saying that the Government will implement these improvements only if the EC directive goes through? Is it not a fact that the Government may very well oppose the directive, which will not, therefore, go through because the Government have done just that?
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, no, the Government are not opposed to the directive. The Government accept the common position that was agreed in December last year. When it comes to what action we will take during the course of our presidency, it is important that we should negotiate in order to see whether we can resolve the difficult situation in which we find ourselves at the moment.
Earl Russell: My Lords, does the noble Viscount agree that his answer, indicating that there are male conditions with which pregnancy could be compared, creates some problems? Does he agree that pregnancy is not an illness?
Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, I do not think that that was what I was trying to indicate. I was trying to indicate that pregnancy requires time off work. So do other conditions.

Homelessness: Cost
3.10 p.m.
Lord Dean of Beswick Lord Dean of Beswick asked Her Majesty's Government:
What are the latest figures for people now living in bed and breakfast accommodation through homelessness, and what has been the annual financial cost for the last five years.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Strathclyde): My Lords, on 31st March 1992 there were 12,423 homeless households temporarily accommodated in bed and breakfast hotels in England and Wales. The net cost to English and Welsh local authorities of providing bed and breakfast accommodation over the most recent five-year period,1985– 90, for which figures are available, was £34 million, £76 million, £104 million, £91 million and £74 million respectively.
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that very detailed reply. I am sure that he is aware of the recent report commissioned by the Association of London Authorities, which is Labour controlled, and by the London Boroughs Association, which is Conservative controlled, showing that the figure for London has now reached £200 million a year and that by 1995, at the present rate of deterioration, the figure will be £500 million. Is the noble Lord aware that £500 million could build 100,000 houses? Will he urge the Secretary of State to abandon his vendetta

221
against local authorities and make sums available to build the low-cost housing which is so urgently required to deal with the situation?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the noble Lord will be glad to know that the Government are not turning their back on social housing. Over the next three years more than £6 billion will be channelled to housing associations. This will provide more than 150,000 new homes for rent and low-cost purchase by 1995– 96.
The Lord Bishop of Worcester: My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that there is another cost which is hard to compute; namely, the cost to the nation of large numbers of children living possibly for the first five years of their lives in bed and breakfast accommodation? Does he not further agree that there are on the whole two reasons why people stay so long in bed and breakfast accommodation? The first is that alternative housing is not available; the second is that they cannot afford to rent. Will the noble Lord therefore give an assurance that local authorities will be able to keep more than 25 per cent. of the profits from selling council houses in order to build up their stocks? Secondly, will he give an assurance that the Government will reconsider the provisions of the Social Security Act 1986 under which families on income support constantly find themselves unable to pay the cost of renting—very often to the tune of £20 a week?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the right reverend Prelate is correct to remind the House that there are costs involved in homelessness which in themselves are not easy to calculate, particularly the effect that it has on children. However, over the past 12 to 13 years there has been an increase of more than 2 million units in the housing stock, a far higher rate of increase than the growth of population. But pressure of demand continues to rise. That is caused by many factors: old people living longer; young people wanting to leave home earlier; and, unfortunately—and perhaps most important for the right reverend Prelate—a greater number of family breakdowns. That is the reason for extra homelessness. The Government are spending the money.
Baroness Jeger: My Lords, can the noble Lord say why we continue to refer to bed and breakfast accommodation? Is he not aware, as I am, having visited many of these places, that "breakfast" is a gas ring on the landing shared by several families? Those landlords are taking money from local authorities—from the taxpayer or the poll tax payer—because there is not sufficient decent, regular housing? Can he do something about such abuse of public money?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the noble Baroness will be glad to know that local authorities are working more closely together than ever before so as to combat abuse by landlords of bed and breakfast accommodation and to make sure that proper cooking facilities are provided. I know that there has been bad practice in the past, but I hope that that is now behind us.
Lord Bellwin: My Lords, can the Minister say how many empty dwellings are currently in local authority ownership?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, on 1st April 1991 there were 83,100 empty council houses and flats in England of which about 24 per cent. had been empty for more than a year.
Lord Ross of Newport: My Lords, is it not a fact that more empty properties are owned by the Government than by local authorities? Having said that, is it not also true that despite the extra money now being provided to housing associations, which is certainly very welcome, the figures for bed and breakfast accommodation continue to rise? It seems daft to those of us who do not understand Treasury matters that we should be spending between £100 million, £200 million, or even £500 million on bed and breakfast accommodation when that money could go into bricks and mortar? A Conservative government once built
300,000 houses in a year. Can the present Government not try to do something similar again?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, government departments, like everyone else, are encouraged increasingly to make the best use of the properties they have, particularly if those properties are empty. The answer is not simply the building of new houses. It is encouraging the use of existing homes, which is why in the Budget we provided for lodgers to be taken in tax free. There have been a number of other initiatives over the course of the past few years; all go to help. We are open to other suggestions as well.
Earl Russell: My Lords, does the Minister agree that one practical way of reducing the cost of bed and breakfast accommodation would be to put victims of domestic violence in women's refuges rather than in bed and breakfast accommodation as they are both a cheaper and a more satisfactory alternative?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, essentially the noble Earl is right. But only 4 per cent. of priority-need acceptances are victims of domestic violence.
Lord Stallard: My Lords, perhaps I may refer back to the Minister's first Answer in which he mentioned a figure of 12,423 homeless households in bed and breakfast accommodation. That figure is a gross underestimate of the true figure. According to those who work in the field—Shelter and CHAR—the number of households in temporary accommodation is 60,000. That costs about £15,500 per household per year whereas the first year cost of building a new home to rent is £8,200. How does the noble Lord justify the lack of initiative in building more houses when the figures so obviously cry out for that result? Secondly, can the noble Lord say whether there has yet been a decision in the deadlock between the Department of the Environment and the Department of Social Security about the funding of 500 bed spaces which the housing associations agreed to undertake under the mental health initiative?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the Answer that I gave originally was the correct answer to the Question

223
that I was asked. If the noble Lord wishes to disagree I think that he should write to me. The noble Lord asked other questions which I think are beyond the scope of the Question on the Order Paper.
Baroness Faithful!: My Lords, why are the local authorities allowed to contravene fire regulations and housing regulations when approving such accommodation?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, increasingly local authorities make sure that the bed and breakfast accommodation they use for housing the homeless comes up to the highest possible standards both in terms of fire precautions and suitable cooking facilities.
Lord Stallard: My Lords, the noble Lord is mistaken when he says that my questions are beyond the scope of the original Question. He may not know the answers but my questions were within the scope of the original Question. I asked about the cost, and the original Question asked about the cost. If the Minister does not know the answer, he should say so. He should not try to dodge it.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I always try very hard not to dodge questions, especially those from the noble Lord. I said that I had answered correctly the Question that I was asked. I made the provision that the figures I used were for the years that were the most recently available. If the noble Lord has unsubstantiated, unofficial figures, that is a matter for him.
Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe: My Lords, as the Minister has asked the House for suggestions, will the Government contemplate during the substantial Recess that we are facing a suggestion that I have made on several occasions; namely, that if the institutes of higher education would take more candidates who are based and lived locally it would release so many housing units for other people that the problem could be solved in a matter of two or three years?
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the noble Lord makes an interesting and useful point and one that I shall certainly consider in my department.
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, in answer to my first supplementary question, the Minister gave detailed figures regarding the Government's building programme. I believe that he talked of upwards of 100,000 units that they were funding over a period of years. However, is he aware that a report issued this morning by Shelter supports the findings of other associations and organisations dealing with the sharp end of homelessness that the target to deal with the situation ought to be 100,000 units per year? On the basis of the figures quoted by the Minister, I think that the number of units involved is less than 50,000 a year. Therefore, we are obviously running backwards.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, in answer to an earlier question I explained that the reasons for homelessness
224
are many and varied. We must look at the overall problem and not just find a solution in terms of building more houses.

South Africa
3.21 p.m.
Lord Hatch of Lusby Lord Hatch of Lusby asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they have taken any action to bring international pressure on South Africa to halt the killing of black Africans and to promote the search for a genuine non-racial, democratic constitution.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have provided practical help to the Goldstone Commission of Inquiry into Public Violence and Intimidation in South Africa with the secondment of three experts. We shall support international initiatives that have the backing of all parties to reduce violence. We are playing our full part in efforts to get constitutional negotiations back on track as soon as possible.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. However, is she aware that President de Klerk and his Ministers have publicly admitted that they have been financing the Inkatha Freedom Party, which has been seen to be mainly responsible for the violence in the townships? Is she further aware that President de Klerk and his Ministers through all the negotiations have shown that their major design is to preserve and safeguard white supremacy rather than have a true non-racial democracy? As the Security Council is meeting tonight, can the noble Baroness tell the House what attitude the British Government will take when the council is asked by the African organisations to send monitors to help the situation in their country?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, I am aware—and I am glad—that the Security Council is discussing South Africa today and that it will hear directly from the parties involved. We hope that the international community will give a strong signal that negotiations should resume as soon as possible. We also hope for unanimous support in the Security Council for resolutions that condemn violence from whatever quarter and call for the earliest possible resumption of talks.
To return to the earlier part of the question, President de Klerk has given a firm commitment that abuses by members of the security forces will be thoroughly investigated and that those suspected of illegal activities will be prosecuted. However, I cannot agree with the earlier part of the noble Lord's supplementary question.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, can the Minister say, first, whether the Government are satisfied that it is the intention of President de Klerk to introduce a constitution based on total equality between the races? Secondly, bearing in mind the great dangers involved and the debate taking place in the Security Council today, is it the view of Her Majesty's

225
Government that there is an important role for the United Nations to play in trying to lead towards a peaceful settlement?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, we all have a role to play in trying to get the various parties together to speak with one voice in the hope that the new Africa will emerge as it was continuing to do until the recent appalling massacre that took place.
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos: My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Baroness for her comprehensive replies to these important questions. Can she say whether Her Majesty's Government favour the proposal to send a fact-finding mission to South Africa? Can she further say whether the Government are in fact making representations to the South African Government to ensure that the security forces there take a detached and neutral stance in the violence that is taking place?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, we recognise that there may be a role for international observers. But that is a matter for the South Africans to decide. We would consider responding positively within an appropriate international framework to any requests which came from all parties. We would expect the role of any such observers to be to strengthen existing structures established under the Peace Accord of September 1991.
Lord Monson: My Lords, does the Minister agree that it is somewhat curious to imply, as the original Question appears to, that all violent deaths of black people in South Africa are to be attributed to President de Klerk and the South African Government? Is it not the case, for example, that a very large number of members of the Zulu Inkatha movement, especially in Natal, have been murdered by members of the ANC who are well armed with AK47 rifles?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, let me make it absolutely clear that HMG are appalled by the recent escalation in violence, especially the loss of life in Boipatong. As I said before, we have noted President de Klerk's commitment to bring those responsible to justice. We hope that that will happen as soon as possible. The causes of violence are complex; it is not for us to assign blame or level allegations. It is important that all the political leaders urge restraint on their followers.
Lord St. John of Bletso: My Lords, does the Minister agree that much of the violence in South Africa can be attributed to the poverty problem? Surely one of the major problems is to meet the expectations of the emancipated. Further, is the Minister aware that South Africa is currently suffering its third consecutive year of negative economic growth? Under the circumstances, will she put pressure on the ANC, COSATU and South African Communist Party (SACP) alliance not to proceed with their strike action planned for between 3rd and 9th August which will clearly devastate the economy,
226
cause an escalation of violence and deter foreign investment in South Africa which is desperately needed?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, with regard to the latter part of the noble Lord's question, I shall certainly pass on his remarks to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State. However, in regard to the first part, the new South Africa will survive only if economic growth returns. I agree that the economy is flat and that the population grows by nearly 3 per cent. As the EC and the G7 have pointed out, a necessary condition for growth is access to foreign capital. That is why Britain is among the leaders in giving aid which will help all black people.
The Lord Bishop of Worcester: My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that those who went to the funeral of the Boipatong victims were very concerned at the alienation of the young black Africans in the townships from their more moderate leaders? Therefore, can she, first, give an assurance that Her Majesty's Government will actually affirm and help to encourage the status of the moderate leadership in such a way that its credibility remains and that it is able to preserve the townships from the more extreme element? Secondly, will the Government be able to press President de Klerk to make even more concessions? I have no doubt that the noble Baroness is aware that many people are grateful that he has withdrawn one of the more controversial military units. There is the further matter of bringing to justice those who are guilty. Will she give us an assurance that Her Majesty's Government will seek that justice?
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, I think that I have already answered both questions. We are playing our full part in the efforts to get constitutional negotiations back on track as soon as possible. I said that President de Klerk's commitment is to bring to justice those responsible.
Lord Mackie of Benshie: My Lords, is the Minister aware that all efforts designed to bring agreement and peace to South Africa depend upon the South African Government putting their security forces under discipline and control? Their absence is obvious to anyone who reads the newspapers and watches the news.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, I think that I have already answered that question as well. I said that President de Klerk has given a firm commitment that abuses by members of the security forces will be investigated thoroughly and that those suspected of illegal activities will be prosecuted. If anyone has a fresh question, I should like to give a fresh answer.

Business
3.31 p.m.
Lord Hesketh: My Lords, with the leave of the House, I should like to say a word about the two debates standing in the names of the noble Lords, Lord Williams of Elvel and Lord Judd. As the mover is allowed 15 minutes and the Minister should rise to

227
reply not less than 20 minutes before the scheduled end of the debate, in the case of the short debate in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel, this means that all other speeches should be limited to a maximum of nine minutes and in that of the noble Lord, Lord Judd,10 minutes. If any noble Lord were to speak at greater length he would be doing so at the expense of subsequent speakers in that debate.
I take the opportunity once again to remind your Lordships that the digital timing devices in the Chamber indicate the moments that have passed rather than the moments to be anticipated; thus, nine minutes means that the 10th minute has been entered into.
This might also be a suitable occasion for me to draw to your Lordships' attention the fact that today was the last day upon which we shall have the great pleasure of Garter King of Arms introducing noble Lords to your Lordships' House. We are all, I am sure, deeply grateful to him for the occasions upon which he has led many Peers across the Rubicon that lies between the Moses Room and your Lordships' Chamber on entering your Lordships' House.
Noble Lords: Hear, hear!

Business of the House
Lord Hesketh: My Lords, in the name of my noble friend the Lord Privy Seal, I beg to move the Motion standing in his name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That the order of Thursday last relating to the Motions in the names of the Lord Williams of Elvel and the Lord Judd set down for today be amended so that the debates on both Motions shall be limited to 2= hours.—(Lord Hesketh.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Industrial Policy
3.33 p.m.
Lord Williams of Elvel Lord Williams of Elvel rose to call attention to the case for an effective industrial policy in the light of sharpening competition within the European Community and throughout the world; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, perhaps I may say how much I look forward to hearing the maiden speeches of my noble friend Lord Howell and the noble Lord, Lord Chilver. I am sure that we shall benefit greatly from their wisdom and that our debate will be very much the richer for their contributions.
We have recently had a series of debates about the European Community and the general state of the United Kingdom economy. Indeed, we had two such debates only yesterday. The theme that I wish to introduce to your Lordships this afternoon is certainly related to those issues but in a somewhat different dimension. It is this: are we satisfied that British industry is in a position to confront the challenges that face it? If we are not so satisfied, what, if anything, should we be doing about it?
Let me first outline to your Lordships the nature of the competition that we shall face over the next few years. There is of course the completion of the European single market. That is not merely a matter of liberalisation of trade between the different members of the Community. In the way that it is developing—this should be openly recognised—it has become no less than the restructuring of the European manufacturing base in which only the best will survive. By the "best" I mean those who have plant and machinery up to the most modern standards—up-to-date information technology, modern management methods; and a clear strategy to develop good products targeted to clearly identified customers.
To be among the best is not necessarily to be big. Small and medium size firms can be among the best. They can compete; but they must have the characteristics that I have described to survive in the single European market. That is the challenge we face in the single market.
Then there is the challenge from the wider world to which my Motion draws attention. Even if—and this is something that we would deplore on this side of the House—there is in the end no agreement on the GATT Uruguay Round, there is no doubt that competition from countries that see their economic future in the development of an industrial base will during the 1990s be especially severe. The OECD recently published what I would describe as a look into the future through a crystal ball. It forecast that Europe and the United States would gradually lose economic power to the countries of the Pacific rim—not just Japan, but Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia and last but by no manner of means least to China herself.
In the face of those two competitive challenges—from our Community partners and from the rest of the world—we have to ask ourselves, and I ask your Lordships, where we in the United Kingdom now stand. The answer is not, I am bound to say, encouraging. It is not just a question of general economic malaise, profound as I believe that to be. The worry is more specific. Most seriously, business investment is badly down, and manufacturing investment is faring even worse, but even that might not matter so much if the quality of investment can improve to make up for the deficiency in quantity. But again here I can only offer your Lordships a certain amount of discomfort.
About four years ago a number of companies recognised the competitive nature of the world of the 1990s for what it would be and made their plans accordingly. In the relatively easy credit conditions of those days they invested in plant modernisation, streamlined their marketing and embarked upon extensive programmes of research for new products. All, your Lordships might say, very sensible and very enlightened. There were other companies, on the other hand, which did not take such a view and decided not to invest in new plant or new information technology and which soldiered on with old-fashioned plant and a low-productivity labour force.
Let us consider the present circumstances of today. Let us consider Company A—one of the enlightened

229
ones. It has already rationalised its labour force to the minimum but in this time of static or even falling demand for its products it is having to carry the now penal cost of the capital it has raised to invest in modern plant. Result: serious financial trouble. Let us consider, on the other hand, Company B—one of the less enlightened. It has money in the bank. It can manage without difficulty a fall in the demand for its products by the simple expedient of sacking part of its workforce. Result: survival.
Between those two companies, can anyone pretend that Company B is better equipped than Company A to face the competitive challenges that I have described? Of course not. Company B will go under, but if Company A has already gone under, where does that then leave us? That picture is a precise reflection of many sectors of our industrial economy today throughout the country.
All in all, I am bound to conclude that at best we are only able to limp into the single market and that we are substantially ill-equipped to compete with the emerging economies of the Far East. The truth of the matter is that we have relied so much on short-term financial judgments that in many sectors we no longer have any capacity in Britain at all. That is why our import bill is high and rising—even when the economy is at best flat and the consumer is reluctant to spend.
What should we be doing? It would be absurd to pretend that there is an easy, quick-fix answer to the question. But there is one thing that we should be doing, in my view immediately. The one area in which it is possible for a policy change to have tangible effect in the near term is in government support for the financing packages available for large long-term projects for exports. We have been losing out badly in world markets, not because of lack of skills or the price of the goods that we try to export, but because of uncompetitive support from ECGD. We must be prepared to match the advantages our competitors give their own exporters; and that is an immediate priority.
Beyond that, I recognise that the question that I asked can only be answered in the long term. It is easy to destroy an industry. We have seen that in the early 1980s and we are seeing it even now. But it takes a long and sometimes painful time to build a new industry which is fully competitive, with world-beating products and the right penetration in world markets. That is what we now need. To do it requires a determined and effective industrial policy from the Government. That is my main message this afternoon.
The construct of such a policy is well known to your Lordships. It would entail an enhanced role for the Department of Trade and Industry. The Treasury can no longer be allowed to dominate our industrial affairs. Not only that, the re-creation of our industrial base has to he set as the prime objective of government. Transport policy must be framed to that purpose. No policy for industry will ever be successful unless industry's products can be efficiently distributed to industry's major markets. Regional policy, too, must be geared to that ultimate imperative for the simple reason, again, that no industrial policy will ever
230
be effective unless its results are properly distributed between the regions of England, and Scotland and Wales.
Sources of finance must not only be readily available but must be available to support companies on a long-term basis so that they do not succumb to the wavering fashions of the financial markets. Not only should the quantity of investment be raised, but the quality of investment is all-important. That means a commitment to a much higher level of civil research and development and also to a highly trained management and workforce, team work in the workplace and an education system that will provide the basic formation and motivation for young people to join in what should be an exciting future. Furthermore, and finally, this whole effort must be orchestrated in a forum which embraces the various interests involved: the government, the CBI, trade unions and consumer representatives.
Your Lordships might at this stage complain that I am doing nothing but recycling the policy that my party put before the electorate last April at the general election. I have to accept that criticism, but I do not believe that because we lost the election it is a wrong policy. I cannot disavow in July what I put forward in April. But—and here I come to the most important point—all the policy recommendations that I have put forward find an almost precise echo in a book entitled Where There's A Will, published in 1987 under the authorship of one Mr. Michael Heseltine. As the world undoubtedly knows, he is now the Cabinet Minister in charge of the Department of Trade and Industry. There are many quotations I could give your Lordships from the book in support of what I have said, but I do not wish to try your Lordships' patience overmuch. Just one will suffice. On page 101 he writes:
"The most serious industrial managers are now increasingly and articulately dismissive of a 'hands-off relationship between government and industry. They want, and should be offered, a new partnership between those whose working lives are spent in British industry and commerce and the political and administrative machine. They want more certainty and stability in decision-taking and they want a longer-term view—not an apologetic 'help me when I'm down' affair, but a proud and visible commitment to a jointly conceived set of measures for the creation of wealth".
I could not possibly have put it better myself. Admirable sentiments—and not only admirable but right. What has happened since the author of those sentiments has become, as he now chooses to call himself, President of the Board of Trade? The entire vision has been abandoned. NEDC, the symbol of the partnership between government and industry, has been abolished in a pre-emptive strike by the Treasury.
There will be no extra support for exports—the Treasury will not allow it; no English development agency to follow those in Scotland and Wales; no new competition policy and, above all, no new industrial strategy to sweep Westminster and Whitehall into the 21st century. All we have seen is a commitment to "one stop" shops and some rearranging of the furniture in Victoria Street.
The shame of it is that Mr. Heseltine's analysis and his prescriptions were broadly right. As I said in the debate on the Address, we would support the new

231
president if he put into effect those prescriptions that he had written in his books. The fact that when in office he has been roundly defeated by the Treasury says more about the Treasury and the Treasury-dominated Government than about the DTI.
However, the matter is more serious than a simple battle for turf between two government departments. The DTI's defeat is a symbol of our industrial and economic decline. As we move into the competitive world of the future, that decline will become more and more apparent and the Government—this Government—will have no one to blame but themselves. I beg to move for Papers.
3.48 p.m.
Lord Joseph: My Lords, I share with the noble Lord, Lord Williams, the welcome and the attention with which the House will listen to my noble friend Lord Chilver and the noble Lord, Lord Howell. I also share with him a deep concern about the competitiveness of this country's business activities. However, I hope to persuade your Lordships that the spokesman for the party opposite will have to accept some attitudes far more difficult or at least unfamiliar to his party than he indicated in his speech this afternoon. I say in no perverse spirit that I hope very much that the party opposite will add to the recommendations that it has just made through its spokesman some of the matters that have been more controversial in party political terms than he ventured on this afternoon.
The noble Lord touched, quite understandably, on the level of investment. I was glad he recognised that it is quality as well as quantity that counts. He touched, understandably, on finance. He failed to recognise that our problems stem from misjudgments in the middle of the 1980s which, in a previous debate a week ago, I acknowledged were the responsibility of the Government. However, I added that the party opposite aided and abetted the Government in advocating that interest rates should be lower than they then were when with hindsight we can see they should have been much higher. Those misjudgments led to the recession and the high interest rates which the country now endures.
The noble Lord also spoke of research and development. He failed to repeat his party's acceptance of a training programme as an indispensable component of success. I regard training and improved education as important. However, I recommend to your Lordships a Hobart paper published only this week entitled Training Too Much? which was produced by the Institute of Economic Affairs. From what I have read that paper is thoroughly worth reading.
As for expanded education, I yield to no one in thinking that we have treated scandalously the non-academic children and adolescents of this country. However, I tremble a little for future entrepreneurship if we expand higher education with its present propensity to be slightly hostile to business as a whole and slightly hostile to enterprise.
I should like to take this opportunity to deal with yearnings which may exist in this House and in
232
another place, and on both sides of both Houses, to adopt the more apparently successful interventionist policy of Japan. My right honourable friend Mr. Heseltine needs no one to defend him. He is perfectly able to defend himself. For those noble Lords who yearn, albeit furtively, for a little touch of MITI in this country, I recommend they read a book, which I have just read, by Chalmers Johnson published by the Stanford University Press entitled MITI—The Japanese Miracle.
MITI and the present skill of the Japanese government, in co-operation with Japanese business, have not emerged immediately but rather after decades of painful and harrowing trial and error. It is a delicate operation of co-operation between interventionist government and business. It succeeds stages when the Japanese Government sought to solve their economic imperatives by way of cartelizing Japanese business. That failed and led to another stage in which the Japanese Government adopted wholesale policies of intervention. That stage failed relatively speaking and it has been succeeded by the present co-operation between Japanese business and the Japanese Government, including MITI.
Noble Lords must accept that we are witnessing in Japan a successful example of a developmental state. It is not a welfare state, as some noble Lords welcome in this country. It is not a state dedicated to equality or to justice, let alone social justice. It is not a regulating state. It is a bureaucratic state. I believe there would have to occur in this country a veritable metamorphosis for us to follow the Japanese example. What are we to do in this country? For various reasons, some of them very understandable, too much of our talent flows into professional and social services, advertising and non-business activities. That factor is partly due to the impression given that manufacturing and business only too recently were pervaded by Luddism. That situation is partly due also to the conditions of pay and responsibility which management offers in business. That is for management to alter.
Today we must speak of something which the party opposite may find itself less willing to advocate than the noble Lord who has just spoken. In this country there has to be—I speak of things that are hard to achieve—a much greater recognition of the dependence of jobs and prosperity and of social benefits on competitive business. Even now I do not believe that dependence is widely understood.
When I was Secretary of State for Education and Science I visited the sixth forms of many schools. I used to ask the teachers to leave and I then spoke alone to the pupils. I asked them what lay ahead for them. They almost always answered that there were only two modes of life ahead for them, either employment or unemployment. I used to point out gently that there were two other modes of life for a business career; there was self-employment and one day perhaps employer-ment. That concept seemed unfamiliar to them. I do not believe those in the senior common room understood that there were four such modes.

233
We depend desperately upon scientists and engineers but they still flinch from vulgar ideas of profit. I was the Minister responsible for trying to persuade a brilliant, world famous laboratory in one of our great universities to move into the market place with some of its products. A special sealed chamber had to be designed in which the scientists could work and not suffer any contamination from profits. We designed something called Celltech which I am glad to say is now taking off. It would not do any harm to the objectives that I and the whole House want if profit, made in competition and subject to the rule of law, were more widely accepted, including by our scientists and engineers. We desperately need more entrepreneurs in this country.
How will Her Majesty's loyal Opposition respond to a particular criterion? I yearn for that criterion although I have no reason to believe that it will happen. Let us suppose that one day the Government suggest a reduction in the burden of capital gains tax. The immediate instant reaction of the Labour Party will be to state that as a result of that lessening of the burden of capital gains tax the wealthy will become wealthier. Some competitors of ours have a quite different capital gains tax structure that penalises short-term gains but exempts long-term gains. That is probably the kind of policy we need in this country. But until the Labour Party accepts that, there will be nothing like full employment and there will be insufficient entrepreneurship; and until we get rid of this incubus of capital gains as it is now, I do not accept the protestations of the noble Lord as meeting the needs of the country.
I agree with him that there is no quick fix coming. The structure of business matters, the corporate nature of Europe and the protectionist nature of Europe are matters we must consider. We are being, through Europe, wicked to the third world and to Eastern Europe in keeping out their products. Were there more time in this debate I would speak for longer on that matter. I accept the same objective as the noble Lord, but I do not believe he has bitten into the real needs of this country.
3.58 p.m
Lord Ezra: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel, in introducing this debate drew attention to the fact that this is not the first time in recent days we have discussed the economy. I participated in a debate introduced by the noble Lord, Lord Dean of Beswick, last week on the subject, and yesterday during the debate on the Finance Bill the economy was widely touched on. Nonetheless the difficult economic situation in which we find ourselves thoroughly justifies the frequency with which we discuss this subject.
There are many aspects to the problem of our industrial situation. I wish to discuss particularly our balance of payments. Britain's visible exports amount to no less than 19 per cent. of GDP. In addition there are substantial invisible exports consisting of financial and consultancy services, tourism, shipping and earnings from overseas investments. Thus, exports of goods and services are big business for this country
234
and the CBI estimates that the UK exports 40 per cent. more per capita than Japan. That is a remarkable achievement.
However, the trouble is that exports cannot be considered in isolation. For the past five years more goods have been imported than have been exported. That is particularly true of visible trade. The last year in which a positive trade balance was achieved in the UK was 1985. That was the year in which the Select Committee on Overseas Trade, so ably led by the noble Lord, Lord Aldington, and with which the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, and I were involved, reported to the House. It foresaw that unless current policies were changed a progressive deterioration in Britain's trade balance would set in.
The committee estimated that that might amount to a deficit of some £10 billion by 1989. At the time that was considered to be wildly pessimistic. In the event it proved to be far too optimistic as the deficit in that year exceeded £20 billion. Subsequently deficits have fallen to £15 billion in 1990 and £5 billion in 1991. However, in 1992, based on figures published so far this year by the Government statistical service, the deficit could rise again to perhaps as much as £10 billion. In the case of visible trade, excluding oil and erratic items, the deficit in 1991 was £13.5 billion and for the first five months of this year unfortunately it is running at a rate noticeably above that.
That situation arises during a continuing period of recession, but it has been evident during the post-war period that as the economy picks up so the balance of payments deteriorates further. Therefore, if the economy begins to pick up either towards the end of this year, as the Government hope, or during the course of next year, as some of us feel is the earliest likely date, on past form we could expect that fortunate occurrence of a recovery to be accompanied by a widening of the balance of payments gap, which is already wide enough.
There can be only one explanation for that situation. That is the inadequacy of our industrial capacity. While there has been noticeable improvement in productivity in a number of sectors of British industry, that has not made up for the underlying lack of capacity. One therefore returns to the question of investment, which has already been mentioned in today's debate by the noble Lord, Lord Williams, and the noble Lord, Lord Joseph. Unfortunately investment in manufacturing industry in particular has been declining at a substantial rate. According to CBI statistics it fell by 15 per cent. in 1991 compared with 1990 and further falls are forecast this year. It is therefore vital to create the conditions under which industry will start to invest again.
That is an issue which has been widely ventilated. If, for reasons which the Government have repeatedly drawn to our attention, it is not possible for this country unilaterally to reduce interest rates, then we must look at other measures, particularly fiscal measures. Fiscal measures which have been mentioned repeatedly in debates on this subject have been an increase in investment allowances and putting more

235
money into essential infrastructure to create the right conditions for industry, particularly transport, training and education and research.
It could well be argued that to spend public money in those directions would add to the already high public sector borrowing requirement. That is perfectly true, but if we do not stimulate the economy in some way the PSBR will go up anyway in financing increasing unemployment. Surely it would be better to spend more on the PSBR to finance productive investment which could stem unemployment than simply have to go on financing an ever-increased level of unemployment.
I should like to draw particular attention to the stimulus of exports. The noble Lord, Lord Williams, mentioned the need for financial packages for export projects to be on the same basis and same scale as those of our major competitors. I should like to refer specifically to export services. I have found that the amount spent on export promotion services in Britain is less than is the case with many of our major competitors. In 1990– 91 some £31 million was spent on those services. That was £6 million less than the previous year, and indeed the amount spent on those services in recent years has declined progressively in real terms.
The British Overseas Trade Board's latest annual report indicates that that fall in expenditure is attributable in part to a decline in the take-up of certain export services. That is a serious matter because the quality of the services offered by the BOTB is, in my opinion, generally high. Therefore it means either that insufficient effort has been made to promote the available services or that the charges made for them are too high. Some of the services offered, such as those relating to overseas trade fairs and outward missions, have limiting conditions attached to them. At a time when it is vital to stimulate exports it seems questionable whether restrictions of that sort should be imposed. I therefore feel that a wide-ranging review of export services is called for.
To conclude, we have been going through a prolonged period of declining employment and investment in industry. It is essential that those trends be reversed. When the economy ran too fast in 1989 the Government began applying the brakes. Now that the economy is running well below the speed limit it is time for a touch of the accelerator.
4.6 p.m.
Lord Howell: My Lords, first of all I should like to express my personal appreciation of the very warm and kindly reception I have had from all sides of this House. It is 37 years since I made my maiden speech in the other place. I shall therefore hope to enjoy more than my fair share of the traditional tolerance of this place in this speech and in future months as I can assure your Lordships that I shall attempt to rid myself of the old Adam as soon as possible.
I am well aware that maiden speeches should not cross the conventions of the House and should be reasonably brief. I assure your Lordships that in my time I have refereed far too many highly contentious
236
and emotional football matches not to wish to enforce the rules, however distinguished the players. I hope that at the end of this speech the goal posts will still be in the same position as they were when I stood up.
Interestingly enough my first maiden speech was also on this subject of industrial growth and harmony, which is a matter of the highest priority for this country. During the whole of my public life I have been sustained by the great city of Birmingham, which of course is suffering badly at the moment but which has been at the heart of the industrial life of this country. I am therefore grateful to my noble friend Lord Williams for calling attention to these matters today. As far as possible I shall avoid controversy by allowing the facts to speak for themselves, which is more usual in this place than in the place from whence I came.
The facts could not be more devastating than at present. Your Lordships are familiar with them, and some of them have just been recited by the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, and by my noble friend. Therefore, I shall not go into them in detail except to say that we know that GDP has fallen for six consecutive quarters and is 3.6 per cent. down over 1990– 91; fixed investments are down; the current account deficit must be the cause of the greatest concern to us all; 30,722 businesses collapsed in the first six months of this year; and unemployment is officially put at 2.7 million but most of us believe that it is much higher. In the West Midlands alone in 1991 manufacturing employment fell by 9.1 per cent. and output declined by 8.5 per cent. Business failures in the West Midlands are up 40 per cent. in the first six months of this year to 2,020. These are catastrophic figures.
I think the question to be asked in this debate, which the noble Lord addressed is, what is the purpose of all this. How are we to rescue ourselves from it? How can so much of our industrial heartland ever again compete and export when it is being laid so low by the recession? I talk to a great many businessmen in the CBI, chambers of commerce and the Engineering Employers' Federation, and I talk to trade unions and others. All of them regard the argument over the correct level of interest rates as purely academic as far as their businesses are concerned. My great fear is that we are not only destroying the industrial base of the country; we are destroying its social fabric.
I was brought up to believe in the Protestant work ethic. I know that for millions of youngsters, including myself and, I suspect, many of your Lordships, the discipline of the workplace was one of the most important things in their lives. If millions of people do not know and never will know the discipline of the workplace, what social effects do we expect that to have in the world outside? That is very much part and parcel of the need for an industrial policy. For example, what on earth can we say about the recent finding of the career service that in 1991 only one in 10 school-leavers had a job to go to—a 50 per cent. reduction in the position three years earlier. If we look at the dramatic drop in business opportunities for graduates and people coming out of technical colleges the situation is equally startling.

237
I believe that industrial policy in this country has been sacrificed on the altar of fiscal rectitude and we desperately need to have a new industrial strategy. I base my comments on the advice I have received from my business colleagues in the West Midlands. We need to have a policy which will create a new partnership between manufacturing industry, the banks—which have a lot to answer for—and the Government. We need long-term investment, with tax incentives for technology and research and development. We also need regional development agencies and improved capital allowances. Can we not end the ludicrous policy of stopping local authorities spending their capital receipts on building houses in order to help the building industry get going again?
The West Midlands also needs an air link from Birmingham to the United States on which we have been pressing the Government for a long time. We need help with the MetroLine to link the Black Country with Birmingham's International Convention Centre, the National Exhibition Centre and the National Indoor Arena. It is a story that beggars belief. It is a £100 million project. A two-year appraisal (the most thorough ever undertaken) was made by the Department of Transport. It gave it the green light. The Government announced a £21.5 million grant for the tender process alone. That encouraged the private sector to put forward schemes and spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on its own feasibility studies. Incidentally, although the £1.5 million help had been announced at the Conservative Party Conference last October, immediately after the election when business houses had tendered and spent hundreds of thousands of pounds, the Government announced that they were not going on with it and there was no money for this extremely vital regional railway link. One result of that is that Birmingham and the West Midlands have lost a £10 million grant from European funds which they desperately need.
Another matter of vital importance given the geographical location of that part of the country is the Channel Tunnel. It is another incredible story. A £9 billion investment was jointly announced by the two Prime Ministers. The French have gone ahead and built a magnificent high-speed link. Where are we seven years after the announcement? We still do not know the route. First, we were told there was no need for a rail link. In 1988 British Rail was producing four alternative high-speed routes. We then had the Trafalgar House involvement, which collapsed. Five months later the south London route which had been chosen was dumped. We then had the east London route. I am not surprised that the recent brilliant "Face the Facts" radio programme commented:
"Kent probably has the worst railway system in the country onto which we are seeking to impose the most sophisticated new system yet devised".
To coin a phrase, this is no way to run a railroad. Our European partners must find the whole story incredible. We need to have urgent decisions taken about the west coast route for high-speed trains and the siting of an international freight terminal in the West Midlands, which is so vital to our export trade.
I express the view that we need both an industrial strategy and a long-term European strategy. On the
238
latter point I ask the question: how are we to educate our children unless in the primary schools we start to get them to speak a second language'? We ought to help our businessmen. It was announced this week that 55 per cent. of those asked did not believe that 1993 affected them at all.
I conclude by asking the Government to establish strategy committees—I looked up the terms of reference and find we do not have them—to consider economic, industrial, commercial and long-term European policy. I trust that this debate will aid the Government in coming to those conclusions.
4.17 p.m.
Lord Benson: My Lords, on behalf of the whole House I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Howell, for his contribution. He comes with a very wide experience in many fields and his speeches will help our deliberations. It may not be generally known to the House, but apart from an abiding interest in cricket his special interests comprise manufacturing industry, health, environment, arts, local government, immigration and international and national sport. We may have the pleasure of hearing from him on a great many different topics.
I start with two assertions which I do not think will be disputed. First, our manufacturing base has been shrinking for years. It is now at such a low ebb that it cannot sustain our economy satisfactorily. Secondly, although there have been improvements in recent years the average standard of productivity in manufacturing is below that of our competitors. Between 1970 and 1987 our world share of engineering goods fell by 37 per cent. I add to those two modest assertions a reminder of the decision which your Lordships took only last year to support the report of the Select Committee on Science and Technology which contained the following statement:
"In the past manufacturing industry has suffered from a perceived neglect by government and from government's indifference to the decline of our manufacturing base. This must now change".
In the face of those facts it is incomprehensible that any government would not wish to formulate a clear, firm industrial policy which would cause the country to change direction in the manufacturing field. I go further and say that there is no difficulty in defining the material and substance of what should be included in an industrial policy. I made some tentative suggestions for the consideration of the House in the debate on 13th May this year, reported at cols.382 and 383 of Hansard. I will not weary the House by repeating them. So far as I could detect from the debate that followed, there was no dispute on those issues.
As an illustration of the decline in our manufacturing base, let me take two simple examples. Before, during and after the last war we had a strong, virile machine tool industry that was strong in exports. What is left is virile but a shadow of its former self. In 1970 production stood at 1,400 million; in 1990 it was 750 million; in 1991 the figure dropped a further 20 per cent.
I take another example. Before, during and after the last war we had a good motor cycle industry. It

239
collapsed in 1970 for reasons which need not be detailed. There has recently been a proposal to resuscitate the industry. However, in the intervening 20 years personnel have been lost along with exports and the skills which enabled us to compete with the Japanese who imported motor cycles in large quantities. In fact we handed the motor cycle industry over to the Japanese holus-bolus. Those are merely two examples of many that can be found in industry through the most trivial investigation.
It may be suggested that the decline is due to lower quality engineering personnel than our competitors, shortage of capital, or a workforce that could not adapt to modern technologies. I believe those suggestions to be nonsense. What we have lacked are leadership, thrust, determination and enterprise—all things which would keep us at the top of the league tables and not rootling along at the bottom.
Looking back on the history of industry in this country, we notice that in the past 50 years when any government have proposed measures affecting industry, the immediate reaction of the opposition parties has been to say in strident terms not only that they disagree but that they will repeal all the relevant legislation and reverse the policies. The effect on industry has been disastrous. The indecision, doubt and lack of knowledge as to what will happen have prevented investment.
Perhaps I may give a simple example to drive home the point. At the end of the last war, steel comprised, directly or indirectly, no less than 50 per cent. of our total exports. Then the Government decided to nationalise the industry. The succeeding government decided to denationalise the industry. A later government decided to renationalise, and a succeeding government decided again to denationalise. There were four complete turnarounds. We ought to be ashamed to see our great industries become political playthings.
The lessons to be learnt are that an industrial policy must be long term; it serves no purpose over the short life of one Parliament. It must also be sufficiently free of dogma and doctrine to be generally acceptable. Lastly, whatever opposition is in existence must exercise much greater restraint than has hitherto been the case.
It is the view, I believe, of many people in this country that we should not have an industrial policy because it might lead to interference in management by government, to direction of labour in some form or another, and to restrictions, impediments and whatever may stop the development of industry. I believe that such views are wholly misguided. I regard the situation merely as it is on the football field. The 11 players represent industry, striving with every sinew to defeat the opposition. But sitting on stools on the sidelines are the manager and the trainer. If the manager and the trainer went on to the football field, they would make themselves look ridiculous. If the players sought to manage themselves, the team would be relegated at the end of the season. Both have to
240
work to a common policy to improve without interfering with each other in the way that is suspected by so many.
An industrial policy would help to enlarge our manufacturing base, which is crucial to this country. It would increase our exports, reduce interest rates, strengthen the pound and bring our adverse balance of payments more into line. Those plums are ready to be picked. They should not be left to rot on the ground. If the Government want to take us out of the recession in which we are now wallowing, they can do no greater service than to stimulate everyone by a firm, strong industrial policy on the lines which have been explained today.
4.26 p.m.
Lord Chilver: My Lords, perhaps I may first thank noble Lords for their very kind welcome this afternoon and for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this very important debate. Over recent years I have become increasingly involved in international business. That has inevitably focused my mind on competition in international trade. In international business one stands or falls by the success of one's competitive activities and that has led me to hold strong views on international trade and competition. However, I am conscious this afternoon that the custom of your Lordships' House requires me to be uncontroversial. Although recent interpretations of that word have shown flexibility, I certainly intend to contribute to illumining the basis of this important debate rather than indulge in further controversy.
Unquestionably competition is increasing around the world at a great pace. It is worth putting that in context. The world's largest exporters are Germany, now in the lead, and the United States. Those are the two greatest exporters. Each of them exports 11 per cent. of all world exports. Japan accounts for 8 per cent. of world exports and the United Kingdom accounts for 5 per cent. That is a very substantial performance. Exports today are at record levels. The European Community, in terms of exports as a whole to the world beyond, accounts now for 15 per cent. of world exports. That is perhaps the most significant feature of the interchange of trade across the world that we need to consider in this country in relation to our national policies of industrial development.
Productivity around the world presents an interesting picture. It may come as a surprise to many people in this country that the average rate of productivity in Japan is lower than it is in Britain. But that masks the fact that the productivity of Japanese industry in areas which contribute to their external export performance is very high indeed. There is a lesson to be learnt; namely, that productivity must be pushed to extreme limits in areas where international competition takes place.
The greater part of international trade is conducted by international companies, which play a key role. They compete in different competitive climates around the world. They work in markets which vary considerably. Those companies are independent bodies. They may be incorporated and based in one country but their activities bring economic worth

241
throughout the world. At the other end of the spectrum, small companies have severe problems with the increasing competition in international trade. They have limited access to knowledge of industrial development and markets and can meet severe problems of funding.
International exchange is one of the most powerful forces in world development. In general we must keep in mind the features which enable those forces of development to continue to operate on the world scene. We must consider areas through which we can encourage the exchange of trade. There are many barriers to what is called free exchange of trade. I use that contradiction deliberately because our concepts of free trade in Britain are very different from those that are experienced in other corners of the earth. It is important that in their study of the problem our Government address the effect of disparities—the impairments to international trade—which so many western companies meet on the world scene. The playing field is complex, with different rules and goal posts in different positions.
International trade is best conducted when fiscal, financial and social environments are stable. That factor will dominate the way in which international trade develops in the future. We have already referred to the importance of investment in the longer term. It is important and requires action not only by Government but by companies themselves. In the diverse funding situations which occur in the world, it is difficult to find areas in which suitable long-term funding can he established to develop long-term projects. In the evolution of the European Community it is not impossible that companies, as we know them today, may become more broadly based in the European Community, and funded in somewhat different ways which will enable the deployment of resources for the longer term.
In Britain we have to exploit the knowledge of industrial development available to us throughout the world. Our science and technology in Britain is very strong. We have to ensure that we not only deploy the knowledge of our working industry but also the knowledge generated elsewhere. We ourselves generate a small fraction of the world's new science. It is important that we develop means of accessing world knowledge which we can exploit in our own industrial development.
Finally, many of the discussions on the balance of trade problem focus either on imports or exports and do not fully consider the importance of the appropriate balance of trade which we as a country wish to aim for. We see powerful exports as one feature of an extremely strong economic policy. However, if encouragement of those exports has not led to competition with imports then the balance is wrong. That can cause serious problems. We in this country should now address more generally the type of balance that we wish for in the longer term. We should not necessarily pursue exports for their own sake. Indeed, one could criticise the policy of the pursuit of exports over the past 25 years or more. One could argue that that pursuit of exports created overseas markets, but because of the industrial plant
242
and capital investment required to produce those exports we were unable to meet the needs of our own domestic markets.
In conclusion, we shall face increasing competition in the years ahead. It is important that we discuss the issue more widely and seek wider understanding of the problems that it generates.
4.35 p.m.
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, it gives me great pleasure to follow two maiden speeches of high quality. I join the noble Lord, Lord Benson, in congratulating my long-standing and noble friend Lord Howell on an interesting debate on the area that he represented so well over a number of years. He has first-hand knowledge of the area and the problems that beset it. I also congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Chilver, on his maiden speech. That too was of high quality. He has a wide spread of interests in the industrial and commercial world which befit him well to make contributions to debates in this House. We shall benefit from those contributions. I note that in his earlier years he was a railway engineer. The noble Lord and I have a tenuous link. In my younger days I too was a railway engineer. However, I manufactured locomotives. We congratulate the noble Lords on their high quality speeches and look forward to hearing more from them in future.
I shall not speak at length about what should be done by the Government to achieve the aims printed on the Order Paper. When I spoke last week in the debate on the loss of jobs in manufacturing, I referred to export credit guarantees. I believe that in this country they are insufficient. My noble friend on the Front Bench Lord Williams referred to them in detail. I did not receive a reply. However, I believe that people in this country are not batting on a level playing field through the assistance that they receive on expensive and long-term contracts.
I refer to some points made by the noble Lord, Lord Joseph. Although we sat on different sides in another place, nevertheless I have always had the greatest respect for him when he made political speeches and statements as a man of the highest integrity. However, he has placed some of the blame on the Labour Opposition as though they had some responsibility for what the Government did in the 1980s, which has placed the country in its present difficult situation. I was in the gallery in another place on the day that the the Budget was announced by Mr. Nigel Lawson, now the noble Lord, Lord Lawson. It was such a marvellous Budget that the Conservative Party rose as one waving their Order Papers. The cheers did not last long because the Budget was an appalling blunder. I do not believe that it is right to say that the Labour Party played any part in that whatever. It is the duty of the Opposition to oppose; and that is what they did. But an appalling mistake was made and nine or 10 of the members of the Cabinet which created that situation have recently been ennobled in your Lordships' House. Those people are responsible for what took place.
The noble Lord, Lord Joseph, spoke also at some length about Japan. Some 12 years ago I went to

243
Japan on an all-party parliamentary visit. We questioned the Japanese industrialists and business people, but there was no hint that they were hindered, or not helped, by their government in the same way that our people are. For example, one of their shipyards was in danger of closing down. There was a surfeit of the mammoth tankers which they were building and they were mothballing them. They were on the last project building a huge oil-drilling rig weighing about a quarter of a million tonnes. I asked what would happen to the shipyard when the project was finished; whether it would be closed down and the workers made redundant as they would be in Great Britain. I was told that that would not happen because the social consequences would be too hard to bear. I was told that there would be an accommodation, although I was not told what that accommodation would be.
At that time, under the last Labour Government, a package was put together by the noble Lord, Lord Varley, who was at that time at the Department of Industry, to tender for a large power station in the Middle East. I believe that our bid was about £130 million and we were beaten by the Japanese by £30 million to £40 million. Anybody who knows heavy engineering will know that a disproportionate part of the cost is accounted for by materials because there are such huge quantities involved. For example, one must buy steel on the world market; there is no cheap market. Those of us who were involved in that tender believed that in some way the Japanese Government had helped to fund that successful bid by the Japanese engineering industry. Therefore, we should be rather careful when saying that we should follow the Japanese.
The term Luddism was used. I worked in engineering from the age of 15 to the age of 40. I was a highly skilled engineer. I do not remember being bombarded with high salaries. Every penny that I received I had to fight for from the boss, and I earned my money. The sad fact in this country is that some of the most skilled men in engineering—toolmakers and so on—are among the worst paid. Last week I received a report from the AEEU which shows the progressive decline in our manufacturing base. Another report will be published, which is embargoed until tomorrow, which shows that that situation is continuing.
I now wish to speak about the North West. From June 1979 to June 1992 there has been an increase of 320,000 in the number of unemployed people. In the manufacturing sector, which is the most important, there has been a total reduction in jobs of 363,000. The Government cannot hide behind those figures by saying that that is because there has been a reclassification of jobs. Those jobs are hard-nosed manufacturing jobs in the workshops. Vickers shipyard will lose 1,000 jobs, BICC will lose 220 jobs, and GEC Turbines will lose 500 jobs. I could go on. That situation is not improving.
Finally, I wish to refer to a report recently published headed:
"15 years of initiatives have failed to halt inner city decline".
244
It is a report by the independent Policy Studies Institute. It lists 50 of the worst areas,13 of which are in the North West. Conditions are worsening in most of the facets mentioned in the report which include education, unemployment, housing and poverty. The article states:
"One of the biggest statistical leaps was in Manchester, where homelessness rose from 0.9 for each 1,000 households in the second half of 1983 to 13.8 per 1,000 in the second half of 1991".
That is an astronomical increase by any standards.
Your Lordships may think that my remarks are somewhat wide of the Motion on the Order Paper. However, I believe that those matters are all inter-related. Where I was born and bred and spent my life was, along with Birmingham, the biggest industrial centre in Europe and it is now a desert. That is not because of high wages or because it has been strike ridden. The people who are still there ask only that they should be given the chance to get to work again. I believe that the Government should do more than sit back and wait for the tide to turn, which it may never do.
4.45 p.m.
Lord Wade of Chorlton: My Lords, first, I congratulate our two maiden speakers. I have never before met the noble Lord, Lord Howell, but I am delighted to see him in this House. Also, I was delighted to hear the first maiden speech of my noble friend Lord Chilver. I trust that that quality will be maintained and that we shall hear from him many times in the future.
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Williams, when he identifies competition as an enormously serious aspect for manufacturing in this country and for the country as a whole because what is detrimental to our manufacturing industries, or industry at any level, is against the interests of everybody in this country.
I agree with the noble Lord that we need to consider seriously what government's role may be in dealing with the extra competition which will come not just from Europe but from the rest of the world. We are moving into an era in which industry should gear itself up to operate at a much more competitive level. The noble Lord, Lord Williams, did not refer to the GATT negotiations which are extremely important and to which we must adjust.
What is the role of government in these matters? I disagree wholeheartedly with those noble Lords who suggest that government industrial policy should decide where investment is made, what kind of industry is developed and how various sectors of our industry are stimulated. Any suggestion that that is what we mean by government involvement would be detrimental, as it has been every time that it has been tried. The only way in which we can be competitive with the rest of the world is by allowing industry itself to adjust to changing economic circumstances and to do all it needs to do to adjust. Surely that is the role of government: that they do not put in the way of industry anything which prevents it from taking up the most competitive position.
It is in that sphere that the Government can take a much more positive approach. By and large

245
governments are much better at stopping things than they are at making things happen. Their structure makes it easy for them to prevent things happening because they can always find supporters for that. It is much more difficult for governments to be positive. The most positive policy of a government in those circumstances is to decide that the growth of industry is the greatest priority of the country. They should not do anything to prevent the growth of industrial development.
I shall now tell your Lordships of three areas of government policy where the Government are unwilling to say "Yes" and thereby stopping investment. There is a major development in Manchester. The project will employ some 25,000 people. An inquiry has been taking place for three years. All that is needed is the Secretary of State to say,"Do it." In the past he has been enormously capable of saying,"Don't do it." We are all aware of such instances. On this occasion he should give the go ahead. We have been waiting for three years.
There is another development in Somerset. An international company has selected a site for a major leisure development. It has now waited well over two years for the result of an inquiry. It wishes to invest £80 million. The company has been offered a site in Germany which can be made available immediately but it would rather invest in the UK. All it takes is for the Secretary of State to say yes. If that was done, the £80 million would be invested immediately, a large number of jobs would be created and everybody in the country would benefit.
Government policy should be first to make economic growth their priority so that whenever they are confronted with an issue, they have to decide whether it is right for the economy. If it is, they should agree to it. There needs to be much greater understanding in government. I agree with the Prime Minister's stance on maintaining our present exchange rate levels and our present levels of interest. However, while accepting that that is the right approach, one must accept also that if those rates cannot move up and down, other matters must reflect the pressures that are created.
The pressures will be in terms of employment and of businesses going through greater cycles than in the past when the money aspect could fluctuate. The Government must appreciate that their attitude to financing themselves has to alter. We must take a greater grip on government expenditure and on decisions about those we employ and what we pay people. I applaud the Prime Minister's stance on the wage constraints affecting civil servants. I should have liked to have seen similar disciplines employed in the other place.
If we are to push the country into becoming more competitive everybody must respond by being hard working, by taking every opportunity to produce growth, and by cutting expenditure to the minimum. And the Government—by far the biggest employer—must pursue the same disciplines that they are forcing every other business to employ.
I agree with noble Lords—I do not need figures; we can all quote figures—in regard to the numbers of
246
people we meet who are experiencing severe difficulties. It is a tragedy to see not only companies that started in the boom times of the mid-1980s, but also those which have been profitable and successful for 30 or 40 years, having to wind up and unable to use their skills.
As the noble Lord, Lord Benson, said, I feel that it is leadership which must make clear the priorities in everything we do. How many times in the past two or three months have we heard pleas for the Government to send money abroad to support this or that cause, or to protect this or that? We must accept that all the sacrifices are not possible until we create the wealth needed to do it. We can only do that through business and industry and by exporting our products. That is one of the most important aspects of the role that government can play.
The noble Lord, Lord Dean, referred to the North West. Extra growth will come from new technology and the ability to transfer technology from one company to another; the stimulation of further technology growth between this country and other countries in Europe and more particularly, the ability to offer and market our services to the growth areas such as the Pacific rim nations and the Far East.
Within the North West we have the North West Regional Technology Centre which was set up under the auspices of government in 1986. It is now running independently and playing an enormously important role. Only two weeks ago I attended a seminar called "Technologies for Tomorrow". It attempted to bring together those entrepreneurs looking to invest in technology and those people with the necessary skills. It was enormously impressive. There was a whole range of new technology waiting to burst upon the market place. Lack of funds and a lack of confidence that having got the right product we would be able to market it was the barrier. However, once people met, the enthusiasm of the entrepreneur on the one hand and the person developing the new technology on the other produced extremely interesting developments. I hope that the Government will see the importance of those kinds of organisations. Although they give support, there are many other areas where they can do So.
This is an important debate. We live on the wealth that we create. If we do not continue to create it and make it our top priority to do so, as many noble Lords have rightly said, so that we achieve a situation in which everyone is working for the common aim, we shall all suffer. Our future will be jeopardised and what was mentioned by the noble Lord will come to pass.
4.55 p.m.
Lord McNair: My Lords, I must first declare an interest in the debate. I am directly concerned with a manufacturing enterprise, albeit a small one. It is a trade which has remained unchanged for generations—that of producing handmade wooden tent pegs. I am the craftsman, the foreman, the production controller, the salesman and the accounts department. One might say that gives me a "worm's eye" view of the economy and of industrial activity. Indeed, it was

247
while I was splitting timber and shaping it into tent pegs that I listened to a programme on Radio 4 about the growing industrial performance, the growing integration and co-operation and the growing economic self-confidence of nations in the South East Asian part of the planet.
People in such countries work extremely hard and are immensely innovative. Those economies are all in different stages of industrial development. Discussion abounds about whether the Japanese system of close co-operation between government, banks and manufacturers or the South Korean system of dynastic family enterprises should be the model for the future. I suspect that the answer is probably both, each in its own cultural context. I feel strongly that it is the cultural context that is more important than anything else in determining the strength and vitality of a nation's economy.
I fear that the cultural context in which manufacturing industry flourishes or founders in the UK is rather unhealthy. There is still great prejudice against trade and engineering in those social groups which sociologists place at the beginning of the alphabet. It is a petty and elitist attitude which only serves to reinforce the prejudices of those by whom education is regarded as a difficult pathway to unlikely success. The "them and us" attitudes of all social groups do not appear to me to be diminishing. All those unproductive attitudes are a luxury we can ill afford. We are indulging our prejudices at the expense of our industrial growth. In that respect, we are playing the fiddle while Rome burns all around.
An argument could be made for moving towards what one might call the "Asian ant-heap" type of economy where social security provisions are minimal or non-existent and wages are low, resulting in rapid growth in currently successful or government encouraged sectors. I suspect that that is what many in the present Government would like, even if they dare not say so.
In my view that is not the answer. We need basic and technical education which both provide the mental and practical tools to do the job and also empower the individual in such a manner that he or she has the emotional maturity and self-reliance to create a secure and worthwhile future. Educational programmes which achieve that are readily available. They provide the self-confidence and self-respect which are a necessary prerequisite for young people to want, to absorb and to benefit from a sound and intellectually stimulating educational experience. I am thinking particularly of two programmes offered by the highly regarded educational research and development NGO called TACADE. Skills for Adolescents and Skills for the Primary School Child are increasingly seen as making a vital contribution to effective education. Such an education results in greater self-reliance and diminution of the dependence on state benefits.
I was particularly struck by an observation made earlier by the noble Lord, Lord Joseph. There are, of course, four possible ways in which one can participate in the economic life of the country. As far
248
as I am aware, we do not have any educational programme that explains to young people how business works in a practical way. An introduction to economics such as I endured on an economics 0-level course, which concentrated on abstract supply and demand graphs, is enough to turn anyone off the whole subject. I wonder whether such an input could be added to the national curriculum.
Additionally, we need to move much faster and more determinedly to catch up not only with the German tradition of excellence in technical education but also with the new developments in that direction in France. We somehow almost expect the Germans to be better at that than we are. Perhaps the fact that France is working hard to create a society of technically competent citizens may spur us to more vigorous action in that direction.
The situation may in fact be more serious than that and require drastic and far-reaching, not to mention far-sighted, policy initiatives. I mentioned earlier that the South East Asian economies reflect various stages of economic development. By that I mean that neighbouring nations consist of highly developed economies close by those which are less developed, which provide a pool of cheap labour. We seem apathetically accustomed to the penetration of our economy by those of Japan and South Korea.
An example of what international trade can be about was provided by the way in which the Japanese television industry came to dominate the Sri Lankan television market. The Japanese Government offered to build them a television station. Meanwhile, all the representatives from the consumer electrical companies went round to every little shop and store they could find. The result, naturally, is that it is very difficult to buy a television in Sri Lanka which is not made in Japan or which is not made by a Japanese company.
That is the kind of partnership between government and industry which would make such a difference to our companies' efforts to export. Even our own entrepreneurs have products like that manufactured in the Far East. I believe I am right in saying that that is how Amstrad operates its computer business.
We saw yesterday that manufacturing output has again fallen. Our balance of payments deficit is increasing at an alarming rate. Could it be that the single market has come too late for us and that we are experiencing the early stages of the structural meltdown of a post-imperial and post-industrial economy? I sincerely hope not. I urge the Government both to confront that possibility and to adopt such policies as would ensure that that does not happen.
Lastly, I endorse the remarks made by my noble friend Lord Ezra about the need to look at the total picture of spending and saving in the economy. There is little point in achieving zero inflation if it brings with it zero spending and a negative growth in manufacturing output while the trade deficit increases. It is sales, and the prospect of sales, which induce entrepreneurs to invest more and produce more. There are no absolutes in economics. When we had raging

249
inflation the cry went up "Why don't people save more?" Now we appear to have become a nation of squirrels.
Surely it makes sense to look at the overall tidal flow of savings and investment. I understand that National Savings is doing very well. I urge the Government to use that resource to stimulate growth by developing our grossly inadequate infrastructure both in a physical and personal sense.
5.3 p.m.
Lord Monkswell: My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Williams of Elvel for introducing this very important debate. I had thought of speaking about the immediate problems facing manufacturing industry in the United Kingdom as we know them today. But the contributions of my noble friends Lord Howell and Lord Dean of Beswick have effectively forestalled that. I have no need to explain to your Lordships the problems faced by manufacturing industry and the opportunities which those problems present to the economy of this country.
It is interesting to note that virtually throughout the debate the emphasis has been on the importance of manufacturing industry. I thought that it might be interesting to take an historical perspective. It is interesting to recall that in the early 1980s the Conservative government said in effect that manufacturing industry and the problems that it faced did not matter because the service industries would take its place and provide the wealth of the country.
I have prepared a list of service industries, but it is not exhaustive. When one speaks in terms of religion, law, medicine and education—prostitution is something of a grey area or a part of the black economy, if I may put it like that—and of soldiering, finance and engineering in the knowledge-based sense rather than in the manufacturing-based sense, they are all elements of service industries. But the Government's encouragement of their development in the 1980s was pretty limited. I say that in the sense that religion, for example, is not really one of the strong points of this country nowadays. We have a rather anachronistic legal system which does not translate well to other countries throughout the world. As regards medicine, we do not train enough doctors in this country to satisfy the needs of our own National Health Service. When considering education, one has only to think about what has happened to it over the past five or six years under the Conservative Government to realise that they were never very much in favour of promoting education. They have done everything they can to denigrate, castigate and do what damage they can to it.
It is interesting that this country spends so much on the armed forces and equipment for them. Soldiering is something which is capable of being exported. One needs only to think in terms of the Gulf War to realise that we have effectively exported that expertise. The Government have not done much to support engineering. Salford University has a very effective centre of learning in the engineering sphere. Far from being supported by the Government, it has had a
250
massive cut in income caused by the Government and the centre has been told to go out and find the money for itself.
Finance is another matter. The finance industry, through taxes foregone and the laxity of controls, has effectively been given every support and encouragement to grow and prosper under this Government. But to what benefit? At the same time as it has been encouraged through low taxation and lax regimes to grow and prosper, it has not been for the benefit of this country, but for those people with money. That situation has existed right through the term of the Conservative government. Effectively, support for manufacturing industry has been whittled away and where it has existed it has been hampered by high exchange and interest rates and a lack of investment incentives. Manufacturing industry has been attacked in just about every way that it could be attacked by this Government.
In my opening remarks I said that I would introduce an historical perspective. I was thinking in terms of my school history lessons and the Scots education I received. The history that one learns in Scottish schools tends to be Scottish history. I remember being taught that when the economies of Scotland and England were brought together in the 16th century, quite a large number of what one can describe as men at arms had to go overseas and become mercenaries. It is an interesting historical analogy. I hope we are not, but I fear we are, in the same kind of situation now in the sense that as our economy is merged with the economies of Europe, we know that we have a large number of men at arms. What is going to become of them? Are they going to be retrained to take part in productive manufacturing endeavour, which has to be the most important activity that this overcrowded isle indulges in, or are they going to be used effectively as mercenaries overseas, killing other people and getting killed themselves? I hope that we shall not see that.
There are two actions the Government can take. One is to reduce the money that they gather in taxation and currently spend on the defence establishment generically—on the armed forces and on defence manufacturing. The other is to take back some of the taxes foregone on money earned by the financial industries. They should invest the money that accrues through that increased taxation and through reducing the expenditure on the armaments business and the armed forces. If that money was invested and channelled into support for this country's manufacturing industries, we could—I hope—start to build a better, more decent and more socially just country and, in doing so, contribute to a better and more socially just world.
5.11 p.m.
Lord Sefton of Garston: My Lords, the last time that I debated this subject in this Chamber was on a Motion moved by the noble Lord, Lord Wade of Chorlton, drawing attention to the situation in the North West. I gave an example of what has happened in a two-mile area of Merseyside. Fifty years ago a tremendous amount of industry was located within

251
that tight area but today nothing remains. That is the place from which I take my title. Because I drew such a tremendous picture of the decline of an area I was accused on several occasions in that debate of being pessimistic. Well, I have not detected much optimism in today's debate. I did not even detect any optimism in regard to the nation's industry and commerce from the noble Lord, Lord Joseph, who, as we all know, is a protagonist of the free enterprise system.
When the noble Lord, Lord Wade, says that he thinks that the Government's industrial policy should not have anything at all to do with the siting of industry, I should like him to consider the situation on Merseyside as a whole. We have lost many major industries. The two industries that are left on Merseyside are all that remains of a massive industrial complex. One belongs to Vauxhall Motors and the other to Ford. Both those firms came to Merseyside because of government policy which was supported by both parties. In fact, they came to Merseyside because of the consensus and the realisation that, because of Liverpool's geographical position, there was no other reason for its existence and a reason had to be found. We persuaded Vauxhall and Ford to come to Liverpool—incidentally, we also persuaded Leyland Motors, but I shall talk about that later—and those firms now provide the only basis for industrial employment today on Merseyside. I ask the noble Lord, Lord Wade, to consider that point.
The noble Lord, Lord Benson, referred to what happened during a 50-year period and to all the faults of the steel industry. However, the problems of the steel industry and of this country do not go back only 50 years: they go back much further than that. I ask the House to consider some of the mistakes that were made by successive governments after the last war. To some extent, did they not depend upon memories of what had happened before the war?
There is no doubt at all that during the inter-war years when free enterprise had its unrivalled reign it could do anything it liked. It ruined the railways. It ruined the coal industry to such an extent that in 1940 when this country was fighting for its very existence the private coal owners closed some pits. It ruined the steel industry because it could not meet the demands of the nation. The story went on and on. In the end it created such massive unemployment that men like Winston Churchill and others were saying that never again must this country use the weapon of unemployment to solve its economic problems. That was said to be the consensus—and we all agreed.
Things were not too bad after the First World War ended. Churchill also said that recriminations about the past should be used in order to enforce effective action in the present. All I ask is that we remember that and act by it.
The present Government's message to the nation is that private enterprise is a wonderful thing and that if it is given its head and allowed to pull itself up by the bootstraps, it will do so to such an extent that the nation will be better off. I assume that the word "nation" means the community, although, having heard the views of a person who has only recently been
252
ennobled and become a Member of this House, I sometimes doubt that. However, presuming that "nation" means "community", the Government say that private enterprise, in the pursuit of profit, would make us all better off. But, if it has shown nothing else, today's debate has shown that an awful lot of people today do not believe that that has happened. They believe that we are facing a crisis of monumental importance over our world trade.
Over the past 12 years private enterprise has received the clear message from the Government: "Go ahead. Exploit". They have said to people,"You go ahead and be an entrepreneur and while you are making your profits, bring work to the people". But the real position at the moment is that we have 3.5 million people unemployed. Is that what the Government were referring to?
Having made recriminations about the past and looked at what happened during the inter-war years, perhaps I may now give the House some other examples. If one goes even further back, one could say that the years before the Boer War were just as bad for the working classes of this land. It is an amazing thing that the events of the Boer War, then of the First and Second World Wars, were the only times when the working classes of this country could look forward to some employment. That is a commentary on the operations of the nation. That is the history of this nation.
Let me bring our history right up to date. It is time that the Government started to look at what happened in the past and tried to learn some lessons from it. They should not make guesses or the dogmatic assumption that because they believe in a certain political philosophy it will bring solutions. It will not. Read the book—it is all there. The Government should consider what happened during those periods. We are now reaching a stage where the cold war is ending and when the resulting unemployment will get worse and worse. We really need to do something. If we leave it to private enterprise, private enterprise will operate as it always has—in the pursuit of immediate profit.
I should like to give your Lordships three examples which I raised with the noble Baroness, Lady Denton, not very long ago. The 125 aircraft, which is being manufactured at Broughton just outside Chester, is a big employer of labour. If it goes down that will have a serious effect on that area. The company which owns the 125 aircraft production has said that it does not have the money to invest in a new model. It is making money, but it needs £500 million to launch a new model if it is to be successful. It does not have that money so it is looking for buyers for the manufacturing capability of the 125 aircraft.
Rolls-Royce and Vickers are also in trouble. They do not think that they have the money to invest long-term in, for example, the new model that Rolls-Royce needs if it is to compete in the world market. Those companies are in trouble and are today looking for customers. It is probable that any customers will be either Japanese or German.
There are other examples, but I have reached the end of my time. I wish to conclude on another point.

253
I raised those examples in the House and I asked the Government what they intended to do to ensure that those companies did not go into foreign hands. The noble Baroness, Lady Denton, replied on that occasion. I respect the noble Baroness very much indeed and I do not blame her personally as she was given a brief. She had to read it. In reply to my question she stated:
"My Lords, the Government take the view that in general it is the company itself which is best placed to decide on changes in ownership or control".—[Official Report,19/5/92; col.549.]
If that does not mean that the ownership of some of our major industries—three major industries which are producing very well, with no complaints about profitability—will he left in the hands of private shareholders, I have never heard anything.
I have another quotation from the noble Baroness. I said in a supplementary question:
"My Lords, can I take it that the answer from the noble Baroness is that the Government intend to do nothing at all to prevent these firms going into foreign ownership?"
The resounding battle-cry from the Government Benches was:
"The resource which allows our industry to continue and for new models to be developed will be focused on with fierce concentration".—[Official Report,19/5/92; col.550.]
I say this to the Government. They can focus on it as fiercely as they will but words will not change the nature of private enterprise. If it sees a quick profit in selling to overseas buyers with the result that Rolls-Royce cars end up being manufactured in Germany, it will do it, and no amount of fierce concentration by the Government will make it do anything else.
5.22 p.m.
Lord Lucas of Chilworth: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Sefton of Garston, will allow me not to follow him down that particular road. On this last full working day of the summer term the noble Lord, Lord Williams, is to be congratulated on putting before us the subject of this debate. It will focus our minds during the Recess and no doubt we can come back to it later. I am grateful to him for that. The noble Lord will appreciate that in a timed debate it is not always possible to debate right across the Chamber. However, if noble Lords will forgive me, I should like to pick up one or two points that have already been made.
The noble Lord, Lord Benson, in using examples of the collapse of British industry, cited the motorcycle industry. He will recall very well that the motorcycle industry collapsed largely as a result of predatory pricing by the Japanese. I am happy to say that the motor industry did not allow that to happen. The arrangements voluntarily entered into between the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders and JAMA, the Japanese equivalent, allowed Japanese imports. Therefore, when that voluntary agreement was entered into it was not necessary for the Japanese to adopt a predatory pricing policy, so we have had a reasonable and fair pricing competition on those products.
That agreement expires at the end of this year and there is another informal arrangement between the
254
European equivalent of the SM MT and JAMA. I very much hope that the Government do not interfere in any way in that kind of arrangement, which was the point made by my noble friend Lord Wade of Chorlton. If they do, the kind of arrangements that have been made between labour—the unions—and the two principal motor manufacturing companies in this country—Ford and Vauxhall—are likely to be affected, with the result that neither Ford nor General Motors will be able to go ahead with their plans, which include huge investments.
The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, with whom I agree so frequently, mentioned trade. It is on that issue that I wish to speak today. I am glad that the President of the Board of Trade has resuscitated that position. I am not completely sure why he has done it. One could make a number of guesses. However, it brings into sharp focus the importance of trade. At the end of the day trade is what it is about. If nothing is manufactured there cannot be any traders. Successful traders will demand a product. If the President of the Board of Trade has that in his mind, I am happy. What I would suggest, however, is that the Board of Trade is revamped. It has been working at arm's length from government but under government. It cannot go on in that way.
The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, mentioned the decline in support for export trade and reminded us that, according to the last report, it fell to £31 million. The noble Lord is right in that a number of the services which are offered are far too highly priced and discourage the smaller trader. But I think there is something more fundamental here. From my experience in the department—admittedly some years ago—it never felt entirely happy that those in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office were the right kind of people to encourage, foster and seek out business in foreign parts. That is not to deny that there are some splendid commercial counsellors in our overseas posts—indeed, ambassadors and high commissioners—who work hard. But the very nature of their discipline prohibits them from being traders.
In the vernacular—your Lordships will forgive me if I use this terminology—they cannot cut a deal. They are not trained to. But a trader can and he knows how to do it. He knows the streets that he has to walk down to cut that deal. I should like to see some of the money the Foreign and Commonwealth Office spends on trade through those overseas posts spread to some of our chambers of trade and commerce in those countries. I believe that they can ferret out this business. They would have far better intelligence and would be able to go to a supplier instead of using the arm's length device that a government servant has to use.
If in January 1993 mainland Europe becomes part of the single market I presume therefore that it will no longer be accepted as an export market. A lot of money is wasted by government in supporting trade in what will be a home market. The best of the people can manage very well indeed. It is where the culture of trade is foreign—for example, in the Pacific basin or in

255
the Arab states—that one needs the support of professionals. I should like to see a shift of emphasis there.
A number of noble Lords have mentioned transport. If transport is the end of a production line I urge the President of the Board of Trade to use his influence in the Department of Transport to stop it shilly-shallying over road and rail developments and to pursue the completion of that production line. For example, in North Kent, Kent County Council has shilly-shallied for about five years over the approach road to the docks. The dock carries 200,000 traffic movements a year, essentially of exports. Manston Airport is stultified by a lack of facilities to get there. We could use those; but, no, the process is delayed by a lethargic county council that has its eyes on the great glamour of the Channel Tunnel. We have to use other assets to get our exports into the market place where the traders can do the business.
5.30 p.m.
Lord Jay: My Lords, I agree wholeheartedly with my noble friend Lord Williams—and, indeed, with both maiden speakers whom I warmly congratulate—that unless the British Government give at least the same active support to British industry and British exporters as other firms receive from their governments, British firms will inevitably be put at a disadvantage. A level playing field sounds fine. But it is not much use if some of the players are more level than others. At present, while our own Government have mutilated the ECGD, and, incidentally, abolished the NEDC, the French Government have given huge state aid to Renault and are now paying thinly disguised state aid to Air France.
In order to prevent the House getting a slightly distorted picture arising from all the propaganda about 1993 and the single market, I think it is worth looking briefly at the other side. Despite the arduous labours of the noble Lord, Lord Cockfield, over the 1993 programme, such efforts, contrary to his intentions, have had the effect of scaring quite a number of the great multinational companies into a rush for cover and the forming of mergers, joint enterprises and various other types of arrangement among themselves.
I shall give your Lordships a few examples. In the car industry, Renault and Volvo have arranged a swap of shares and executives together with the formation of joint subsidiaries which I do not think are intended to ensure competition between them. Of course, Volvo also has an alliance with a Japanese car producer in the Netherlands. However, we can also look elsewhere. In the food industry, Nestle, already the world's largest food combine, is seeking to take over Perrier which is the leading French mineral water group; indeed, it is France's largest food company.
In the various branches of the electricity industry, a whole series of link-ups and joint ventures—"joint ventures" now being fashionable and sounding more respectable than mergers—have been formed involving our own GEC. In fact, after acquiring Plessey and Ferranti, GEC now has joint ventures with Siemens of
256
Germany, General Electric of the United States and the Compagnie Générale d'Electricité de France. In addition, it has arrangements with Thomson CSF of France for joint development in defence electronics.
I am not criticising GEC for defending itself; I am merely pointing out that the single market that we are supposed to be entering will, to some extent, be a managed market; that is, managed by the multinationals rushing for cover against the threat of extreme competition. Indeed, in the electricity industry it looks as if the single market may almost become a single producer in some parts of the system.
In the meantime, Fiat has established a close tie-up by means of a swap of minority stakes with, again, the Compagnie Générale d'Electricité de France—a combination which the Financial Times described as an alliance between Europe's third largest car producer and Europe's largest supplier of telecommunications and railway equipment. In the absence of the noble Baroness, Lady Thatcher, perhaps I may mention our old friend the helicopter industry which at one time inspired such political passions. Aerospatiale of France and Deutsche Aerospatial of Germany have merged their helicopter interests in a new company called Eurocopter. Presumably, there will be no more competition there. I could continue and mention British Steel and even BP which have been forming alliances of that kind. Indeed, the airlines are also hankering after mergers; for example, Air France with Sabena of Belgium and British Airways with USAIR. Of course, what I have briefly mentioned only shows the tip of the iceberg.
No doubt the gallant Sir Leon Brittan, who really has an industrial policy, will be battling to stem the tide. I doubt that he will succeed. The House will remember that, in the case of Renault, the previous French Prime Minister went behind the back of the luckless Sir Leon and straight to M. Delors and, as a result, Sir Leon was outvoted in the Commission. Frankly, control of all such matters is not very easy.
Of course, legislation can legally prevent mergers. But you cannot so easily veto or, indeed, interfere with joint ventures which are, as I said, the current fashion. You can ban written restrictive agreements; but you cannot force firms to compete if they do not wish to—if two firms in a duopoly simply refrain from competing, I do not think that governments or legislation can interfere. Nor can you blame individual firms for defending themselves in that way in the present deflationary state of the world, particularly when, incidentally, we have all passed company legislation compelling them primarily to act in the interests of their shareholders. It is the natural inevitable rift of' a privatised market economy, as indeed Adam Smith once pointed out in a very famous quotation.
The public should not be deluded into thinking some great transformation into perfect competition will suddenly be revealed on January Ist 1993. Indeed, on balance, and owing to the headlong rush for cover by so many of the multinational firms—both big and small—the 1993 campaign may, in the end, actually turn out to have diminished rather than increased competition in Europe and elsewhere.

257
Therefore, I believe that the public will not really notice any great difference. With present policies, things will go on much as they did before; that is, a steady decline in UK competitiveness which is much more due to excessively high interest rates and the hopelessly uneconomic exchange rate. That will have more effect on the British economy in the next few years than all the propaganda that we have had about the single market.
5.38 p.m.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, once again I have to thank the noble Lord, Lord Williams, for allowing us to listen to a most interesting debate. We are grateful for the opportunity. I should like to say what a particular pleasure it has been for me to be in the Chamber to hear the maiden speeches of my noble friend Lord Chilver and the noble Lord, Lord Howell. The noble Lord and I share an affection for the West Midlands, so I was particularly pleased with his speech. I also had the pleasure of serving on three interim advisory committees chaired by my noble friend. I was delighted to be here today. I should like to express my thanks to both my noble friend and the noble Lord for being custom-abiding speakers.
The Motion before the House which calls attention to the case for industrial policy is couched in terms with which I suspect very few of us would disagree. However, what we do disagree about are the precise elements of an effective industrial policy. I must say that it is the first time that I have heard from the Benches opposite the admission that their industrial policy came from my right honourable friend's book. I was surprised to hear the noble Lord criticise the president for recognising that the world is changing constantly and he has moved on.
It is certainly the Government's intention to help British industry to win in international markets, and with such intense competition in those markets, particularly at a time of worldwide recession, it is all the more important that government and industry work together in partnership to help industry gain that necessary competitive edge. We are doing this by establishing the economic conditions in which industry can flourish, and we are building up a clear and useful dialogue between government and industry. Our view is that that is the best way to help British industry compete.
What UK firms need most of all, as my noble friend Lord Wade pointed out, is the defeat of inflation. That is the cornerstone of our economic policy. Entrenched inflation destroys industry's competitiveness and leads to lost output, lost jobs and lost savings. Lower inflation enables businesses to plan and invest with confidence.
We have made substantial progress. The latest figures show inflation to be down to below 4 per cent. from a peak of nearly 11 per cent. in 1990. That means that it has been below the EC average since August last year and has been below the German headline rate since February. No one should doubt our resolve on inflation. Our record speaks for itself. Under this Government inflation averaged 7.6 per cent. compared with 15.5 per cent. under the previous Labour
258
Government. But there is still some way to go before we can consistently match the 2 per cent. inflation level of Japan, and there is no room for complacency about pay rises. In the first quarter of this year manufacturing earnings were 9 per cent. higher than a year earlier. We must exercise further pay restraint if we are to increase our competitive edge. In particular, I very much hope that those at the top of industry will send the right signals to the rest of the workforce by restraining their own pay rises. Last night's vote in another place does not help the noble Lord's case.
Our success in bringing down inflation and our resolve to reduce it still further have enabled us to reduce interest rates from 15 per cent. (when we joined the ERM) to 10 per cent. now, thereby cutting industry's costs by £7 billion a year. Membership of the ERM has not only reinforced our commitment to bring down inflation but has also provided the exchange rate stability which businesses want. I believe the noble Lord said that that was a Treasury decision. Departments do not work in isolation. We will deal with the economic scene in partnership.
I know that many businesses would like to see interest rates fall further still. But they should understand that the best way to guarantee that is to maintain downward pressure on inflation.
Prudent management of the economy will also mean firm control over public spending. That includes restraining the growth of the European Community budget.
A key area for action will be our continued promotion of enterprise. Our record is strong. Our taxation policies have reduced corporation tax to the lowest rate of both the EC and the G7. Our top rate of personal income tax is now among the lowest in the world. Trade union reforms have improved our industrial relations to a state which was almost inconceivable 15 years ago. Last year the days lost through strikes were at the lowest level since records began. Our privatisation programme is now being emulated the world over. Transferring state businesses into private ownership increases business efficiency, whether through competition or in other ways. It allows employees to take a direct stake in their companies, and it gives everyone a chance to own a real share in the nation's assets.
Our competition policy has ensured that market forces encourage British businesses to satisfy their customers and raise their quality. Our deregulation initiative has succeeded in cutting red tape for business so that it can focus its energy, although there is still some way to go. My colleagues are studying that. The way to improve the productive capacity of our economy is not to try to increase the role of government but to curtail it; not to add to bureaucracy but to reduce it wherever possible.
We have paid especial attention to small firms. It is my privilege to be Minister with responsibility for small firms. The loan guarantee scheme for small firms has provided nearly 31,000 loans since its inception. Small businesses are a vital part of our economy: firms with fewer than 20 employees provide more than a third of all private sector jobs. There are over 400,000 more small firms in Britain today than there were 11

259
years ago. Manufacturing output is now over a fifth higher than in 1981. The Government agree with the noble Lord, Lord Howell, that education is vital for industrial competitiveness. That is why we have done so much to raise standards through the national curriculum and other reforms.
Another key part, as many noble Lords have pointed out, which government can play in industrial competitiveness is in international trade. We shall continue to strive for truly open markets worldwide, just as our policies at home are designed to produce vigorous and healthy competition in the domestic market. In Europe our aim must be to sharpen competition, to pull down the barriers to trade and to remove unnecessary regulation. We must impress upon our partners that greater competition is the best way forward. It will both enhance the process of wealth creation and strengthen European industry's ability to compete in world markets.
On the wider international scene, I agree wholeheartedly with the noble Lord, Lord Williams, that we have to do all that we can to ensure a successful completion of the Uruguay Round of the GATT negotiations. I hope he agrees that that is a policy that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister is visibly pursuing.
We shall continue, via our export promotion policies, to assist UK companies to succeed in overseas markets. Export volumes are at record levels and the UK's volume share of world trade in manufactures, which fell under Labour, stabilised during the 1980s and has risen over the past three years. Exported goods account for more than 18 per cent. of our GDP. The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, questioned that fact, but we must look at both ends of the problem. I see nothing but pleasure in that figure. And those figures disguise some even more impressive achievements in particular sectors. Between 1981 and 1991 chemicals exports grew by over 70 per cent. and pharmaceuticals exports by almost 80 per cent. We should remember those industries more often. We are now a net exporter of televisions and we expect to be a net exporter of cars by the mid-1990s. We shall continue to help industry to build on that clear capability to win in world markets to show that the British workforce can match any other.
We shall also aim to continue to attract investment from abroad. By 1990 the UK accounted for over 40 per cent. of Japanese inward investment in the EC. In 1991 we attracted 10 times more inward investment than Germany, four times more than Italy and twice as much as France. That shows the success of our efforts to maintain an economic climate which will be attractive to investors.
I have spoken at some length on the importance of establishing the right economic conditions for industry. The other key element is to develop a clear and effective dialogue with industry. That must rest upon a solid relationship with every sector of industry and a real understanding of their needs and anxieties. Our restructuring is not just furniture moving. The restructuring at the DTI is aimed at increasing that understanding. Decisions must be based upon clear
260
communications between government and industry. Having opened up that communication, the DTI has it at the top of its agenda to help British companies to compete and win in world markets.
Let me expand upon the reorganisation of my department which was announced some 10 days ago. There are three main elements: our industrial competitiveness will receive particular attention from a new division set up for the purpose; we shall look closely at how the UK compares with its international competitors; and we shall make it our priority to ensure that government policies do not stand in the way of our industry's performance. The Government must and will shape their policies and spending plans with full knowledge and recognition of the needs of industry.
The second element of the reorganisation is the adoption of a sectoral approach to industry. Existing areas of sectoral expertise within the department will be brought to the fore and any key sectors which are not at present fully represented will be covered by new divisions. We shall look to be at the beginning of business cycles, not at the end, and we shall look to be working in partnership.
The sectoral divisions, both new and existing, will have an explicit role to sponsor their industries, not in an uncritical way but as a basis for an informed dialogue and a constructive partnership. We are also looking at the possibility of setting up local first-stop shops as a first point of contact for businesses to stop time being wasted on re-inventing the wheel. I hope my noble friend Lord Joseph will be pleased to know that we shall include in those areas signposting to services available, to academic opportunity which will help industry, to design opportunity and to financial opportunity. It is important that we fund small companies.
In his list of what matters in industry, the noble Lord, Lord Williams, omitted people. People are absolutely vital. They are the essence of our future and our "Invest in People" programme concentrates on that. We are not aiming to be the lowest cost producer. We are aiming to be globally competitive. I am pleased to reassure my noble friend Lord Joseph that customised training will play an enormous part in our forward plans. That of course will allow small firms to work with some of the children about whose future he was concerned.
Both my noble friend Lord Joseph and the noble Lord, Lord McNair, raised the question of the status of industry, and particularly in regard to young people vis-à-vis the professions. I would say that industry does not yet honour its graduates or let its young people through nearly as much as it will need to. I hope that my noble friend will be pleased with the continuing strength of the teaching companies scheme which the DTI operates and which enhances technology transfer, gives graduates business training and improves industry and academic links.
We have heard much comment on the export credits guarantee scheme. Project exports remain healthy and the business is well on a par with previous years. I personally was pleased to hear a report from one of the successful Hong Kong submissions that our

261
support was as competitive as that of any other country and—even better news—they did not need it in order to do the contract. ECGD announced in April 1992 premium rate reductions in over 50 markets.
The noble Lord, Lord Ezra, mentioned export services. He pointed out that there were limitations to the help we offer to companies on trade missions. That is so; after three trade missions help is withdrawn. We believe that if after three trade missions to one country contacts have not been made or agents appointed, we may do better helping in some other country. In fact, it is five missions to Japan and I admit that even that will take a little time. However, it gives people the chance to start moving. We wish to put as many people into the export markets as we can.
I hope that it is not out of order to disagree with a maiden speaker, but my view of the West Midlands is more optimistic than that of the noble Lord, Lord Howell. There is a changing shape to industry and economic activity there. The convention centre is second to none in this country. The financial services centre being built in Birmingham can hold its own throughout the world. We cannot expect industry always to be the same shape. I hope that the noble Lord will allow me to introduce him to a midwife at some point. He talked about the deaths of companies. We should also look at the births. It is estimated that in 1991,460,000 new companies were formed. But I must agree with the noble Lord that it is important that banks show more understanding of the agenda of business and in particular of small businesses.
The noble Lord, Lord Benson, said that there had been losses in manufacturing industry. I would point out that even in the machine tool industry some companies in this country are incredibly successful. They benefit from the same economic policies as others. Again. I mention the UK chemical industry as a prime wealth-creating sector on which almost every other manufacturing industry is dependent. Its trade balance was positive all the way through the 1980s and was almost £3 billion in 1991. Between 1981 and 1990 its R&D grew in real terms by almost 90 per cent. Perhaps we could take that as a firm indication of one of the reasons for its success.
My noble friend Lord Chilver pointed out that no one is immune from global competition—certainly not small firms. We aim to be well aware of the internal competitiveness they need to match. The noble Lord, Lord Dean, seemed to indicate that to be ennobled one always had to be right. I hope that he did not really mean it, otherwise my stay here would be short. I point out that unemployment in inner-city areas outside London declined between 1983 and 1991 and we can look forward to the announcement of new city challenges tomorrow.
My noble friend Lord Wade shared concern that dictatorship from the centre is not the way to encourage enterprise. I hope that he will be reassured to learn that the Department of the Environment's latest policy guidance on planning says that development is to be allowed unless it would cause demonstrable harm. The intention to allow people to grow is there.
262
I can tell the noble Lord, Lord McNair, that the Engineering Council has an absolutely splendid neighbourhood engineering scheme under which it sends young people from industry to share the opportunities with younger people. It works very well.
I am sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, did not recognise that the defence industry is at the forefront of manufacturing and that the skills and technology it learns allow our engineering skills to be developed. It contributes greatly.
I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Sefton, who was kind enough to suggest that I understood industry, would not expect me simply to read an official answer to him. I do not agree that one can criticise a company for recognising an out-of-date model and strategically planning to find the funds to build the next one, or for looking at how models can be continued in global markets where one has to have numbers to cover research and development.
The North West has many growing companies. Several of the best pharmaceutical companies are represented there. It has the glass industry and it even has one of the best television producing companies in the world. We have to look at where the future lies, and those companies all employ people.
I have tried to answer as many points as I can in the limited time. The Government are well aware of the need to maintain and improve upon our industry's competitiveness at home and abroad. Of course we believe in manufacturing industry and of course we believe in training. We believe in innovation and in the British workforce. We also believe in winning. To allow our companies to do that we are establishing the best possible economic climate.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, I am most grateful to all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate which has been interesting and useful. I should like to spend another 10 minutes or so answering some of the points that have been made but it is not the convention in this House to do so and nor do I have the time. I wish I had the opportunity to move for Papers, but that again is not the convention of the House. I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

Sea Fish (Conservation) Bill
Brought from the Commons; read a first time, and to be printed.

Southern Africa: Famine
6.1 p.m.
Lord Judd Lord Judd rose to call attention to the impending famine in southern Africa; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, southern Africa is enduring the worst drought in living memory. For millions the coming year will be the harshest they have ever suffered. Crops are devastated and no fewer than 18 million men, women and children face the very real prospect of starvation.
We are understandably mesmerised by the cruel events in Yugoslavia and by the danger of contagious

263
anarchy in much of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. It was therefore essential that at its recent meeting the Group of Seven decided to make further assistance available for the Commonwealth of Independent States and that the European Community should vote its 120 million ecu for Yugoslavia. However, more, much more, is needed.
But people too are at risk—some 18 million—in southern Africa. The struggle for democracy is as real there as in the CIS and Yugoslavia. There are few parts of the world in which British and European interests and involvement, not to speak of moral responsibility, are greater. It is therefore disturbing to learn that, as aid is being mobilised for the former communist world, non-governmental organisations are being told both by the British Government and by the European Community that the money allocated for Africa has virtually run out.
The relationship between ethnic politics and hunger is as real in southern Africa as in Yugoslavia and the former Soviet empire. The grotesque racially based social inequalities in the Republic of South Africa mean that the burden of hunger falls heavily upon the black community. Failure to reach political settlement will perpetuate that position and perpetuation makes political settlement more difficult.
But it is not only within South Africa that the political dimension applies. The drought is no respecter of frontiers. The 10 developing black African countries which comprise the SADCC region adjacent to South Africa are badly stricken. What is more, they depend upon South Africa for much of the logistics of relief. There is a crying need for them and South Africa to work together. A settlement in South Africa will make that possible. Delay will prolong the obstacles. It is high time the British Government and the European Community follow the example of the Security Council today and put the disturbing setbacks to negotiations in South Africa at the top of their agenda alongside East European preoccupations. It was without doubt the combination of internal dynamics and external pressure which brought about the South African negotiations in the first place. A serious external assessment of what has gone wrong and of what action is now appropriate is long overdue.
From South African sources I learn that between 7th April and 21st June no fewer than 40 vessels unloaded more than 1 million metric tonnes of grain in South African ports. Last week some 10 vessels were unloading. During the same period in June, I am told,187 trains left South Africa for Zimbabwe with more than 240,000 tonnes of food. Some 16 trains went to Zambia with more than 20,000 tonnes of food; 23 went to Malawi with more than 31,000 tonnes; 8 to Botswana with more than 11,000 tonnes; two to Swaziland with more than 3,000 tonnes and 14 to Lesotho with more than 15,000 tonnes. Imagine the potential consequences for those countries if the setback in South Africa were to deteriorate much further with large scale prolonged disruption to ports
264
and transport. It is abundantly clear that the political and humanitarian issues of the whole of southern Africa are deeply interlinked.
The dimensions of the drought are appalling. Even Zimbabwe and South Africa, the traditional bread baskets of the region, are importing millions of tonnes of food. South Africa will need 5 million tonnes of maize and 1 million tonnes of wheat this year. Zimbabwe, which is normally a net exporter of grain, will need 1.7 million tonnes in 1992– 93. Indeed, South Africa and the rest of the southern Africa region combined will need over 11 million tonnes of food between now and April 1993.
In early June the United Nations and the SADCC countries made a co-ordinated appeal in Geneva. They stressed that 10 countries were at risk of starvation and that 2.6 million square miles of land were stricken by drought. They called for 685 million dollars for 1.6 million tonnes of urgently needed emergency relief food,150 million dollars for emergency non-food aid such as water, health services and agriculture, and 21 million dollars for regional logistics and co-ordination. They also called for 2.5 million tonnes of programme food aid which they emphasised is essential if sufficient food is to remain in the markets. The background to their call is that malnutrition is increasing; surface water supplies are precariously low; boreholes are drying up, with grim consequences for schools and clinics; draught oxen, essential for ploughing and future crops, are dying and once mighty rivers such as the Zambezi, the Limpopo and the Orange have all but dried up. The social fabric of the SADCC countries has been gravely damaged and, overall, cereal production has fallen to 6 million tonnes—that is, about half the normal production.
I understand that the international response to the United Nations and SADCC appeal has been seriously inadequate with only two-thirds of the total target so far met. It is particularly disturbing that the pledges for emergency food aid for the most vulnerable people are less than half that requested. Furthermore, it seems that almost none of the food aid pledged at Geneva in June has yet arrived in Africa. Recently the director of Oxfam, Dr. David Bryer, and his colleague, Justin Forsyth, a specialist in African affairs, travelled to the region with Simon Hughes, a Liberal Democrat Member in the other place. Underlying the United Nations and SADCC appeal, they reported that in parts of Zambia people have resorted to eating wild fruits and roots. The traditional economic coping mechanisms such as selling crafts to markets have broken down. The reserves of food have been eaten. Water tables have dropped and malnutrition and a lack of clean water have meant that health is deteriorating fast. Men are deserting their villages in search of work in urban areas, leaving women-led households to take responsibility for coping with the drought.
In Zimbabwe some 40 per cent. of the population who are dependent on subsistence farming have lost most of their income. Countrywide, some 5 million people are estimated to be affected by drought. A special feeding programme is already being provided by the government for 1.5 million children. The whole

265
situation is likely to be made still more acute by the arrival of an additional 350,000 refugees from Mozambique searching for food and water.
In many communal areas between half and two-thirds of the cattle have died. Those surviving are frequently too thin to be marketed. Seed has been eaten and tools have been sold. Dams are averaging only 19 per cent. of capacity and there is a real prospect that the Kariba Dam itself may close by February 1993 if the next rainy season proves to be a failure.
In both Zambia and Zimbabwe other, non-drought, factors are aggravating the situation for the poorest people most at risk. The structural adjustment programmes agreed with the World Bank and the IMF have led in the short term to price increases for basic foodstuffs, rising unemployment and cuts in basic services. Heavy debts are draining vital resources and driving the governments of both countries towards a choice between meeting their repayment obligations or feeding their people.
The drought is also having a significant impact on financial resources and foreign exchange reserves. Both Zambia and Zimbabwe have been forced to import substantial amounts of food at tremendous cost to their balance of payments and foreign exchange reserves. In addition, Zimbabwe has lost its foreign exchange earnings from its usually significant agricultural exports.
In Mozambique the nightmare is made worse by the continuing warfare. There is a pressing need, which I hope is being taken seriously, to feed the troops guarding food convoys if they are to do their job properly. It has been depressing to witness the gap between the peace rhetoric of Renamo and the reality of its activities on the ground. We desperately hope that the Minister may have news of progress on that front.
In Malawi the latest estimate is that there are 6.2 million people in need,2 million more than estimated in the joint SADCC/UN appeal in June. Namibia has experienced a 71 per cent. fall in cereal production, down from 114,000 tonnes to 33,000 tonnes. Cattle deaths there are widespread.
As recommended by the Bryer, Forsyth and Hughes mission report, I hope that the Minister, who has already responded with at least some additional British aid, will promise tonight to call for rapid international action on five points. The first point is pledges. The international community must provide the necessary funds to meet the minimum needs spelt out in the joint SADCC/UN June appeal. It is very worrying that pledges for emergency or target food aid for the most vulnerable in Zimbabwe and Zambia are so low.
The second point concerns deliveries. As things stand, very little of the food pledged in Geneva is likely to arrive in the region before September. Pledges must be turned fast into shipments. Supplies from large donors such as the European Community are needed by the end of August. Shipments should be properly co-ordinated to take account of port capacity and priority needs. Co-ordination by all concerned is also important at national level to identify the
266
communities most at risk and ensure that the required assistance reaches them, overcoming the problem of the "last mile", as it is known to aid workers in the field.
The third point is recovery. Agricultural recovery is as much a priority as relief if next year's food needs are to be met. Seeds, tools, tractors, oxen, water harvesting and food reserves are all vital to stimulate food security. Structural adjustment programmes must take proper account of that.
The fourth point is the structural adjustment programmes themselves. As the poor struggle to survive more targeted aid is urgently needed to cushion the adverse effects of SAPs.
The fifth point is debt. Debt could be the final straw that breaks the camel's back. The Paris Club is to meet on 23rd July to review Zambia's debt. Zambia is likely to be offered only a limited Trinidad Terms debt relief package—a 50 per cent. rather than a 66 per cent. write-off. But surely Zambia, a country which is fulfilling all the international political and economic conditions and struggling to reconstruct democracy, should be given maximum relief, the full Trinidad Terms. Surely the IMF and World Bank should reschedule Zambia's multilateral debt as a first step towards debt cancellation. Now that Zimbabwe has been given access to World Bank IDA funds for the least developed countries Zimbabwe, too, should surely enjoy full debt relief.
In 1984 the BBC and Michael Buerk shocked the United Kingdom with their powerful pictures of death by starvation in the Horn. Everybody said it must never happen again. The public response was magnificent. Record sums were rapidly raised. It could very well be about to happen again in southern Africa, but there is still time to prevent it if, and only if, the governments of the world move decisively and fast. When we reassemble in October it will probably be too late.
The United Kingdom holds the presidency of the European Community. It therefore has an ideal opportunity to lead and to get the act together, to use the Minister's own words. As a first step I suggest that the Minister should immediately convene an emergency meeting of the European Community Council of Development Ministers to review the situation and to speed the action. I know that the whole House will cheer the noble Baroness if she takes the humanitarian lead and uses it relentlessly. I beg to move for Papers.
6.15 p.m.
Lord Beaumont of Whitley: My Lords, when I heard, with gratitude, that the noble Lord, Lord Judd, was to instigate this debate I got in touch as soon as I could with the various church societies which work in that part of the world. I was fortunate enough almost immediately to get in touch with Bishop Donald Arden, who was at one time Archbishop of Central Africa and who is at present commissary for the dioceses of Malawi and Mozambique. He returned from Malawi two days ago and has very kindly let me have his report so that I may relay some of it to your Lordships today. Therefore, I hope that your

267
Lordships will forgive me if I overstep the usual conventions about reading because I wish the House to know what the Archbishop said, which is considerably more pertinent than anything I could have said myself.
He says that this is the worst drought in living memory and its results are calamitous. One does not yet see frank starvation though there are plenty of examples of people eating every other day. People cross the border into Mozambique in order to re-enter a few days later as refugees to get the tiny rations which the UN supplies of maize meal, pulses and cooking oil. But there are no stocks of food in the villages and eight months to go before the next harvest. That must be seen against the background that in normal times half the children under five show marked stunting from malnutrition and there is a death rate among under-fives of 253 per thousand.
As noble Lords have already heard, even promises of grain fall far short of requirements. No one can see how it will be transported into Malawi with all the main routes closed as a result of the Mozambique war and all surrounding countries competing for such transport as is available.
Malawi's normal export-import routes are closed (for example, at Beira) or have a capacity of one train a fortnight travelling at 10 miles an hour—as at Nacala. The alternative routes—by road from Lusaka and thence by rail to Durban or Port Elizabeth, running the gauntlet through Mozambique to Harare and thence to Beira or Durban, or 800 miles by road to Lusaka and thence to South Africa by rail—are estimated to take up to 47 per cent. of the export earnings of that country. Added to that is the horrific effect on firewood and food reserves of supporting a million official refugees and an unknown but larger number of unofficial refugees.
The Paris sanctions are a consideration. I do not believe that anyone would oppose the idea of the Paris sanctions, least of all noble Lords on these Benches. Political change is essential and with no active political parties for 30 years, no free press and no opportunities for public debate there is a crying need for democratic reform. But the sanctions are having a devastating effect on the lifeline of the poorest of the poor, the non-wage-earning rural population. Their only income is the produce of their lands which this year has been practically nothing. There is a need for positive action to see that the very poor do not bear the brunt of those sanctions. One way of doing it is by seeing that aid is not cancelled but redirected through the NGOs that directly serve the poorest of the poor. That will usually mean church agencies, since it is only they who have a wide network of health centres and schools in rural areas.
Apart from stopping starvation, there is an urgent need to support the health services. The Church Hospitals Association of Malawi provides more than one-third of the health services of that country, and at the moment it looks as if it will get only 50 per cent. of its basic needs from the government. Education in secondary and primary schools, particularly in the rural areas of Malawi, is desperately in need of
268
resources. In rural areas the pupil/teacher ratio is between 68 and 90 and the number of children per classroom ranges from 98 to 167.
The Bishop asks me to say that the steps he believes to be within the power of the United Kingdom and EC Governments, are, first, to make available to churches and other NGOs directly involved in providing basic services to the rural poor the resources needed to prevent the total breakdown of health and education in the next three to six months. As a minimum, that should be equal to the amount of aid which has been withheld because of civil rights deficiencies. The poorest of the poor should not have to suffer as a result of a campaign which, after all, is undertaken on their behalf. There should be a fresh examination of the resources available for health, education, agriculture and women's development in countries like Malawi. It is too easy to blame the deficiences on mismanagement. Factors totally outside the control of the government—terms of trade, debt climate and the war in Mozambique—also have their effects.
Every available ounce of political and diplomatic power should be used to bring an end to the war in Mozambique. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office should be congratulated on joining the Rome talks as an observer. It should not turn a blind eye to foreign aid to Renamo which is still arriving from sources in South Africa. Whether they are individuals or the third force of army and police referred to by Nelson Mandela is very difficult to say. If humanly possible efforts should be made to open the rail corridors from Malawi to Beira and Nacala to enable famine supplies to be imported. The same applies to roads in Mozambique, regarding which I believe Her Majesty's Government have already made representations to Renamo to avert deaths from starvation.
The latest reports seem to show that Renamo members are murdering people in ambushes up to the present time and there is no undertaking from Renamo that it will halt its attacks on vehicles carrying humanitarian assistance.
I repeat the Bishop's closing words that if humanly possible efforts should be made to open the rail corridors from Malawi to Beira and Nacala to enable famine supplies to be imported, and the same applies to roads in Mozambique.
It is tremendously important that we are seen to do the best we can to help this area of Africa and stop the deaths which will take place over the next eight months if aid does not reach the stricken lands and we do not manage to transport the food to where it is needed. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Judd, for having initiated the debate and hope that Her Majesty's Government will be able to redouble their already good efforts in this area. It is tremendously important for the future of the whole of Africa.
6.25 p.m.
Baroness Hilton of Eggardon: My Lords, I too am grateful to my noble friend Lord Judd for introducing the debate. I do not have the specialist and detailed knowledge of the crisis facing South Africa possessed by other noble Lords who are involved in the debate. However, from the sidelines I have been wondering

269
why there is so little public awareness of the impending catastrophe. Public awareness is important because it is only through the mobilisation of public opinion that the politicians and governments of the developed world will be moved to action with sufficient generosity to avert disaster. I have wondered why our attention is focused on the appalling situation in Yugoslavia to the exclusion of almost everything else. It is likely that in Yugoslavia 10,000 have so far died and there are one million refugees. Clearly, that is a dreadful situation. But the drought and famine in southern Africa may kill 18 million people which is an order of comparison far beyond anything we have seen so far in the Balkans. That may occur in the next few months and is already affecting the lives of 40 million Africans.
No doubt there are many explanations for our lack of attention: I propose to concentrate upon three. First, it is a slow crisis without the excitement of daily gun battles and the fast-moving scene in Croatia and Bosnia. Therefore, it does not produce the daily headlines beloved by the media attention is inevitably fickle and feeds on crises and vivid images. No doubt the television crews and reporters currently in Yugoslavia will lose interest as the civil war continues and move to southern Africa as the images of death by starvation become increasingly horrific. By then it will be too late to provide the necessary food aid. So far only 50 per cent. of what is needed has been promised.
Secondly, to people in this country Africa does not have the familiarity of Yugoslavia where many of us have spent holidays in the now shattered cities of Zagreb, Sarajevo and Dubrovnik. Nowadays, it would seem extraordinary if anyone referred to Yugoslavia (as Neville Chamberlain referred to Czechoslovakia) as a far away country of which we knew nothing. But that is how many people still think of Africa. I suspect there is also a strong element of racism. It is easier for us to identify with the problems of white Europeans in Yugoslavia than those of black Africans. However, we belong to one world, and it is in many ways the crippling debts owed to the western world by developing countries which in some cases outstrip their gross domestic product that make it impossible for them to buy the food they need.
The third reason for the lack of public interest is that the scale of the crisis is too enormous to be grasped. Perhaps that is why the public interest has not yet been engaged by this particular crisis. I have been seeking some means of making the scale of the crisis more concrete to the ordinary citizen on the street. The 18 million people at risk of dying from starvation are equal to two and a half times the population of London or one-third of the population of the British Isles. I have finally settled on a figure which may have more impact. Fifty years after the event we are still affected by the horrors of the Holocaust in which six million Jews died in Nazi concentration camps. If we allow the catastrophe in southern Africa to happen, three times that number will die in the famine. No doubt that will reverberate
270
for many times 50 years ahead. It is essential, as my noble friend Lord Judd said, that the developed world responds forthwith to the crisis in southern Africa.
6.30 p.m.
Lord John-Mackie: My Lords, like other noble Lords I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Judd for introducing a debate on two countries in Africa which have suffered such terrible drought. In my opinion, it will affect them for more than one year. Of that I am pretty sure. I should like to widen the discussion beyond just those two countries. I am obliged to Oxfam for a very good brief on the situation as observed by the head of Oxfam and Mr. Simon Hughes, a Member of another place, when they were out there.
Some of the stories that they have told are tragic. There was one in particular about a woman with 12 children and an unemployed husband. All their cattle had died and she was left sitting watching her 12 children daily become thinner. To have so many children raises the issue of population control, which is a subject in itself. I shall not go into that matter other than to say how important it is that something should be done.
The report notes that the lives of about 18 million people are threatened by starvation. That point was emphasised by my noble friend and the last two speakers. The information I have from Christian Aid indicates that the figure is more likely to be 40 million. It could be greatly increased by those in an equally hungry Mozambique. So we are talking about very large numbers of people who are likely to starve in the coming year unless something is done.
That brings me to the world food situation. Accurate figures are difficult to obtain, but there is little doubt that well over 1,000 million people are starving to death in the world today. Estimates from reliable sources say that a figure of between 600 million and 700 million people die yearly of starvation, a very big proportion of whom are young children.
At lunch time today I was speaking to my wife about this debate. We have two grandchildren aged 4 and 6 who stay on our farm. The thought came to me of how it would be to watch those two children—who are well fed, well clothed, and I nearly said, well behaved, but I might need to amend that—starve to death. It simply cannot be imagined. But it is happening all over the world and something has to be done.
There are two problems. One is to get as much food as possible to the starving millions; the second is to teach them how to develop their own food production. It is extraordinary that they do not appreciate the situation. My noble friend said that they were eating their reserves of food and, even worse, many of them were eating the seed for the next year. Those are both big, long term problems.
Early in 1982, the noble Lord, Lord Renton, made a speech in this House about the issue. How right he has been proved. But the problem has grown worse over the past 10 years and still not enough has been done. What is to be done? First, the food that is

271
available must be got to the people. I do not think that there is enough food available to do the whole job but we must do what we can.
There are difficulties. I was recently speaking to an Oxfam official who has been distributing food to villages in various parts of the world. He said that there are quite a lot of difficulties—indeed, there is no question of that—but that those difficulties could be overcome. However, there has to be the will to overcome them. He believes that that will is not there. Too many excuses are made. One excuse is that putting food into those countries destroys the local market for food; another is that the water supplies are so bad that it is a waste to send surplus dried milk.
There are answers to both those excuses. So far as water is concerned, let us send out more water purifiers. This country makes a lot of them. As for destroying the local markets, we should give the money to governments and tell them that they must spend it to subsidise farmers and to ensure that they are not made worse off by food coming into the country. Those difficulties can easily be solved.
As regards producing more food, at the behest of the EC this country was asked to take 1,500,000 acres of land out of food production. That is in addition to the 500 thousand that have already been taken out in the past two years in set-aside. At the same time our imbalance in temperate foods is something like £3,000 million a year. We should produce that ourselves and spend the savings in food for the needy countries. I cannot emphasise that point too much.
One thinks of the shiploads of food from New Zealand, Australia and other countries proceeding up the eastern seaboard of starving Africa with food for Europe, including Britain. Surely an arrangement could be made to deliver that food to the ports of the starving countries—it could include the two countries in southern Africa about which we are speaking—from Mozambique to Abyssinia. For that matter, before leaving the Mediterranean, some could be delivered to Algeria. That may seem difficult to arrange. The point is that we must have the will to arrange it.
A strong point made by David Bryer and Simon Hughes was that there is a need for co-ordination between governments and all the parties concerned to achieve the objectives that we all wish in this tragic situation. It is emphasised that we have the presidency of the EC for six months and we should use all the influence that that gives us to produce a co-ordinated scheme to help not only Zambia and Zimbabwe, but all the areas of hungry people. There was a very good letter published in yesterday's Independent signed by the heads of various charities—one of them a church charity—emphasising that point. I hope that the Government will pay attention to it.
6.38 p.m.
Lord St. John of Bletso: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Judd, for introducing this debate today on the impending and in many cases existing famine in southern Africa. The whole issue of the consequences of famine in Africa was raised last year
272
by the noble Lord, Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge, when he addressed the problems existing in the developing countries. Two underlying themes came out of that debate: first, the need for effective distribution of food aid and measures to provide international assistance in farming methods in Africa; secondly, the disastrous effects of conflict in many of the famine stricken countries.
I wish to elaborate on both those themes in the context of today's debate. As noble Lords are aware, Africa is the poorest continent, with an estimated population of 400 million people living in poverty. As the noble Lord, Lord Judd, mentioned, in the 10 countries of southern Africa an estimated 18 million people are threatened with starvation as a result of the drought, which is said to be the worst ever. Not only has it destroyed many farms, it has also resulted in many of the great rivers—the Limpopo, the Zambezi and the Orange—beginning to dry up. There have been dramatic reductions in the production of maize, grain, sorghum and sunflower seed during the current year.
For much of southern Africa maize is the staple diet. In South Africa the maize crop is down 67 per cent. to 2.4 million tonnes. In 1990–91 the domestic consumption of maize in South Africa was 6.7 million tonnes. Namibia's maize crop is down 71 per cent.; and Botswana has lost almost its entire crop. Zimbabwe, which used to be a major exporter of maize and sugar products, has seen almost its entire harvest collapse. Already food queues and hoarding has started in Zimbabwe and Zambia. As noble Lords may be aware, Mozambique—which for many years has been ravaged by civil war—has the highest level of human suffering through starvation in the world. Mozambique will reap only one-third of its food harvest this year and more than 3 million of its population of 15 million will need food aid. Almost half of that total amount has already been promised. Even though the international community has pledged vast amounts of food aid, there is frequently a long time lag before the food is delivered. That point has already been made.
The drought and impending famine has placed an important test on regional co-operation in southern Africa. With its sophisticated infrastructure of ports and road and railway networks, several southern African countries are to a large degree dependent on South Africa for rail transport for the maize and other products that they import.
The noble Lord, Lord Judd, mentioned the amounts of maize to be distributed in southern Africa. It has been estimated that a train 1,500 miles long would be needed to bring in all the maize that is required by South Africa and its neighbours. Of the 11 million tonnes of grain, some bought and some supplied by the United Nations world food programme, South Africa's railway network SPOORNET is transporting 8.5 million tonnes. It is the biggest transportation exercise in food and relief in the world. Even the Ethiopian drought relief effort involved only 2 million tonnes of food.
It is worth noting that South Africa, despite being excluded from the SADCC regional conference on the

273
drought in Lusaka in April this year, and the Pledging Conference organised by the SADCC and the United Nations in Geneva in June this year, has nevertheless taken the initiative in fostering a regional approach to the problem. Together with Botswana, Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe, the world food programme, and the SADCC, South Africa has established the Strategic Group for the Southern Corridor for the purposes of distributing food supplies. At any particular time about 20 ships from Argentina and the United States are on their way to South Africa to unload grain. The grain that is not distributed from South Africa is offloaded at Walvis Bay in Namibia, Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, and Beira, Nacala and Maputo in Mozambique.
That vast transport operation obviously has its political side. Although Zimbabwe has had a firm policy in the past of no ministerial contact with Pretoria, because of the seriousness of the food situation a Zimbabwe Minister recently visited South Africa to discuss transport arrangements. The whole exercise highlights the ridiculousness of Zimbabwe's stand on sanctions against South Africa. Despite the deadlock in South Africa at CODESA II, and the tragic recent incident at Boipatong, together with the continuing violence, surely now should be a time for a concerted effort by all parties in South Africa to resolve the log jam, and for an international mediation group to be established to endeavour to break the deadlock between the various parties in South Africa. Will the Minister consider that option? I believe that an international delegation to South Africa would have an immensely persuasive influence.
A major theme on the issue of the impending famine is the relationship between conflict and poverty. I make brief mention of the stalemate situation in South Africa. Since half of my 10 minutes is up, I wish purely to touch on the issue of violence. There is no denying the fact that the security forces in South Africa have been indirectly partly to blame for many of the deaths in the townships. But it would be totally wrong to put all the blame on the Government for not controlling the security forces. There are clearly elements from both the extreme right and the extreme left which have sought to derail the democratisation process in South Africa. Pressure should be exerted on all parties to meet to discuss ways of strengthening the existing peace structures that were established in the national peace accord last year and thereby to encourage the need to return to negotiations as soon as possible.
South Africa is currently suffering its third consecutive year of negative economic growth. Mass action, in particular the general strike threatened by the alliance of the ANC, the South African Communist Party and COSATU between 3rd and 9th August, can only have a devastating effect on any chances of resolving the deadlock. Not only will it be totally destructive in its effects on the economy, but, with intimidation in the townships, in particular of workers wishing to ignore the boycott, violence will worsen and finally will detract foreigners from investing in South Africa. That foreign investment is desperately needed not just in South Africa but in the
274
whole region. Will the Minister prevail on the alliance of the ANC, COSATU and the South African Communist Party the futility of that threatened action?
Clearly, the Government are and will continue to be under pressure to provide as much food as possible. However, I also believe that it is vital that aid is focused not just on food aid but on assisting the economies of southern Africa with education programmes, such as co-ordinated agricultural research programmes, health assistance—the point was made by the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont—both in the treatment of famine stricken peoples and in the improvement and treatment of water supplies.
Voluntary organisations such as Oxfam, Christian Aid, Save the Children Fund and others are to be much thanked for the fantastic work that they have done in the distribution of food aid not only in southern Africa but throughout Africa. The Minister is to be congratulated on her policy of granting and coupling food aid with good governance. The Minister is conscious of the severity of the drought and impending famine in southern Africa. I look forward to hearing more about Her Majesty's Government's policy for assisting the region.
6.48 p.m.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, the most graphic illustration of the depth of the famine and drought in southern Africa came from the news that the bushmen community, for the first time in history, is appealing for food aid. It is a community which for thousands of years has been independent. It has obtained the needs of its families from fruits and from hunting and gathering. It is now reduced to appealing for food aid because the berries, vegetables, nuts and vegetation have been wiped out by the drought.
We have had an ample supply of figures. My noble friend Lord Judd began with a set of figures which would be shocking in any era of history but is particularly so in our modern times. All I would say is that, according to the United Nations,130 million people are already affected and 18 million people face starvation in that region.
Again, to bring that up against the international realities of today, the governments of Zimbabwe and Zambia are both faced with the desperate choice that they either renege on their debt payments and are cut off from credit or they allow their people to starve. They either put the money into food for their starving people or they pay it in debt repayments according to the structural adjustment policies as laid down by the IMF and the World Bank.
That is an effect of nature. The drought has not come from any human activity, with some exceptions which I shall mention in a few moments. However, a question is raised and it is a question of which I gave prior notice to the Minister who is to reply to the debate. Has there not been an opportunity to predict that famine and to prepare for it coming? I wonder whether the Minister has read the words of the noted Columbia University geologist Mark Cane who suggests that the drought could have been predicted if enough work had been done on seasonal climate

275
forecasting. The question I wish to ask the Minister is this. In view of the fact that seasonal climate forecasting is done excellently by our meteorological office and at the climate research unit, is the ODA helping to finance that work? I believe that it did so in north Africa some time ago and I believe also that that finance has either come to an end or has been drastically cut. From the point of view of information, I should like to know what the ODA's policy is towards that crucial aspect of climatology which can save so many lives and can provide a basis for forecasting and predicting. That makes it possible to take action before such tragedies as we see today have come into effect.
The second aspect of famine with which I wish to deal is the impact of wars. We have already heard of the disasters in Mozambique brought about very largely by South African policy and forces. Millions of refugees are now moving into Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Tanzania, away from both the drought and the violence of Mozambique.
What some of us have been saying for decades now is that that kind of tragedy is inevitable under the system of apartheid. Those who have had the opportunity of travelling across the mountains of Transkei, Ciskei, Bophuthatswana and other reserves in southern Africa can see, and have seen over the years, the scarring on the hills, the soil erosion, the land of more and more people taken away and given to the whites, and pushing those people into the reserves until they are overstocked. The people cannot keep their families alive and so, again, there is the rush to the towns and the reserves are left with only old people and women to husband them. That is a direct effect of apartheid.
The revolt against apartheid is not just political; if anything, it is based most deeply on the love of the land and on the anger which comes from the removal of people from the land according to their racial origins. I should say to the noble Lord, Lord St. John of Bletso, that that continues. He calls for the ANC and COSATU to withdraw their tactics of strikes, but how is it that he is making no demands of the white minority government? They have shown themselves to be both brutal and determined to maintain white supremacy. The political deadlock has not come about just through intransigence; it has come about essentially because the de Klerk Government have been insisting on maintaining white supremacy through their constitutional proposals and through their refusal to compromise over those proposals.
The South African government and Mr. de Klerk himself have openly and publicly admitted—and I heard them so do—that they have been funding Inkatha and its trade unions. It is estimated that of the 7,000 deaths which have occurred in the past two years, well over half have been caused by Inkatha attacks. Anybody who wants to substantiate that should go along to Gray's Inn this week and listen to the international hearings organised by the United Nations and the British anti-apartheid movement.
The mad dogs of war have been let loose in South Africa. We have a responsibility. The Government,
276
unwisely I believe, removed sanctions far too early before it was clear that irreversible measures of reform had been undertaken. If that is allowed to continue, the whole of southern Africa will collapse into chaos. I suggest to the Minister that she should tell the House this evening what action the British Government will take this evening in New York at the United Nations Security Council meeting when the ANC call for international intervention and mediation and the South African Government are saying we should keep out of their country.
I suggest that along with the United Nations, our position in the Commonwealth and in the EC gives us special responsibility and special opportunities to bring our pressure and international pressure to bear on those who are destroying southern Africa. We should show that when we speak to President de Klerk we speak with the backing of the international community in telling him that, if he wants to be accepted as a member of the international community, he must withdraw from the violence that is taking place and either control his security forces or else allow a new government to do so.
7 p.m.
Lord Monkswell: My Lords, we owe a duty of gratitude to the noble Lord, Lord Judd, for introducing the debate this afternoon. It is a subject of great importance. It disturbs me that we seem only to be hearing contributions from one side of the House, apart from the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester. I hope that the Members of the Government are all busily beavering away writing cheques to Oxfam to help the situation, but I suspect that they are not.
Be that as it may, it is inevitable when we discuss a topic relating to southern Africa that the political difficulties that beset the region inevitably come to the fore. I do not want to go down that road. I want to discuss a different aspect of the subject, except for making one aside to the noble Lord, Lord St. John of Bletso, who railed against the ANC for calling what is effectively a general strike in South Africa to put pressure on the De Klerk government to attend the negotiating table in a better frame of mind.
I understand that there may be some economic dislocation. But that is surely far better than having a situation where the negotiators of the ANC—Nelson Mandela and his team—are effectively divorced from the mass of the people of South Africa. We must recognise that there are not simply two parties to the dispute; namely, Nelson Mandela and De Klerk. Both have constituencies consisting of millions of people who need to be taken with them. When one is engaged in negotiations one must sometimes put on a show of force, a demonstration of solidarity, if for no other reason than to assure one's own supporters that one is going in the right direction.
Lord St. John of Bletso: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for giving way. Is the noble Lord aware that in the threatened mass action of a strike the ANC youth league stated categorically that it intends to make the townships ungovernable?
Lord Monkswell: My Lords, young people are always taken with making extreme statements. While I appreciate that in the context of South Africa one must be extremely concerned about those statements, the impetuousness of youth needs to be recognised as well as the need for the leaders and the led to be together.
I do not want to spend too much time on that aspect. Our debate concerns the power of nature. I hope that we all agree that the tragedy unfolding in southern Africa is not being caused by the ethnic divisions, the economic unemployment and the political scene in that part of the world. It is being caused by an act of nature. Effectively, a natural disaster is taking place. We are talking in terms of 18 million people who are liable to die. We can compare that with the scale of death—I agree that it has been horrific—over the past few years caused by ethnic conflicts and the various political instabilities and crises in that part of the world.
Eighteen million is an enormous number of people. As my noble friend Lady Hilton said, it is three times the number of people who died in the concentration camps in the second world war. The impact that that would have if it came to be, not simply in Africa but around the world, would be immense. I suggest that the rich peoples of the world, the peoples of Europe, North America and Japan, would be held significantly responsible for those deaths. It is within our power, through our economic might, our wealth, to do something about them. That is what our task should be over the next weeks and months.
A number of speakers said that time was running out. There is only another half day of this Session of Parliament before we go away for a long Recess. We must have action from this Government not only as a government of a rich nation needing to make a financial contribution for all of us in the United Kingdom, but also, as a country holding the presidency of the Council of Europe, our Government have a position of influence and responsibility. That should be used over the next few months. Our membership of the Security Council in the United Nations is a privileged and responsible position. Some may argue that it is a relic of 40 years ago. But we should use that position also to ensure that not only our own country, not only the European Community, but also that the other rich nations of the world make their contributions as well.
We have seen this impending tragedy unfolding over the past few months, this awesome power of nature affecting now and liable to affect even more significantly in the future our fellow human beings and we must take action. We must take action through the Government. We must take action because of the wealth that we own. As a statistic, the per capita income of the peoples of southern Africa is less than 500 dollars a year. The per capita income of the rich nations—Europe, North America and Japan—is in the order of 15,000 dollars a year. Those statistics are stark. It is the difference between the poorest and the richest peoples of the world. We have a responsibility as a rich people, a rich community, to take the necessary action to prevent the disaster happening.
278
I make a plea that we do not rely on the charity of individuals. We are a rich community. The European Community is a rich Community. As a society, as people acting together, we must make that contribution. The only way we can do that is through government contributions. Governments must levy the taxes on the citizens of their countries to raise the money and to spend it in a way that will save many millions of people in southern Africa from dying. I make the plea for our Government to take action as soon as possible.
7.10 p.m.
The Lord Bishop of Worcester: My Lords, I must begin by apologising for arriving late for this debate. It was unavoidable but I felt it was important that one from the Bishop's Bench should contribute to the debate, for which we are all deeply grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Judd.
It is difficult to follow so powerful a speech as that made by the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell. I can concur with almost everything that he said. In passing, perhaps I may repeat what was perhaps implied this afternoon at Question Time, that I believe that Nelson Mandela is in fact a moderate; that he said before he went to the United Nations that as far as he was concerned the ANC had left behind warfare and violence in favour of persuasion and negotiation. It is essential that we give him affirmation so that he may lead his people and not leave the townships to the mercies of the extremists and the mindless who have no real understanding of the future and the statesmanship which is needed in southern Africa. So I greatly hope that we can still, as a government, keep in touch with the moderate leaders so that the situation does not degenerate into total chaos.
I know that every Member of this House agrees that there is a human tragedy of vast and almost apocalyptic proportions about to take place in southern Africa. It is difficult to take in the figures. They have been given by most of the speakers and I do not wish to repeat statistics. I believe that it is a similar situation to the kind which we might have faced if there had been a major nuclear exchange between the nations. It affects both black and white and urban and rural people. All of us must have heard from friends in the cities of southern Africa—Bulawayo, for example, where sanitation has almost come to a halt and from people in Zimbabwe—who have said that we are one step away from the tragedy of Ethiopia.
This is a tragedy so immense that it must command from us an equal, generous and unprecedented response. I believe that there is a sense in which we either survive together in the present-day world or we do not survive at all. The destabilisation of the continent of Africa through abject poverty which will bring the breakdown of government, will obviously affect us all. If they go deeper and deeper into poverty the more sophisticated economies will follow them. That much we noted when we had a debate in this House on the successful completion of the GATT round.
I say again that I believe that the time is here for an unprecedented response on the part of government as

279
well as individuals. I can assure your Lordships that the Churches have alerted their members to the need. But I agree with the noble Baroness that there have been so many other things in the headlines of the news that the tragedy of southern Africa may have gone less noticed than it should have done. We need first aid, but we also need a long-term strategy.
Perhaps at this point it would be fair for me to say that the Christian Council of Mozambique, for example, has organised an airlift to the remoter areas. The Zimbabwe Christian Care Council is running a supplementary feeding programme in primary schools. Children are being both fed and educated. A headmaster went on record as saying,"Children who had stopped coming to school because they were too weak have started again", with the provision of food. Christian Aid in southern Africa is also raising at the moment £500,000. It has reached that target for southern Africa alone. The Catholic Bishops Conference raised a "Crisis in Africa" fund, which I am glad to say reached £1 million yesterday.
I do not recount these things with any sense of complacency. I continue to make the point, however, that has been made by the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont. The Churches of any denomination are singularly well placed to make distribution of food to local people. They have the people on the ground who know those who are in need and where the landless poor and the stricken farms are to be found. I know that I hardly need urge government to make use of us in the relief programmes which must be mounted. It is a matter of saying to government: "Give us the provisions and we'll help finish the job".
It is vital at this moment of summer pause and summer vacation, as noble Lords have already pointed out, to persuade the international community to make a new round of pledges. The first round was none too successful. Not only was it too small but it was too long delayed. There should be a new round of pledges. I hope that Britain, as holder of the European presidency, will take the lead in such an initiative. We have done in the past. We in this nation have a reputation for caring for dispossessed people. Let us live up to that reputation.
Furthermore, as other noble Lords have urged, it will be necessary to release more Treasury funds to enable the Overseas Development Administration to meet unforeseeable needs generated by the drought. In the long term it will be abject poverty which will be the enemy of those administrative, economic and governmental reforms which are so necessary in some of the poorest countries in southern Africa. Perhaps I may again give a statistic: people in some of the poorest countries in southern Africa are 120 times poorer than a British citizen. Many people would love to have the food that every evening we put down for our cats and dogs.
The Prime Minister of this country is to be praised for his consistent return to the need for debt release, because that would set free the resources needed for development. As noble Lords will no doubt know, Africa's development deficit will amount to 35 billion dollars over the decade of the 1990s. If action is not
280
taken, the present cycle of deepening poverty will surely bring in its train war, epidemics and the breakdown of government as night follows day. Furthermore, I am told that investment during the 1980s in sub-Saharan Africa has, like the landscape, dried up.
Perhaps I may speak extremely briefly about a lesser-known United Nations organisation, the International Fund for Agricultural Development. It helps small farmers to grow more food. But in spite of it being rather a success story, I believe that Her Majesty's Government are no longer going to contribute to it. I would like some reassurance on that from the Minister when winding up. Seven million pounds were put into the organisation at the beginning. Although other nations in the northern hemisphere are supporting the international fund for agricultural development, we in Britain have refused to continue to do so. This body has organised 26 projects in 20 countries. It has enabled farmers in Burkina Faso to rehabilitate 5,000 hectares of degraded land and to increase staple cereals by 40 per cent.
Let us not waste time arguing as to who should pay the share. Can we not return to the position of being a supporter of this lesser-known United Nations outfit? The famine in southern Africa and in the Horn of Africa is becoming, as we have already said, massive and tragic. There are few things which are more terrifying than drought. I pray that, if the experience teaches us that the time has come to transfer some of the multimillions we have spent in developing weapons of destruction in past decades to resources for both short-term and long-term needs in such an impoverished world, then we may have learnt an important lesson. I repeat: we either survive together or we do not survive at all.
7.19 p.m.
Lord Bottomley: My Lords, I too join in the tribute that has been paid to my noble friend Lord Judd who has great knowledge of the subject that he introduced and who speaks from great experience. He has done more for the developing world than most people. I am also delighted to follow the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester who spoke with feeling and understanding.
It was my privilege to be a member of the United Kingdom delegation to the United Nations in October 1946. The leader of that delegation was Ernest Bevin. It was my responsibility to watch the British interests in the developing world. I was a member of the trusteeship committee and some of my fellow-members included Foster Dulles of the United States, Gromyko of the Soviet Union and Field Marshal Smuts. At the end of the session Field Marshal Smuts said to me,"I am very glad that young members of the Labour Party are taking an interest in southern Africa, but you do not understand the problem unless you see it first hand". He said that he would send a letter to Prime Minister Attlee suggesting that I visit South Africa.
In due course the Prime Minister said to me,"Field Marshal Smuts is going to send you an invitation to

281
visit South Africa and you can accept". Again in due course I met the Field Marshal in London and he asked me whether I would bring my wife with me. I said that I could not do so because I could not afford it and the Government would not pay for that. He said,"The South African Government will have her as a guest". My private secretary on that visit was Lord Hunt, who eventually became Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet.
There has been some comment today that the Commonwealth has no relevance to today's problems and that it is more of a liability to Britain than an asset. The links may be mainly sentimental, but the fact is that over 40 countries, most of them of considerable importance, still wish to preserve this multiracial association. In 1980 Willy Brandt, who was the first Socialist Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, produced the Brandt Report. He called it an assault on poverty and hunger, a programme for survival. Seventy thousand copies of the report were sold. The present father of the House of Commons, Sir Edward Heath, was associated with that report. I wonder whether the Government might consider asking him to get together a team of Commonwealth statesmen and women to produce an up-to-date Brandt Report.
During the past 60 years conditions of life have altered more than in the past 2,000 years. Television, radio, computers, electronics and automation have changed our life-style. We live longer. Our most acute problems today are mass hunger and disease. They are not new, but they are intolerable because they could be solved by our modern knowledge and technology.
A friend of mine who recently returned from Zambia said that Lusaka was surrounded by immense squatter camps, populated by those who had come to seek refuge from the drought-ridden countryside. There is violent crime there caused by out-of-work guerrillas. Malawi, which is a land-locked country, has one of the largest refugee populations in Africa. The competition between the local population and the refugees over food resources could cause untold trouble. In Zimbabwe, hundreds of thousands of families are experiencing severe food shortages. The drought has hit different groups, small-scale farmers being among the most severely hurt. Lesotho, Swaziland, Mozambique and many other southern African countries are similarly affected.
In the coming year many millions of people in southern Africa will be threatened with starvation. They have had one of the worst droughts in living memory, destroying huge amounts of crops. It is estimated that to meet this devastation 11 million tonnes of food will be needed between now and April 1993.
Rural communities are stretched more than they have been ever before. They will face a bleak future if action is not taken to help with agricultural recovery. Oxen, seeds, tools and tractors are urgently needed to ensure that crops are planted in September. If we fail to cure mass hunger and disease we shall be condemned by history.
7.27 p.m.
Lord Rea: My Lords, from the many speeches that noble Lords have made the tremendous extent of the impending disaster which is about to hit southern Africa is now clear. I should like in my speech to discuss briefly some of the underlying reasons behind the recurrent severe droughts and famine conditions which have been affecting both the Northern and Southern Savannah regions of Africa. First, however, I wish to ask the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker, about measures which Her Majesty's Government might be able to take in the present emergency to assist in getting help out to populations at the village or remote settlement level—"the final mile"—where the need is most severe, especially among women and children. Roads are bad and distances great, especially in Zambia and Mozambique. The atrocious surfaces are punishing to vehicles and according to Oxfam local transport companies are unwilling to use their vehicles because of the possibility of breakdown and the lack of spare parts. If development was at a higher level and the roads and infrastructure in general were better—as they are in parts of Zimbabwe and South Africa—getting supplies out to the periphery would be easier. It must be part of future development aid to help to improve that situation.
As many noble Lords have pointed out, the need is to get the food, seeds and tools out to where they are needed as soon as possible—and certainly by September—to be ready for the next planting season. I remind the noble Baroness of the significant part that was played during an earlier drought and famine in Ethiopia by Hercules transport aircraft. Their part in moving grain and other supplies through war-torn and difficult terrain will not be forgotten either by the NGO teams who were working there or by the local population. A similar exercise for southern Africa might well be appropriate. The Hercules transports might even take with them mobile workshops and suitable spare parts so as to keep a fleet of local trucks in operation as well. There would be considerable training potential for the military personnel involved in mounting such an exercise.
One of the justifications for maintaining an army or an airforce in peacetime should be their ability to intervene and assist in civil disasters. A mobile task force could be assembled to work very effectively in the situation in southern Africa. Ideally this should be under UN auspices, but because of the urgency of the situation and our long association with southern Africa it would be entirely appropriate for the United Kingdom to offer bilateral emergency assistance of this kind. Such a task force to southern Africa, rather than to the south Atlantic, would be something we could be proud of.
The Republic of South Africa is very much affected by the drought. It should have sufficient resources, or should be in a position to buy them, to avert serious consequences within South Africa, but that is no guarantee that it will do so. For example, will it get adequate help out to African people, especially in more remote settlements? Does the noble Baroness have any information on how the South African Government intend to tackle the problem within their

283
own borders to help their people, particularly their black people? Has South Africa offered any assistance to its more severely affected neighbours?
In the five minutes left to me I should like to put forward some thoughts as to why these problems affecting the sub-tropical and savannah zones of Africa seem to keep recurring. Droughts of course are not new in these ecologically rather delicately balanced areas where rainfall, often heavy, is concentrated into one third of the year to be followed by long and often very hot dry periods. Southern Africa is more fortunate than mid-Africa and the Horn of Africa because it is narrower and the sea is nearer. Moisture enters the atmosphere nearer the centre of the continent. But both in the south and the north the effects of a drought are much worse now than they used to be for several reasons.
As my noble friend Lord Hatch pointed out, the land is more intensely cultivated and is often over-grazed, leaving less in reserve. Water tables are lower and fall more quickly and there is less natural vegetation for populations to fall back on. To quote a report from Christian Aid regarding Zimbabwe:
"Up until two years ago Zimbabwe had built up large stocks of maize which could have covered the shortfall caused by drought. But in order to increase foreign exchange earnings the government sold some of the surplus, and encouraged farmers to increase production of cash crops like cotton and tobacco. The remainder was used to cover shortfalls in the harvest during the poor rains of recent years"—
my noble friend spoke of warning signs—
"So when this year's drought struck, the country was left without any reserves".
In Mozambique the situation, like Ethiopia in the mid-1980s, has been made far worse, as other noble Lords have pointed out, by the continuing conflict which has severely disrupted agriculture. The Christian Aid report states:
"Taking trucks through Mozambique, where the civil war disrupts normal life, is very difficult".
To return to the cause of the droughts, we have to consider whether man and his activities are contributing to their increasing frequency. Even if we leave aside the possible effect of global warming it is highly likely that intensive agriculture and forest or scrub clearance contribute to the problem. Indigenous plants are well adapted to long dry spells; they have deep roots and can draw water from deep down. At the same time they contribute to atmospheric moisture by transpiration through their leaves and by covering the ground in the dry season to prevent some of the heat of the sun being reflected back into the atmosphere. Unchecked, this extra heat decreases the relative humidity in the atmosphere so that cloud formation and precipitation of moisture as rain is reduced.
This has lessons for agricultural practice. For example, the level of the water table could be improved by building many small dams—the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester mentioned what has happened in Burkina Faso—to prevent run off and erosion, and atmospheric moisture could be increased by planting suitable tree cover between and around crops and restricting forest clearance.
284
There is an urgent need for assistance to small and medium farmers if Zimbabwe and Zambia are to continue in their role as the bread basket of southern Africa. One important step here—I fully echo what was said by the right reverend Prelate—should be to augment the funding of the International Fund for Agricultural Development. The reason put forward for our not contributing to the fund is that other countries are not contributing their share and so we are withholding our share. I can understand that if a small contribution is spread around the whole world it might be dissipated. This again might be a reason for Britain going alone and instituting its own agricultural projects in southern Africa to follow up this drought. Britain could well support an assistance and development policy to help small farmers. But even before this, as several noble Lords have pointed out, the reduction of debt, both official debt through the Trinidad mechanism and commercial debt through pressure on the banks, must be considered as a top priority.
To sum up, I suggest that Her Majesty's Government have within their power the ability greatly to alleviate the immediate crisis but also to make a major impact in the long term. If they were to do so both now and later they would earn the gratitude of many millions of people in South Africa and throughout the world.
7.37 p.m.
Lord Pitt of Hampstead: My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Judd for introducing this debate. I am lucky in that I am the last Back Bench speaker and most of the detailed arguments have already been put. I want therefore to make a summary. There is a drought in southern Africa. We should be asking ourselves why there is a drought in southern Africa. Could it have been foreseen, and if so, why was it not foreseen? If it could not have been foreseen, why could it not have been foreseen? There is evidence to suggest that it could have been foreseen and that action could therefore have been taken to—I would not say prevent—at least reduce the worst consequences. That is my first point.
One needs to ask another question. Assuming that there was no way of forecasting the drought and that nothing could have been done to prevent the drought, why has the drought had such devastating effects? That is a question we need to answer. Unless we answer that question we will not be able to deal with further developments in this way. Let us face it: we do have droughts and they have consequences. But there are areas where preparation is made and the consequences are not so serious. Therefore one needs to ask why in an area like southern Africa the drought has had such serious effects.
My noble friend mentioned the political activities in the area which have played a part. I want to build on that because I believe that the direct activity of the South African Government to destabilise its neighbours is one of the factors in the situation that we are now facing. I believe that I am right to say that. For example, if I just instance Mozambique, there is no question about it: the activities of the South African

285
Government through Renamo have been largely responsible for that country being flat on its back, because that is where it is. Therefore, we have to look at that as a political side. If I am right and that political side is important, then the British Government must ask themselves what they must do about it.
Over the years the Government have tried to defend what is happening in South Africa in one way or another and to be a sort of friend to that country. The stage has now been reached where, if the Government are to be a friend to South Africa, they must be a candid friend. I say that because there is a real danger at this moment of South Africa going backwards rather than forwards. If it does so, much of what we are talking about is small fry compared to what will in fact happen. Therefore, it is necessary to try to ensure that there is agreement in South Africa and that, instead of splitting up in the way that it is doing, the country is able to unite and to unite not only within itself but also with its neighbours so that the area which is fertile and which has many good resources becomes an area of which the world can be proud.
Frankly, the latter requires international action. It is no use all of us sitting on the sidelines and just hoping that things will not get worse. We are in a position—indeed, I believe that the Security Council is actually discussing South Africa today—where the international community can say,"We want to examine the situation here and see what can be done in order to enable this particular country to become a true democracy," and so fulfil its full potential. We must also encourage the neighbouring territories to play their part because the area is one of great potential which, if fully developed, can not only feed and clothe itself but can also help many of the areas further north.
Therefore, I hope that one of the consequences of our looking at this disaster is that we will seriously consider political action which will prevent a recurrence. At the same time—the point has been mentioned many times—we must consider the economic causes; indeed, the matter of debt has been much mentioned. But it is not just the debt; it is the whole way in which those territories have had to use their resources not to feed or develop themselves but in order to meet the demands of other people. We need to ask ourselves: is it really right that we should go on taking that particular attitude to those territories? Is it really right that we should go on taking from those countries all that we can get while failing to help them develop?
The truth is that if we were to put back into those countries what we have taken from them—not all of it, but enough of it—the consequential development would enable both them and us to prosper. Therefore, we need to be looking at those issues in this way. Over the years we have adopted a selfish attitude; namely, one of what is in our best interests rather than what would help the community as a whole. We have always done so. We have always ended up with gainers and serious losers. It is the consequence of always doing that rather than the other round that leads us into problems.
286
In my rambling way, I hope that I have brought to the House a realisation of the wider aspect of the problem. It is not only in southern Africa that we have droughts about which we ought to have been warned and about which we ought to have done something but have not; it has happened elsewhere and will happen again. What we really need is a new philosophy, a new approach or a realisation that we can help and that, by helping, we can also benefit. I hope that the Minister will feel able to accept what I have said.
7.47 p.m.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey): My Lords, perhaps I may first thank the noble Lord, Lord Judd, for tabling the Motion for debate this evening. It is absolutely right that we should debate the drought and the impending famine in southern Africa. I am very pleased that the House has had that chance. Despite the increasingly sad but welcome media reports which are now appearing with increasing frequency, as the noble Baroness, Lady Hilton of Eggardon, said, the severity of the crisis is not yet as widely appreciated as it should be.
As the noble Lord, Lord Judd, knows, I saw the new Director General of Oxfam together with our colleague Simon Hughes from another place immediately upon their return from southern Africa. I have today received a further report from the Save the Children Fund on what is happening. The work that is being done by the British NGOs, side by side with local Churches to which the right reverend Prelate referred, is first class. But they cannot do it all themselves. We know that, and that is why we are giving them as much backing as possible.
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Judd, that insufficient priority is being given in some countries to the forwarding of grain and the commitment of money to appeals. But I can tell him that right from the outset, Britain has ensured that we put our efforts right up front so that people knew what was in the pipeline. We have not ceased to do that. We have also sought to use every piece of scientific evidence possible to guide us in meeting the needs of those people.
Most noble Lords have painted, rightly, a stark picture of the situation in southern Africa. The debate has, however, ranged far wider than the impending famine in southern Africa. Before I concentrate on that topic I want to try quickly to put into context two other issues: first, the comments that the noble Lord, Lord Judd, made about the attention which the former Soviet Union and central and eastern Europe, especially the former Yugoslav Republic, and the tragedies of Bosnia Herzegovina, are attracting at the moment. Yes, I know, because I too am working for Africa, how infuriating it is not to be able to get into the headlines with this desperate famine. Other measures also need to be tackled. As the noble Lord made that comment I looked up into the Gallery to see how many members of the press were there. My heart sank once again. We must hope that the combined efforts of the appeals from the United Nations, the NGOs, and what we say in this House and another

287
place, will alert the public to just how bad is the situation. It is as tragic, in numbers, as anything we shall ever see. We hope that we shall never see anything like it anywhere else in the world.
The second issue with which I must deal before turn to the debate on the famine relates to political matters in South Africa—a subject to which the noble Lords, Lord St John of Bletso, Lord Monkswell, Lord Hatch of Lusby and others referred. I am glad that today in New York the Security Council is discussing South Africa. It is at the moment hearing directly from most of the parties directly involved with South Africa. I hope that as a result of that debate the international community will send a strong signal that negotiations among all the parties in South Africa must resume as soon as possible, and that the violence must end.
When in New York last week I ensured that every effort was made to bring people together on that issue. Since I returned from a further discussion in Washington we have done everything that we can to ensure that we build upon the work that is already being done to stop the violence and to build up local peace committees. The House may be interested to hear that in that respect it is a British expert (Dr. Waddington of Reading University) and two British police officers who were sent at our expense to Judge Goldstone's inquiry into Boipatong some two weeks ago. We believe that we can help further in South Africa, if all parties wish us to do so. That is why I have said on many platforms in the past two weeks that Britain is ready to respond positively to any proposal within the international framework that has the backing of all the parties in South Africa, whether it come from the EC, the Commonwealth or the United Nations. As friends of peace and of progress and a non-racial democracy in South Africa, we must do all that we can to assist.
As I told the European Parliamentary Development Committee in Brussels this morning, I greatly hope that the European Ministers' troika will be able to visit South Africa as soon as will be helpful to bring about further steps to end violence and enhance negotiations. I hope your Lordships will forgive me for having departed from the text of the debate, but South Africa has been mentioned so often that I felt it right to respond.
In terms of the drought and the impending famine, we have never seen anything so severe as that now faced by southern Africa. For a region which, taken as a whole, is more or less self-sufficient in the production of food grains, that is disastrous. Food production has been at less than half the normal level, and up to 18 million people are at serious risk. I say to the noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, that that figure of 18 million people at risk comes from the United Nations and the southern African Development Co-ordination Conference. They are not our figures. They are internationally accepted.
The food imports needed are, as the noble Lord, Lord Judd, said, in excess of 11 million tonnes. That is already placing an enormous strain on the region's fragile economies and on its transport infrastructure
288
and distribution systems—a subject to which I shall return in a moment. I can assure the noble Lord, Lord Pitt, that Britain has not sat on the sidelines. We have been active from the earliest moment, as I shall describe shortly. There is a further problem, and that is the drastic shortage of water. It has led to the widespread slaughter of livestock and the loss of already threatened wildlife resources. The water shortage has further resulted in an increased incidence of diarrhoeal and infectious diseases, to the loss of industrial production and even threatens the viability of major cities such as Bulawyo. I hope that those outside the House will realise from those remarks just how seriously we view the drought in southern Africa.
The noble Lords, Lord Hatch and Lord Pitt of Hampstead, talked about having been able to foresee the drought. Your Lordships may wish to know that my own Natural Resources Institute at Chatham has already done great and good work in studying how, through remote sensing technology, one can foresee as much as possible. But I am told that we cannot foresee more than six months or so ahead. As regards the current drought, the valuable work that was done by the United States Aid Administration and the World Food Programme drew our attention to the scale of the problem in the early part of the year. That is how I came to respond with the first £10 million in the first 10 days of March this year.
We are using all the technology we have. We shall be working further with the World Meteorological Organisation to extend the monitoring that is already going on which alerted us this year to the situation. However much monitoring there is, and however much warning there is, I am afraid that we shall never be able to avoid the full effects of a drought such as we now face. The threats it poses for 18 million people go much wider. That is why the international community must act with all speed and determination to counter them.
As I said, this country did not wait for any second warning. Britain has, throughout the disaster, taken a leading role in trying to cajole others to make efforts similar to ours. Not only were we the first to respond, since March I have approved a total of £48 million of bilateral commitments of aid to southern Africa. This has taken the form of food aid, balance of payments support to help ease the financial burden of additional food imports, technical assistance for various aspects of drought management and support for the activities of British and local voluntary agencies.
The European Community, too, has responded to the crisis. At the Council of Development Ministers on 4th May we approved a special food aid programme which is making available an additional 800,000 tonnes of food aid this year. Over 370,000 tonnes of this will go to the countries of southern Africa and Britain will be contributing more than £11 million towards the cost. So, in total Britain's contribution to date this year to southern Africa to help alleviate the effects of the drought is nearly £60 million.
The response of the other bilateral donors has been positive. But it was not early enough in a number of cases. I am grateful to my officials around the world for following the lead I gave some months ago that we

289
must persuade other countries to do as we have been doing. I was at least glad to be present in Geneva at the drought appeal conference where 600 million US dollars were pledged. However, I was very sad to find that I was the only European Minister present; there were few from other parts of the world. As has already been said, the amount pledged fell short of the 854 million dollars appeal target.
I am glad to tell the House that since that date there have been significant commitments from a number of major donors, including the United States of America and Japan. Others, including Holland and Canada, have announced substantial extra funding since the conference, and indeed we have made other announcements since then. But resources are still needed and we shall take every opportunity in the various international fora to urge others to join us in responding to the need.
I must mention the speed with which the machinery of co-operation has been put in place within the region. A ministerial meeting of the southern African development co-ordination conference in April established a regional task force to oversee the response to the crisis in liaison with national emergency co-ordinators and the relevant UN agencies. Six corridor groups have been established to supervise the importation of food through the main regional ports and associated road and rail systems. A logistics advisory centre has been established in Harare, with the close involvement of the World Food Programme. Together, they will help smooth the flow of food imports and ensure that the best use is made of available transport capacity.
I pay tribute to the Minister of Transport from Zimbabwe who helped to break a deadlock which we faced at one time, with the importation of food through South Africa, mainly because I am afraid one or two countries did not want to receive the food through South Africa. When there is a guerrilla warfare going on in Mozambique one has to use whichever ports are available. But more of that later.
I must say that I am heartened now that the co-operation has transcended political differences. The South African Government have also played a key role in this logistical exercise and that should not be forgotten. The port and railway authorities in South Africa, in close concert with their counterparts in neighbouring countries, have responded to the challenge of coping with more than four times the normal level of food imports.
I wish to say a word to those who I know were worried that old wagons were being used from South African railways to take the food up to the landlocked countries. This was sensible, because the wagons could remain as storage places in those countries when there was no other warehousing available for the food which might otherwise have been in a worse state when it reached the people in the far off villages. So there was a good reason for using the old South African stock.
Throughout the debate we have heard a number of comments about structural adjustment affecting our ability to help people through this drought period. The noble Lord, Lord Hatch of Lusby, commented
290
that it was food or paying your debts. Others made less extreme comments. Perhaps I may make it clear to the House that the implications of the drought for economic reform in the region have been a key subject in discussions over the past few months and last week in my discussions with the World Bank and the IMF. I am convinced of the willingness of the World Bank and the IMF, if they find there is a problem, to deal with it promptly and flexibly. Both institutions are making substantial extra resources available for the countries worst affected by the drought.
It is important that the progress we have so far made under economic reform programmes should not be reversed. That is one of the reasons why we have increased the level of our balance of payments support for the reform effort in Zambia and Zimbabwe, so that they should not be knocked off course and they can at the same time help those badly affected by the drought.
There is no conflict between structural adjustment and food security. Indeed, more realistic producer prices and improved arrangements for agricultural marketing should be helpful in this respect. But the experience of the drought has caused us to ask the fund to make more explicit its consideration of the food security issues when it is designing further stages of structural adjustment. We have not faced this situation before. We learn that if we can be flexible—whether it be through the bank, the fund or bilateral donors—the people in these countries will end up the better.
Many noble Lords, particularly the right reverend Prelate the Lord Bishop of Worcester, referred to the debt situation. The noble Lord, Lord Judd, paid tribute to my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. As the House knows, Britain has taken a leading role in debt reduction in recognition of the burden which accumulated debt represents for many developing countries. The Trinidad Terms are not, as we had proposed, a two-thirds reduction in the debt, with the balance being repaid over 25 years, but 50 per cent. of the payments falling due over an initial agreed period, usually three to four years, and the balance rescheduled over 25 years.
The British Government have already recognised the particular problems in Zambia. As an immediate measure of support for the new government we have rescheduled all the debt service payments falling due this year—a sum of about £4 million. Next week, in the Paris Club meeting,. we shall give our strong support to the application of the Trinidad Terms to the remainder of Zambia's official debt.
Zimbabwe is in a slightly different position in that it does not have the same debt repayments to be made, but we are taking what steps we can to help.
There were several comments in the debate about the Community's commitment to the whole process of alleviating the effects of the drought. Not only did we give approval on 4th May to a substantial programme of additional food aid, but we have been emphasising to the Commission throughout that the timely delivery of the food aid is equally important. Nearly half the Community's total food aid programme for this year has been shipped or was about to leave the docks by

291
the end of June. Therefore, there is a great deal which is already getting there. Some of the food aid that we gave went rather earlier.
We know that there is a need to help arrange the delivery in-country and that is why Britain is supplying computer know-how to the SADCC secretariat which, with the World Food Programme, has set up the logistics advisory centre in Harare. It is being run by a Briton who has much experience from his time in Ethiopia of assisting in the onward delivery. That worried a number of your Lordships.
The drought is not confined to the front line states. The noble Lords, Lord Hatch of Lusby, Lord Rea, and Lord St. John of Bletso asked me about the drought in South Africa. South Africa is badly affected by the drought. The cereal production will be around 30 per cent. of the normal level. That means that exporting to the rest of the region is simply not on. The country itself will need 5.5 million tonnes of imported cereals this year.
The South African Government have allocated 440 million rand—approximately £88 million—for the nutritional development programme. However, that may not be enough and more may need to be added. One of the main ways in which South Africa has been helping its neighbours has been in the logistics of delivering the aid. Certainly they have waived demurrage fees at docks for transport which we were providing for landlocked countries. They have brought out of cobwebs old railway wagons. South Africa has offered much help in the logistics of delivering the aid.
The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester wished to make a particular point but did not have the time to do so. If we could bring more people, be they in the Churches or in the population at large, to comprehend the reality of this situation, we would perform a great service. The noble Baroness, Lady Hilton, referred to that.
The noble Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley, talked about the immense amount of work that is being done by the Churches in Malawi and Mozambique. However, it is not just a case of the Churches helping in the affected countries. The Churches in the developed nations need to play an increasing role in this respect. Both the right reverend Prelate and I wish to draw the attention of the nation to the role that the Churches in the developed nations can play in this respect. There is an awful lot of talk but not an awful lot of "do". I believe our own Churches can do even better in this matter.
The noble Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley, asked me about Malawi. He gave the House some heartrending facts that had been sent to him by the Archbishop of Malawi and Mozambique. I would say to the noble Lord and all other Members of the House that we are in no way stopping humanitarian aid, even where we have decided that because governments are not following a path of good government and not respecting human rights we should cease further programme aid. Malawi is a case in point, but the prevailing situation in that country has not stood in the way of our providing humanitarian and food aid.
292
I hope we shall never stop providing that aid. That is why we have been working alongside the non-governmental organisations who can deliver where there is no government-to-government aid programme.
It is right that we should pay tribute to the role of the NGOs. The noble Lord, Lord Rea, mentioned the difficulties that sometimes occur when food aid reaches the last leg of its journey to the villages. That is one area where NGOs have an outstanding record. I have so far approved a total of £3.5 million for the provision of technical and transport assistance and support to help NGOs in their task. We are working through our High Commissions and embassies in southern Africa to ensure we are in contact with those on the ground. However, if any NGOs feel there is more to be done I hope they will make contact with me.
At my main meeting with the British NGOs working in southern Africa I stressed to the staff of those bodies that they must let me know if they encounter any kind of difficulties in making deliveries. I am following up that matter on a regular weekly basis and I shall hold a further meeting with the NGOs before my visit to six countries in the southern African region in September.
The noble Lord, Lord St. John of Bletso, and others, referred to transport. The House should know that we have been giving support for the rehabilitation and development of ports and inland transport routes for some considerable time. Over £17 million has been given for the development of Maputo Port in Mozambique and more than £5 million has been given for the repair of Tanga port in Tanzania. Our assistance for inland transport includes more than £30 million for the rehabilitation of the Limpopo and Nacala railways in Mozambique and £14 million for the northern transport corridor linking southern Malawi with the port of Dar es Salaam. If good transport infrastructure is vital in a time of drought it is no less so for the economic development of the region in the longer term. While I cannot discuss the longer term tonight, I expect our involvement in this sector to remain substantial as it is so greatly needed.
The noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, referred to using food surpluses in drought affected countries. I must caution your Lordships somewhat on this matter. I know the noble Lord, Lord Judd, will support my following remarks. We find that some of the products which we may have in surplus in European countries are simply unsuitable for food aid purposes. We will use food aid from intervention stocks where we can, but it is much better to use food aid funds to purchase food locally where it is available within the same region, or even in other developing regions, because that encourages the regional trade these countries need and it helps to ensure that the food supplied is in line with local preferences. It also avoids distortion in local markets.
The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester asked me about IFAD and the question of a second special programme for Africa. We have considered this matter many times. When we agreed the first £7 million in 1986 it was on the understanding that that

293
was a one-off exercise. It is perfectly true to say that a number of other donors did not even contribute at that stage. Therefore, the programme did not have quite the same role as the aid we are discussing although it was quite successful in its own way. Given that some of the other donors would not contribute again, and given that we believe IFAD's work in Africa should be funded on the same basis as its work elsewhere, we believe we can use the money more efficiently not through a special programme but by adding to other programmes that are being implemented. This is a difficult issue and I shall not go into it further, but I assure your Lordships that it does not mean we shall be spending any less. It means, I hope, that we shall he spending more effectively.
An enormous amount of rehabilitation and recovery will be needed in the years ahead in those countries affected by drought and famine. We are not waiting to do that until we are through this crisis. We are already planning for the years ahead. Comments have been made about the provision of seeds, but we must also consider the provision of livestock. Much of the livestock in those countries has been slaughtered as it could not be fed due to the shortage of grain. Therefore, it will be a major task to replace that livestock. I have already considered that matter.
Tonight I had hoped to say that agreement had been reached to establish peaceful land corridors that we could use to deliver food in Mozambique. Discussions are continuing in Rome and they will continue into the night. I am hopeful that we shall reach some agreement because until there is peace in Mozambique there is no hope of feeding not only the people of Mozambique but also the people of the landlocked countries such as Malawi, Zimbabwe, and even Zambia, to the extent that is needed. Above all, peace is needed in Mozambique. We shall continue working, as we have done over a long period, to achieve that peace.
Southern Africa is facing its greatest hardship this century. We will do everything in our power to make sure that we help the countries of southern Africa through this crisis. We shall also ensure that we take the necessary action to help prevent such a crisis occurring in the future. We must ensure that we develop an ability to deal with these crises more effectively in the years ahead.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, as we have a few minutes to spare I hope the Minister will clarify what she had to say about seasonal climate forecasting. Does her department support and help to finance that forecasting because, if the geologist I referred to is correct in his forecast, the preparation for the drought could have started six months earlier? Can she tell the House, and if she cannot do so now will she write to me to let me know, what is the position of her department on seasonal forecasting?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, we are already helping in the way the noble Lord described. I shall write to him in some detail. I find that some of what he said in his contribution does not accord with the information which has been given to me by
294
well-experienced scientific officials. I believe that we have done much, irrespective of whether or not we had had earlier warning.
8.20 p.m.
Lord Judd: My Lords, I am sure that everyone who has participated in the debate will want to thank the Minister for the characteristically constructive and conscientious way in which she replied to the points that have been made. I believe that two features have always marked her work in this sphere. One is that she listens and the other is that she cares. It is particularly to be noted that she made a special effort to return from her international responsibilities to be with us this evening. We appreciate that.
I should also like to thank those who participated, because it has been a deeply concerned debate. In thanking them I should like to say that I am glad that the Minister referred to the NGOs, because I believe that we heard the NGOs very clearly, both directly and indirectly, in this debate. We are grateful to them for their insight and professionalism. I support what the Minister said. It is also important to remember that those who work very bravely and consistently with those organisations and the countless thousands of British citizens who support them with record sums in the midst of recession do not do so in place of a national commitment but as a spur to a national commitment. Therefore, the very success of that work is a reason why we look unashamedly to the Government to do more. We support the Minister in all the battles which we know she has on that score.
I am glad that in the debate she mentioned frankly the political dimensions of South Africa as well as the development issues, because the debate has brought out very clearly the interrelationship of the two. In thanking her for her response I believe that we would all say that she will have powerful support from all parts of this House, and certainly from this side of the House, if she takes as an absolute priority now the immense humanitarian urgency of the situation in southern Africa, leaves no stone unturned to get the EC collectively mobilised as well as the international community, and does not mince her words in arguments with colleagues in this Government about the resources that are needed to do all that is necessary.
I conclude with this thought. As has been said, we live in a media age. This country has had it if we as political practitioners succumb to the ghoulish priorities of the media. News is so often where the cameras are, and the cameras too frequently are where the dying occurs. I believe that all those working in the media, and all news editors, have to ask themselves why it is, if they want a place in civilisation, they cannot put equal emphasis on preventing the crisis before it occurs as distinct from covering the death and disaster once we have failed to act in time. As the right reverend Prelate said, we stand or fall together. I believe that if we do not respond to what we know is happening in southern Africa we undermine the moral fabric of our own society. I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

Civil Rights (Disabled Persons) Bill [H.L.]
8.23 p.m.
Report received.
Clause 6 [Provision of goods and services to qualified person with a disability]:
Lord Monson Lord Monson moved Amendment No.1:
Page 5, line 17, leave out from ("hotel") to end of line 18.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, as I explained to the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood, earlier today, I was unfortunately unavoidably absent during both the Second Reading and Committee stage of the Bill. Therefore, I hope that my intervention at this relatively late stage will not be interpreted as being discourteous to those who take a great interest in the Bill. It is certainly not intended to be.
I have strong misgivings about the Bill as a whole. Not only is it yet another example of coercive liberalism, as I term it, but if passed it would have the added disadvantage of importing extreme subjectivity into our law. That is no doubt why this Conservative Government, which is by no means averse to coercion in other fields, are so decidedly lukewarm about the Bill. How on earth are any two people going to be able to agree on "undue hardship" or on what would "unduly prejudice the operation" of a business? The lawyers would have a field day, or a series of field days. However, that is perhaps a matter best discussed at greater length at Third Reading.
In the amendments which I have tabled tonight I want to concentrate on a few aspects of the Bill which seem to me to be especially worrying. They involve personal relationships at potentially very close quarters which might lead to confrontation. It may be convenient if I speak to Amendments Nos.1 and 2 together since they are fairly closely related. In practice they concern mainly the mentally as opposed to the physically disabled.
Your Lordships will be aware of the sort of eccentric one finds all too often on a London bus who alternately mumbles incomprehensibly and then shouts obscenities, usually at the top of his or her voice—more often it seems to be a female—while the other passengers in the bus sit rigid with embarrassment, staring straight ahead to avoid eye contact with the person concerned.
Then there are the more severely disabled people such as one finds at a day center which has opened recently near to our home in London. Some 60 or 65 per cent. of the people are perfectly harmless and innocuous. The remaining 35 or 40 per cent. cannot be so described. They are mainly young people whose problems are attributable to drink or drugs, or so I deduce. They are often extremely aggressive. They walk the streets shouting and glaring at people. I have seen one of them urinating in the street at 11 o'clock in the morning. I am told by shopkeepers that some have urinated in shop doorways, and that others smash windows. I accept that whether or not it is their own consumption of drink or drugs which has brought them to that condition they cannot help it.
Nevertheless, it is an inescapable fact that they do not make life particularly pleasant for other people in the district.
Most of us present tonight can afford to spend holidays in a hotel. Hotels are probably able to cope with such people in the event they should want to use hotels. Most hotels nowadays have private facilities, meals can be served in rooms, and so on. However, boarding houses are very different. Boarding houses have shared bathrooms, and total strangers are obliged to sit next to one another at close quarters at the same table. Do not people, mainly of modest income, who have saved for a quiet holiday, have rights too? It may not happen often, but if they have to be confined at close quarters with people who are aggressive, unpredictable or doubly incontinent, would it not ruin their holiday?
There is also the question of entertainment, which is covered by Amendment No.2. No one would want for a moment to deprive disturbed people of their pleasures. In the days when I used to take my sons to the pantomime many years ago I remember that there were often considerable numbers of educationally retarded people in the audience whose uninhibited pleasure and shouts of appreciation positively added to the occasion and to the pleasure of everybody else, both in the audience and on the stage. The same would presumably apply to the circus, for example.
However, when one is at a non-musical stage play with moments of great dramatic tension, or at a concert featuring a string quartet or a solo pianist, cellist or violinist, very different considerations apply—hence the need for Amendment No.2. It is no good saying that these people are not very likely to go to such events. One cannot frame statute law on the supposition that something will not happen very often. If it happens at all I contend that it is something that has to be dealt with.
Clause 7 does not help to mitigate the situation since it covers only technical and financial considerations. The same applies to Clause 9 since it provides only for the possibility of temporary exemptions not exceeding five years, not permanent ones. This is not something where temporary exemptions would help very much for obvious reasons. What would help would be the importation into Part III of the concept of reasonableness to enable providers of facilities and services without contravening the law to exclude on reasonable grounds not people en bloc but those who look as if they are going to mar the enjoyment of much greater numbers of other people. If that were to be agreed to, perhaps on Third Reading, Amendments Nos.1 and 2 would be unnecessary. For the moment, I beg to move Amendment No.1.
8.30 p.m.
Baroness Lockwood: My Lords, I am very sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Monson, has thought fit to propose amendments to the Bill tonight particularly in view of the terms he has used in relation to the first two. I know that the House will accept his apology for the fact that he was not able to be involved earlier for understandable reasons. Nevertheless, I should like him to note that the Bill has had all-party support in

297
this House. It came to us having been initiated in another place, again with all-party support. It has arisen from long discussions with groups of people, some disabled and others concerned to assist the disabled. It seems to me that the two amendments to which he has spoken and the others that he will seek to move take much of the heart out of the Bill in relation to the provision of goods, facilities and services. That would cause great dismay among many disabled people who have been campaigning for legislation to give them the same rights as those enjoyed by people without disabilities.
There exist two pieces of legislation, the Sex Discrimination Act and the Race Relations Act, which have not caused any difficulty. I know that we are now talking about a completely different group of people who have in the past, as clearly indicated at Second Reading, suffered great hardship through discrimination because they have been denied access to certain places. The framework of Clause 6(2) is such that it is intended to provide facilities for access to these places, but it has to be read in conjunction with Clause 7 which makes clear that the modifications and changes necessary to provide such access should be reasonable. In this connection I think the courts would be well able to interpret what was meant by "reasonableness".
The noble Lord, Lord Monson, mentioned the difference between a boarding house or similar establishment and an hotel. I would suggest to him that the problem he has outlined needs to be dealt with by different means; that is, assistance to the young people whose habits he described. If he were to press his amendment it would exclude not only such people but all people with disabilities; it would have a much wider effect than he suggested. I do not think it would deal with the problem he has in mind, because boarding houses and any such organisations often accept applications for accommodation not knowing the kinds of persons they are dealing with. All of us in all kinds of contexts have had examples where perhaps we would rather have sat next to somebody other than the person we were sitting next to. The amendments to which the noble Lord, Lord Monson, has spoken remove the dignity from disabled persons which the Bill is designed to help restore.
Lord Renton: My Lords, this is the first time I have addressed your Lordships on this Bill, which I consider to be overdue. As to the case put forward by the noble Lord, Lord Monson, I would say that subsections (1) and (2) taken on their own would be totally unworkable. But, as the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood, said, they have to be regarded in the light of Clause 6(3) and the test of reasonableness as applied by Clause 7. With that qualification in mind, I think it would be wrong for us to strike out the words "boarding house or other similar establishment" in subsection (2) (c) and the words "entertainment, recreation" in subsection (2) (g).
I know from the experience of having a severely handicapped daughter that although she cannot speak and entertain other people much, unless they know her very well, entertainment and recreation add a new
298
dimension to her sad life. To strike out "entertainment, recreation" would be very unfortunate. I sincerely hope that the noble Lord, Lord Monson, for whose initiative I so often have high regard, will not press the two amendments.
Lord Rix: My Lords, I find the logic governing the amendments moved by the noble Lord, Lord Monson, extremely interesting. I am surprised that they do not go even further to exclude other groups from accommodation, entertainment, clubs, and so on. How about those over 65 with incipient or actual disabilities of age? I fear that might exclude many of your Lordships' House, including myself. What about overweight people who take up too much room in theatre seats or ruin a landlady's mattress in many a boarding house? I am sure that the noble Lord was testing your Lordships' collective sense of humour. I cannot believe that these amendments were moved without the noble Lord's tongue being firmly rammed in his cheek; otherwise, they should he rejected with the contempt that they deserve.
Lord Auckland: My Lords, as the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood, said, this is an all-party amendment. With his considerable legal experience, my noble friend Lord Renton put his finger on the point. I happen to have family in the hotel and catering industry. There are old establishments which are difficult to adapt for disabled people, whether those people are physically disabled or mentally disabled. However, I should point out that it is now compulsory to have fire doors in hotels. I am not sure of the position in boarding houses.
Adapting such places for the disabled is not as difficult as it seems. In cases where architecturally it is very difficult to make allowances for the disabled, subsection (3) gives some leeway to local authorities or others who are responsible for adapting those places.
Nowadays more and more people are becoming disabled because they are living longer. It seems to me that the amendment would bar not only many young disabled but also elderly disabled. After all, as I mentioned at Second Reading, some of those people may have become disabled through war injuries received while serving their country. Are those people to be excluded? The amendments of the noble Lord, Lord Monson, seem to me at any rate to have that effect.
There are difficulties and not every establishment can immediately provide such facilities. I hope that the House will not accept these amendments, even at this late hour. Whatever deficiencies the Bill may have, I believe that Clause 6 in the main is a very practical clause.
Lord Rochester: My Lords, after what has been said by a number of speakers, there is no need for me to add much from these Benches. In his opening remarks the noble Lord, Lord Monson, said that he had considerable misgivings about the Bill as a whole. I am sure he will acknowledge that, as the Bill received a Second Reading, the principle that there should be a curb to discrimination against disabled people was accepted by the House.

299
Clauses 6 and 7 have been carefully framed. In my view they take adequate account of the reservations to which the noble Lord gave expression. Indeed, I thought that in his very last remarks he hinted that that might be the case. However that may be, I share the view expressed by several noble Lords that it is important that if at all possible the Bill should go forward with the support of all parties and of the Cross Benches.
In those circumstances, I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Monson, will feel able to withdraw these amendments.
Baroness Darcy (de Knayth): My Lords, when I saw the amendments of my noble friend Lord Monson I thought that they had been formulated on the grounds of cost and not of feelings about how disabled people might behave. Able-bodied people have the right to enjoy themselves unmolested. If someone with a disability was being objectionable he would probably be asked to leave the premises. He would be treated in exactly the same way as someone without a disability because this anti-discrimination is simply on the grounds of a person's disability.
As the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood, said, the amendments go to the heart of the Bill. Entertainment and recreation are just as important to people with disabilities as to others. Sport in particular is probably even more beneficial to someone who has a disability and who is less mobile.
Does my noble friend Lord Monson recognise that people with disabilities have equal rights? Of course the provision would be subject to the clauses on reasonableness anyway. I hope that he will think about this matter again during the Recess if he decides to withdraw his amendments.
Lady Kinloss: My Lords, I apologise that I have been unable to take part in this debate until now. I am puzzled by the amendments of my noble friend Lord Monson. Surely Clause 6(3) deals with many of his worries. As the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood, said, Clause 7(1) would certainly help him. I cannot understand his worries.
8.45 p.m.
Lord Carter: My Lords, in speaking to this Bill I shall follow the usual convention on a Private Member's Bill. I should explain that I speak on my own behalf. If a Labour Government had been returned at the last election, we should have introduced a Bill very similar to the one in front of us.
I was struck by a phrase of the noble Lord, Lord Monson, who referred to the Bill as an example of "coercive liberalism". I am not sure whether he is aware of a Bill introduced in America which goes much wider than this Bill; namely, the Disabilities Act, which was introduced by the Bush Administration. The Bush Administration has been accused of many things but I am sure that coercive liberalism is not one of them.
The noble Lord described the symptoms of mental illness and then described people as eccentric. He moved on to speak of delinquents and people suffering
300
from problems with drink and drugs. I did agree with one comment of the noble Lord. He said that there are some people with whom one would not wish to be confined at close quarters. He is quite right about that.
The noble Lord also said that one should exclude people who look as if they are going to mar the enjoyment of others. Who decides about that? Who decides that they look as if they are going to mar the enjoyment of others? He also used the phrase "educationally retarded" which I think went out of style a long time ago. He reveals an inability to distinguish between the mentally ill and the mentally handicapped.
To put everything together, I shall restrict myself to saying that if these amendments are accepted, they will be less than helpful. I hope that the noble Lord has taken the feeling of the House and will now agree to withdraw them.
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, when this Bill was considered in this House at Second Reading and during Committee, my noble friend Lord Henley made clear the Government's position. That position has not changed.
The Government have considerable sympathy with the thinking behind this Bill. We recognise that discrimination does still exist, although there is no doubt that considerable progress has been made over the past few years to improve the quality of life of disabled people across the whole spectrum of the activities of everyday life. But we are fully aware that there is still some way to go before disabled people are able to participate fully in an integrated society. The Government continue to take appropriate action to eliminate discrimination on the grounds of disability, including taking legislative action where appropriate.
The Government neither support nor oppose these amendments. We shall of course continue to listen carefully to any points put forward here today.
Lord Monson: My Lords, if this discussion has shown anything, it has demonstrated how extremely subjective is the concept of rights. Many noble Lords take it as axiomatic that the state should not only prevent people from doing harm to others, which is right and proper, but also force them positively to do good. The concept of rights is indeed subjective, and I say so advisedly, because one could theoretically apply the principle to elderly people and people who are below average height and so on and so forth. That has not yet been done and so far as I am aware will not be done.
I say in parenthesis to the noble Lord, Lord Rix, that over the past 16 years or more I have consistently opposed all such legislation, whether it involved religion, sex, height, weight or whatever. I certainly would not dream of singling out disabled people to be treated any differently. I shall keep to my phrase "coercive liberalism". However, the fact that President Bush, heavily influenced by the wave of political correctness sweeping the United States, has supported such a Bill does not prove much. The fact that there is all-party support for the Bill does not mean that it should be automatically rubber-stamped and immune from criticism whether or not such criticism is

301
justified. I suspect that there are many people in this Chamber and in another place who tacitly support the Government's lukewarm feelings towards the Bill but are reluctant to say so openly for fear of being branded as hard hearted.
The most interesting contribution was from my noble friend Lady Darcy (de Knayth). If her interpretation were right, and people who behave badly, whether or not intentionally, could be asked to leave premises under the Bill as drafted, my amendments would be totally unnecessary. However, my interpretation does not accord with hers. I have read the clauses several times. They do not seem to indicate that interpretation. Clause 6(3) states:
"This section does not apply where compliance … would be impracticable or unsafe".
Safety does not come into my amendment. Nor does "impracticable". When one refers to "impracticable", one means physical measures such as widening doors and so on. That is my interpretation. If the supporters of the Bill will assure me otherwise, I shall be delighted and gladly beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Clause 7 refers to the test of reasonableness. However, it does not refer to "reasonableness" in isolation but,
"reasonableness of any modification to rules, policies or practices".
That is an ambiguous phrase. I should be much happier if the provision were redrafted to ensure that the pattern that my noble friend Lady Darcy (de Knayth) suggests will be permissible is beyond doubt.
My amendments were somewhat probing and broad brush. I prefer that the concept of "reasonableness" is made clear beyond doubt in Clause 6 and in Part III. It is not clear at present. However, if those with drafting expertise assure me that it is clear and that my noble friend Lady Darcy (de Knayth) is right in her interpretation, then no one will be more pleased than I shall be. I do not intend to press the amendments. I never did. I have put the amendments forward with the aim of discussing the issue. It would be helpful if those who sponsor the Bill will investigate further the wording of Clauses 6 and 7 to ensure that the meaning imputed to them by my noble friend Lady Darcy (de Knayth) is correct. If so, that will be splendid. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No.2 not moved.]
Lord Monson Lord Monson moved Amendment No.3:
Page 5, line 27, leave out from ("associations") to end of line.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I feel much more strongly about Amendment No.3. Clubs have never been my scene, as they say, but I have always understood that a club is a club, for which applicants for membership can be accepted or rejected for the most quixotic of reasons which have nothing to do with fairness, balance or any other virtuous considerations since they are essentially private places. That has been the normally accepted attitude throughout the western world for decades, if not for centuries, except in the latterly politically correct United States. In 1976 a passionate opposition within the Conservative Party involved both Back Benchers
302
and Front Benchers. It was led by Mr. William Whitelaw (as he then was) and Mr. Patrick Mayhew QC (as he then was) against the Labour Government, who included clubs in their Race Relations Bill. One still waits for the Conservative Party to live up to the principles expressed so passionately in 1976 by repealing that section.
Clubs are not included in either the Sex Discrimination Act or the Northern Ireland religious discrimination legislation. The Bill ought to follow that pattern.
Associations are a different matter because one often needs to join an association for professional purposes. Associations are not private organisations in that sense. But clubs are different. They arc private. If people choose of their own free will to be virtuous and to admit anyone, that is splendid. But in essence clubs are an extension of one's home and people are under no legal obligation to be virtuous about whom they admit into their home. I beg to move.
Baroness Lockwood: My Lords, does the noble Lord realise how limited the provision is? Many people would like to see it go much further. The provision before us is somewhat different from those within the Sex Discrimination Act and the Race Relations Act. Nevertheless, the operative wording is the same.
I again draw the noble Lord's attention to Clause 6(2) which states:
"This section applies to the provision … of goods, facilities and services to the public or any section of the public".
Those words are also in the Sex Discrimination Act and in the Race Relations Act. They have been the subject of court cases. Indeed, there was similar wording in the 1976 Race Relations Act; and a House of Lords case in 1973 ruled that private clubs which had membership rules that they enforced would not be covered by the Act. Therefore clubs which operate a formal selection procedure to control their membership can claim that they are private and therefore outside the scope of the legislation. That might cover a number of points to which the noble Lord has referred.
Clubs which are included are those which automatically accept into membership people of certain categories such as those with certain qualifications or interests or anyone working in a particular company or area. Such clubs cannot claim to be private and are therefore included within the terms of the clause. I hope that the noble Lord will have second thoughts on the amendment.
9 p.m.
Lord Renton: My Lords, subsection (2) (j) in itself looks terribly wide in its application. Indeed, if one looks at in its most absurd expression, for example, the word "club" includes the Athenaeum, which is a club for the intellectual elite. I cannot imagine anybody with a learning difficulty being elected to the Athenaeum. If we were to leave that phrase in paragraph (j) as it is, it would be an absurd provision to have in a Bill.
However, we do not leave it as it is because subsection (3) has in the second line the word

303
"impracticable", which covers the application of what has gone before. Therefore, I believe that the fears expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Monson, are not justified.
Lord Monson: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his intervention but I still contend that the word "impracticable" is somewhat too subjective.
I am rather more heartened by what the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood, said. If I understood her correctly, she implied that the wording in this clause is comparable to that in sex discrimination legislation, which covers only clubs which are generally open to everybody and is not comparable to that in race relations legislation, which goes further.
Baroness Lockwood: My Lords, both Acts are similar in scope.
Lord Monson: My Lords, I am afraid that they are not because there has been a recent case in North London where clubs have been told that they must elect certain people, whether or not they want to. That does not apply as regards sex discrimination legislation because there has been the recent case of the Garrick Club, which attracted a great deal of publicity. I accept that clubs which are more in the nature of associations but which call themselves clubs should be included in the Bill, if we are to accept the general premises of the Bill. With the assurance given by the noble Baroness that this follows the Sex Discrimination Act, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 10 [Enforcement of Part II]:
Baroness Lockwood Baroness Lockwood moved Amendment No.4:
Page 6, line 33, leave out ("an order") and insert ("a recommendation").
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No.4, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos.5 and 6.
In Committee I put forward a number of amendments to place disabled people who were discriminated against in the field of employment on the grounds of their disability on a similar basis to those who were discriminated against on the grounds of race or sex, in the sense that the latter two categories can pursue their cases through industrial tribunals. However, my amendment went somewhat further than the provisions of the sex discrimination legislation and the race relations legislation, as I indicated at cols.846 and 847 of Hansard on 1st July.
The amendments were in line with suggestions by the Equal Opportunities Commission for amending the Sex Discrimination Act. They would have simplified procedures and strengthened the position of tribunals vis-à-vis county courts. In my view, they were and still are desirable amendments. However, the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Alloway, whose experience both in the operation and in the drafting of law is much greater than mine, intervened in the debate and suggested that the amendments were objectionable on the grounds that they would have
304
consequential effects on other statutes, and in particular on the statute conferring jurisdiction on industrial tribunals.
In subsequent discussion with the noble Lord, it emerged that a Private Member's Bill such as this would not be the proper mechanism to bring about such far-reaching changes. Therefore, these amendments are much more limited and would bring the provisions of the Bill back into line with the provisions of the Sex Discrimination Act and the Race Relations Act, in that employment cases would appear before industrial tribunals but the procedures for those cases would be just the same as they are at present.
This amendment may not go as far as some, including myself, may wish. However, it ensures that the industrial tribunals will be the appropriate means for dealing with discrimination in the field of employment for those who have been discriminated against on the grounds of disability. I hope that there may be other channels which can ultimately bring about the effect of my original amendment. However, this evening, I beg to move Amendment No.4.
Lord Renton: My Lords, at first sight, to insert in the Bill the word "recommendation" instead of "order" looks as though we shall enact something which is not enforceable. However, as I understand it, the noble Baroness has covered that point by subsection (6), which alters subsection (3) as it stands at present in the Bill and deals specifically with the problem of failure to comply with the recommendation. That provides a means of enforcement.
Therefore, although I was rather hesitant about this group of amendments, I concede that there would not be the problem which occurred to me at first sight.
Baroness Lockwood: My Lords, I am glad to hear the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Renton, on this matter. Perhaps he and I might discuss the situation to see whether we can bring about the elements of the amendment by other means. I hope that the House will accept the amendment as it is tabled. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Lockwood Baroness Lockwood moved Amendment No.5:
Page 6, line 34, leave out ("and necessary").
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Lockwood Baroness Lockwood moved Amendment No.6:
Page 6. line 38, leave out subsection (3) and insert:
("(3) If without reasonable justification the respondent to a complaint fails to comply with a recommendation made by an industrial tribunal under subsection (2) (c), then, if they think it just and equitable to do so—

(a) the tribunal may increase the amount of compensation required to be paid to the complainant in respect of the complaint by an order made under subsection (2) (b), or

(b) if an order under subsection (2) (b) could have been made but was not, the tribunal may make such an order.").

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I have already spoken to Amendment No.6. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Monson Lord Monson moved Amendment No.7:
Page 7, line 8, leave out subsection (3)
The noble Lord said: My Lords, most of us over the age of 45 or 50 were brought up in an era where teasing, taunting and name calling were rife among young people of school age. If we had all been given financial compensation every time our feelings had been hurt, we would all be multi-millionaires.
The provision introduces an undesirable transatlantic litigious atmosphere into our affairs. Having said that, I recognise that comparable legislation containing identical provisions is already on the statute book. I therefore do not believe it is appropriate to press the amendment tonight. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

PDSA: Recruitment Policies
9.10 p.m.
Lord Molloy Lord Molloy rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will investigate the current recruitment policies of the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, my Question is mainly concerned with the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals, which is a registered charity. I must declare that I am involved with the all-party Blood Group; I am an associate member of the British Veterinary Association; I am a member of the International League for the Protection of Horses, which is run so ably by Colonel George McStephen, OBE.
I must remind the House that the PDSA was founded in 1917 by Maria Dickin for the treatment of sick and injured animals of the poor. It has done remarkable work. The caravan dispensaries worked wonders. Since then it has done remarkably well in helping poor people. I must say also that I am involved with the RSPCA and the RSPB. I am involved in fundraising for the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals in Swansea, helped by the noble Lord, Lord Swansea. We succeeded in collecting sufficient money for the PDSA to create in Orchard Street in Swansea a big blue shop front which became extremely well known. Unfortunately it was bombed to bits during the war and recently a new one was created.
I must say also that my debate relating to the threat to Edinburgh University Veterinary School, contributed to by the noble Baroness, Lady Robson, the noble Lord, Lord Kimball, my noble friend Lord Cledwyn and wound up by the noble Lord, Lord Henley, did a great deal to save the vet school, which was important also to the PDSA.
Those of us interested in animal welfare were disturbed to learn that the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals had serious financial problems. We decided to apply for membership. Cheques were included with our applications and the applications submitted to the Director General, who wrote a most courteous letter to me pointing out what we needed to do to become a member. I followed the instructions, as did many others. We waited for some time and then all
306
received a letter saying—I ask the House to listen carefully—that the PDSA no longer accepts applications for membership. Yet it is up to its eyes in debt!
We found that quite remarkable. Many applicants were spurred on by the fact that the PDSA was short of funds and had done magnificent work. We felt that we should give an example by sending our cheques and applying for ordinary membership. I was one, as a Peer of the realm. There was Mr. Tom Maclnnes, the former PDSA chief vet for Scotland; there was Mr. Walter Beswick, a former president of the BVA and Professor James Armour, Dean of the University of Glasgow Veterinary School.
We were all rejected. I was informed it was because of our association with the British Veterinary Association, which had done so much for the PDSA and often featured it in the BVA journal. We found it somewhat distressing and decided to examine a number of matters. Incidentally, everyone who made application but me was a Scot. I hope that there is no racial issue involved in the PDSA refusal. The Scots will soon get rid of it if there is.
Mr. Tom Maclnnes was a senior PDSA vet and the senior organiser for Scotland for the PDSA. He was also a PDSA pioneer group guild organiser for 40 years in the service of the organisation. He was senior to all the people who now sit on the present council.
I understand that he was nominated by Sir John Banham and Mr. John Butterfill, MP. When the council examined this nomination it must have meant that Sir John Banham and Mr. Butterfill did not stick by their word and did not support Mr. Tom MacInnes. Since then he has received a letter from Rear Admiral Sir John Garnier, KCVO, CBE, who is the private Secretary to the Patron. The Admiral said:
"The [Patron] was saddened to hear of your disappoint-ment that your application for Membership of the PDSA was not accepted, and also of your disenchantment with the present financial policy of the Society. The [Patron] has been aware from letters she has received of the difficulty that the recent restrictions in treatment might have meant",
for the PDSA. It is hoped that there will be new thoughts about his acceptance.
We hoped that the fund for the PDSA was going to be increased by the launch of a balloon race in Trafalgar Square. Mr. John Bower, the president of the British Veterinary Association, on that day made an emergency call to me at this House asking if I. would help them because no one from the PDSA had come. None of their council members attended except for Mr. J. S. Hough, the director of public relations. It was a very difficult situation. I went there with my PA and Mr. John Bower. With a great deal of hard work we managed to get the balloon off the ground and the enterprise was a success.
I have also received correspondence from very distinguished people such as Mr. D. L. Haxby, CBE, MRCVS. In a letter to me he states:
"I have made extensive inquiries about this matter and it does appear that there is a form of membership of the PDSA which is limited by an inside form of self-perpetuation of the members and constitution of the management committee. It almost appears to be a secret society".

307
That is a letter from a very well-known and distinguished vet about which we felt some concern. Therefore, we decided that we had to do something about the matter.
There was a recent speech to the British Veterinary Association by the chairman of the PDSA, Mr. Francis Butters. It is on the record of the British Veterinary magazine. Mr. Francis Butters outlines the precarious financial situation of the PDSA. A vast number of poor people were prevented from receiving help. Because the financial situation is so bad help can only be given to those who are really poverty-stricken.
We could not understand why a number of distinguished people sent cheques to the PDSA, having been encouraged to do so, but were rejected. The director general had outlined what was to be done. He said that membership could be obtained by sending only one shilling. We submitted very much more than a shilling. Noble Lords can therefore imagine how angry we were when we had letters saying that no more people were to be allowed to join the PDSA.
From investigations which we made, it was discovered that the real crime was that we were all, somehow or other, associated with a vet or the British Veterinary Association. Therefore we were ineligible. Among the ineligibles was included Miss Cherida Hopper of Bristol University Veterinary School. She is in charge of the school's feline centre, which is a clinic dealing with research into the FIV infection. Another ineligible person was the noble Lord, Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior, who is one of the United Kingdom's most distinguished vets and a man very much honoured in this House. Others were Mrs. Judy McArthur-Clark, president of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, and Mr. J. H. Baird, who is the chief executive member of the association itself.
Perhaps noble Lords will listen to this: there are 24 Members of Parliament, one Cabinet Minister, seven noble Lords, four MEPs, a Shadow Cabinet Minister, my noble friend Lord Cledwyn, the Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition and, possibly, the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor, none of whom can apply for membership of the PDSA because they or a son or daughter are honorary members of the British Veterinary Association. We believe that this situation needs to be examined.
Since we made these investigations some other matters have come to light. For example, we have been informed that the finances and the accountancy arrangements are in a pretty serious situation. The society has 50 vet centres,70 retail shops and 14 appeals offices. These cost a great deal of money to run. The late director of the PDSA finance—he is not dead, but he simply packed in the job because he could not stomach it any more—was deeply concerned at the accounting and reporting system. It was in very poor order. There was a turnover of £18 million and net assets of £43 million. The criticisms of the director of finance were rejected by the council, so he resigned. What had he done? What was he about to expose, we wonder. We hope that the Government will take it up.
The only guide to a collective organisation is the collective conscience—in this case of the PDSA's council. The only shield to the PDSA's memory is its rectitude and sincerity of honest behaviour. I have to say—and I am sad to have to say it—that my last words have to be in this context. These vital desiderata of decency are absent at the governing levels of the PDSA. A full inquiry is required to restore them and so recreate the dignity and honour of a most notable organisation which has somehow or other gone right off the rails and is behaving in a manner which is not merely authoritarian but in no way acceptable to any democratic society.
9.20 p.m.
Lord Morris of Castle Morris: My Lords, those of us who had the duty and privilege of serving on the Committee of your Lordships' House which considered the Charities Bill last year recall very well that there are hundreds of thousands of registered charities in the United Kingdom and that the overwhelming majority of them are totally unknown to the person on the Clapham omnibus.
The People's Dispensary for Sick Animals, however, is not one of those. Despite the modest words of its chairman at the British Veterinary Association Congress last September when he said,
"We're not glamorous, we're not on TV, nobody wants our autographs—except sometimes on cheques",
people have heard of the PDSA, and its large-scale and widespread activities are legitimately matters of public interest and concern. We are all, I am sure, grateful to my noble friend Lord Molloy for bringing them before your Lordships' House this evening and for raising, in his characteristic and inimitable way, questions of importance which are of deep concern to him.
I stress that the PDSA is a well-known and respected public charitable institution in this country. As my noble friend has pointed out, this is possibly due to its almost fairy tale origins in the work of Maria Dickin, a daughter of the manse born in 1870, who during a selfless career as a social worker in London's East End founded the dispensary in 1917 out of her burning compassion for the ill-treated animals mostly donkeys, ponies and horses at that time—for whom no one else seemed ready to care. In her book The Cry of the Animal published in 1941 she wrote:
"The suffering and misery of these poor uncared-for creatures in our overcrowded areas, was a revelation to me. I had no idea it existed and it made me indescribably sad".
Clearly, there was an urgent need for action to remedy a situation of Dickensian or almost Chekovian severity and, equally obviously, that treatment had to be free. It was from those dramatic, emotional beginnings in a 13-foot square cellar in Whitechapel, rooted in true charity and unselfish idealism, that the PDSA began its life and its problems.
It is no surprise then to find that the PDSA grew and flourished and maintained, so far as it possibly could, its ideal of a free service—free at the point of use, if I may use that phrase—for the animals of those who genuinely could not afford to pay the normal

309
veterinary fees. Let us hope tonight that the Government will be able to say with conviction,"The PDSA is safe with us".
There are now no fewer than 50 veterinary centres located in areas of high population density, together with Pet Aid Services which operate in a further 64 communities. In 1990 the PDSA carried out 1.4 million treatments at a cost to the society of over £13 million. At present the average donation is 77p and the average cost of a single treatment is £8.05. Its original commitment to providing a free service has had to be mitigated because in these difficult financial conditions in which we live the PDSA receives no state aid whatsoever and is entirely reliant on its capital funds, its donations, endowments and bequests.
This places the society in a most delicate and difficult position among charities, and one which requires the most careful, responsible and skilful financial management, including an almost prophetic requirement to forecast accurately the movement of its income year by year, and balance this against its constant requirements for skilled—and expensive—veterinary staff, drugs, suitable premises and purchases of modern equipment. The PDSA is a very large employer of veterinary surgeons and ancillary staff, and salaries and costs under this budget head are notoriously difficult to predict with accuracy but utterly essential to pay at the end of every month. Prudent financial management is thus of the very essence in the total management role. My noble friend is quite right to draw our attention to the PDSA's finances.
I have looked, albeit briefly, at the latest available set of accounts, although naturally a statement of accounts is no more than a snapshot of the state of financial affairs, and one would need to compare one year with another and analyse trends and flows more closely than I have been able to do if one were to be able to feel fully confident about any institution's financial health. Nevertheless, the society appears to have very substantial reserves, of the order of some £20 million, and it is against this that the drop in income from donations and bequests over the past two years should be seen.
With that having been said, however, last year's deficit of some £1 million is serious, and it will behove the society to look to it with immediate concern. I understand that steps have already been taken, including the tightening up of the almoning rules, to remedy this state of affairs; but the society must be aware that many of us, including the Charity Commissioners, will be watching most carefully to see that the very compassionate and charitable rules under which it operates do not (in these harsh times when market forces rule and strict accountability is in force) bring its finances into an undesirable state. It may rest assured that my noble friend Lord Molloy will be watching its financial performance with hawk-eyed vigilance, and it will do well to take heed of the criticisms he has made.
If the society operates under very demanding financial conditions, it must also be said that it seems to have unusual and perhaps curious by-laws concerning membership, and these, too, have caused
310
my noble friend some concern. As I understand it, the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals Act 1949 lays down in Section 16(1) that:
"The Council shall have power from time to time to make, alter and revoke by-laws with respect to the management of the Society".
The resulting by-laws contain six clauses on "Members" which lay down, inter alia, that,
"No person shall he admitted a member of the Society unless he is first approved by the Council and the Council shall have full discretion as to the admission of any person to membership".
That comes from PDSA by-laws, No.3.
This and other clauses on the constitution of the society's council seem to arrogate considerable power and authority to the council, but all its powers are derived directly from the 1949 Act, and, although some might think that the council may have acted ungenerously in considering recent requests for membership, it would be difficult to sustain a charge that it had acted illegally or even improperly. It may be, however, that it would be well advised to take a look at the legislation which governs it, especially the by-laws, with a view perhaps to revising some of its requirements in a more liberal and inclusive direction.
That might be felt to he a conciliatory gesture, though in fairness it has to be said that by the time of the last meeting of the council, on 14th May, there had been no complaints registered against rejection by those who had recently applied for membership. Among that group were, I believe, a number of most eminent practitioners of veterinary science, and it might seem that they were eminently desirable as members of the PDSA. But the society seems to have felt—and the case is at least arguable—that, as one of Britain's's largest employers of veterinary practitioners, it should not itself be governed by vets. The arm's length, or in this case, I suppose, one could say, paw's length principle, might seem, in the circumstances, not inappropriate.
Lord Molloy: My Lords, I am sorry but I must interrupt my noble friend for one moment. We must note the fact that there is a very great difference. If anyone joins the society he will be an ordinary member. Only the council can make him a member of the ruling body; that is, the council itself. On that basis, those concerned have stopped any soul in Great Britain from being a member of the organisation, despite the fact that it is up to its eyes in debt—or, at least, it appears to be.
Lord Morris of Castle Morris: My Lords, of course the society is in charge of its own rules of membership. However one may feel about that, I should imagine that it is impossible to make any particular difference without legislation. But it may be that my noble friend has legislation in mind.
The PDSA, like many other charities in these uncharitable times, is obviously going through a difficult period. It may be that there are stormy waters ahead of it even yet and it would do well to pull down its sou'wester and see to it that all the hatches are battened down. I support entirely the insistence of my noble friend Lord Molloy that this charity, like all charities, must uphold the highest standards of public

311
probity and conduct and we must all be grateful for his vigilance in inquiring whether or not the noble ideals of the PDSA's founder are being upheld today. I await with great interest what the noble Baroness who is to reply has to say. Of course, it is entirely a matter for Her Majesty's Government what action, if any, they decide to take. I am sure that my noble friend will receive her remarks, as I hope he will take my own, with his customary courtesy and charity.
9.32 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Cumberlege): My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, has raised an interesting issue tonight. I am glad to take part in the debate. As the noble Lord reminded us—as, indeed, did the noble Lord, Lord Morris of Castle Morris—charities, both large and small, play a vital part in the life of our nation. It is perhaps often easy to forget that many of the major services which we take for granted today, whether they be of health, education or social welfare, were built on foundations laid down over many years by concerned individuals who gave of their time and resources, not because they were required to do so, but, voluntarily, for the good of their communities. Charities now engage in an enormous range of activities; they affect all our lives. Some have few funds with which to operate, others are substantial multi-million pound international corporations.
The charitable sector is growing—and growing fast. That is a tribute to the good will of the individuals involved and to the generosity of the general public who give so unstintingly. The Government believe that, if the sector is to continue to grow and play its full role, charities must be well managed and seen to be so, their trustees fully accountable and concerned to apply the highest standards of stewardship.
With those aims in mind, a complex legal framework has been built up over many years to ensure that money donated for charitable purposes is used wisely, honestly and well. The Charity Commissioners play a key role for it is they who are charged with the task of supervising and monitoring charitable activities and with investigating abuse—a fact recognised in the new the very new—charities legislation. The Charities Act 1992 was designed in part specifically to give the Charity Commissioners sharper tools—and more of them—with which to supervise and investigate charities, to identify abuse at an early stage, and to remedy it quickly and effectively wherever found.
The noble Lord, Lord Molloy, has told us of his concern at some of the PDSA's internal practices and has asked if the Government will intervene and investigate his complaints. I have to tell him that it is not open to me to take such action. My right honourable friend the Home Secretary does have general responsibility for the reform of charity law and, indeed, for the overall efficiency of the Charity Commissioners; but he has no powers to intervene in
312
the day-to-day conduct of a particular charity's affairs nor, indeed, in the day-to-day administration of the Charity Commission.
It is, as I have said, for the Charity Commissioners to investigate the conduct and administration of individual charities. But it is for the commissioners to decide whether they will exercise their powers in any particular case.
I understand, of course, the noble Lord's anxieties and that he feels that something must be done. I shall ensure, therefore, that the commissioners are made aware of all that he said this evening. I urge him, however, if he has any other information which he thinks would be useful to the commissioners when they look at the points he has raised, to lay it before them as soon as possible.
As to whether the commissioners can act in the situation which the noble Lord describes is of course for them to decide. However, perhaps I should explain that the trustees of all charities are bound by the terms of their governing instrument (their trusts) and by the general law. Provided that they keep within the law and the terms of their trusts the commissioners cannot properly intervene in matters which fall to the discretion of the trustees.
Not all charities have a membership in the well-understood sense. Where they do, the admission of individuals to the membership and the powers and rights, if any, of members once admitted, the provisions for the conduct of meetings and so forth are always governed by the terms of the charity's trusts.
Where the trustees of a charity are given absolute discretion as to who may be admitted as a member, then obviously it is for them to exercise that discretion as they see fit. But neither my right honourable friend the Home Secretary nor the Charity Commissioners have power to intervene in the trustees' lawful execution of their discretion.

Tribunals and Inquiries Bill [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to.
River Humber (Upper Pyewipe Outfall) Bill [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to with amendments; the amendments considered and agreed to.

Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Disclosure of Information) Bill [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to.
House adjourned at twenty-four minutes before ten o'clock.

  SUDANESE AND SOMALI REFUGEES IN KENYA AND UGANDA
  SUDANESE AND SOMALI REFUGEES IN KENYA AND UGANDA
  YUGOSLAVIAN REFUGEES AND ETHNIC MINORITIES
  YUGOSLAVIAN REFUGEES AND ETHNIC MINORITIES
  UN DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE FUNDING TARGET
  UN DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE FUNDING TARGET
  PRIMARY ENVIRONMENTAL CARE
  PRIMARY ENVIRONMENTAL CARE
  RAINFOREST MANAGEMENT
  RAINFOREST MANAGEMENT
  COMPANY LAW AND BANK BRANCHES: DRAFT EC DIRECTIVES
  COMPANY LAW AND BANK BRANCHES: DRAFT EC DIRECTIVES
  BLANK TAPES AND AUDIO EQUIPMENT: LEVY PROPOSAL
  BLANK TAPES AND AUDIO EQUIPMENT: LEVY PROPOSAL
  CENTRAL STATISTICAL OFFICE: PERFORMANCE
  CENTRAL STATISTICAL OFFICE: PERFORMANCE
  TRINIDAD TERMS
  TRINIDAD TERMS
  DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: DEBT REDUCTION
  DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: DEBT REDUCTION
  MAASTRICHT TREATY
  MAASTRICHT TREATY
  EC DEVELOPMENTS: INFORMATION
  EC DEVELOPMENTS: INFORMATION
  EC PRELIMINARY DRAFT BUDGET
  EC PRELIMINARY DRAFT BUDGET
  LLOYD'S: IMPACT OF LOSSES
  LLOYD'S: IMPACT OF LOSSES
  TAXI AND MINICAB USERS' SAFETY: REPORT
  TAXI AND MINICAB USERS' SAFETY: REPORT
  SALARIED DENTISTS
  SALARIED DENTISTS
  TOBACCO ADVERTISING: STUDY
  TOBACCO ADVERTISING: STUDY
  CENSUS RESULTS: PUBLICATION
  CENSUS RESULTS: PUBLICATION
  WHALES: CONSERVATION
  WHALES: CONSERVATION
  EUROPEAN FIGHTER AIRCRAFT
  EUROPEAN FIGHTER AIRCRAFT
  COUNTY COURT JUDGMENTS: REMOVAL FROM REGISTER
  COUNTY COURT JUDGMENTS: REMOVAL FROM REGISTER
  FIREARMS CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE: ANNUAL REPORT
  FIREARMS CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE: ANNUAL REPORT
  FIREARMS CONTROLS: PROPOSED REGULATIONS
  FIREARMS CONTROLS: PROPOSED REGULATIONS
  REPATRIATED PRISONERS
  REPATRIATED PRISONERS
  DRIVER EYESIGHT: REPORT
  DRIVER EYESIGHT: REPORT
  WAR CRIMES ACT 1991: MANPOWER AND COST EFFECTS
  WAR CRIMES ACT 1991: MANPOWER AND COST EFFECTS
  WILDLIFE AND COUNTRYSIDE ACT: ADDITIONS TO SCHEDULES
  WILDLIFE AND COUNTRYSIDE ACT: ADDITIONS TO SCHEDULES
  ENVIRONMENT AGENCY
  ENVIRONMENT AGENCY
  LAWRIE PARK HOSTEL: CLOSURE
  LAWRIE PARK HOSTEL: CLOSURE
  LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT AND THE CROWN ESTATE
  LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT AND THE CROWN ESTATE
  SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
  SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION