Sitting of 16 July 1992

Preamble
The House met at hall-past Nine o'clock
PRAYERS
[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]
PRAYERS
  PETITION

    Vulcan Bomber (Auction)
    9.34 am
    Mr. Harry Greenway: I wish to present a petition which reads:
    To the Honourable Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the Parliament assembled the humble petition of Robert Neil Franklin, Nigel Glen Pearce, Brian William Palmer and Judith Ball and 9,000 other signatories sheweth that the planned disposal of the world's last airworthy Vulcan is by public auction in the last quarter of the year of 1992 as ordered by the Ministry of Defence.
    Nigel Pearce, my constituent, Bob Franklin, Brian Palmer and Judith Ball have been instrumental in getting together a countrywide petition with 9,000 signatures which is designed to void the auction because they believe that this entirely British-built bomber—British-built to the last nut and bolt—which last saw distinguished service in the Falklands should not be auctioned but should be saved for posterity. The bomber has given distinguished service and has countrywide—perhaps worldwide—support.
    The petition continues:
    Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House halt this planned public auction and obtain the XH558 B2 Vulcan as part of our national heritage as a flying work of art; it being the only flying Vulcan left in the world. It is totally British made, being the very first B2 strategic bomber in service in the RAF and the last. Statistics show that every Vulcan sold previously has never flown again. We beseech you to determine this does not happen again; and your Petitioners, as in duty hound, will ever pray.
    To lie upon the Table.

    Civil List
    9.36 am
    Mr. Bob Cryer: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I wonder whether during the recess you would care to reflect on the issue of questions on the recipients of the civil list. A number of issues are now being raised, through questions and early-day motions, about expenditure of the civil list. My motion has been submitted to the Clerks and has been altered. I make no criticism of that because it has probably been improved since my original draft.
    As a result of the scrutiny of questions and early-day motions, there are sometimes unnecessary delays. Questions on the expenditure of the civil list are not reflections on the Sovereign, but are an essential component of the functions of Parliament. People who are in receipt of taxpayers' money are subject to questioning without much delay in the Table Office. Such questioning should extend to recipients of the civil list.
    All I ask, Madam Speaker, is that over the recess you reflect on the matter to see whether the caution that affects the procedure for tabling questions and early-day motions can be reduced to ensure that access is given to Members of Parliament to ensure the scrutiny that has been a function of Parliament over many years.
    Madam Speaker: I have heard what the hon. Gentleman says. There are procedures about these matters. I will do as the hon. Gentleman requests. I am always interested to look at these matters, and during the recess I will reflect on the point he raised.

    "Options for Change" (Transitional Arrangements)
    Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Wood.]
    9.38 am
    Mr. Frank Field: I thank you for calling me, Madam Speaker, and for giving Wirral Members the opportunity to debate the issue. I see that my hon. Friend the Member for Barrow and Furness (Mr. Hutton) is here and I know that he hopes to catch your eye, Madam Speaker. As in the first debate on shipbuilding in which I participated, I see that my hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow (Mr. Dixon) is in his place. There was never a shipbuilding debate in which the two of us did not take part.
    I will set the background to the debate, and I hope that others will continue it. We shall then wait with great interest for the Minister's reply. I welcome the Minister to the Dispatch Box on the first occasion on which we have met in debate in the Chamber. I welcome him to his position not only because of his ability, but because he represents a seat, not in the north but in the south, which has been hit by high unemployment. Unlike many Ministers, this Minister is well acquainted with the underlying theme of our debate.
    Perhaps I might begin with a comment on the role that Cammell Laird plays in the Wirral. It is very difficult to think of Birkenhead and the Wirral without a shipyard—not that the men and women who work in the yard believe that they are owed a job or that they have the right for ever and a day to build ships. I happen to believe that there is a role for shipbuilding at Cammell Laird in the future, and not just the immediate future. The men and women working in the yard look forward to other opportunities of deploying their skills for the good of themselves, their families, their town, their area and their country.
    This debate is an attempt to persuade the Government to give our town and other towns similarly placed the breathing space that they need to move from being wholly dependent on military contracts to obtaining contracts in the civilian sector. Other Wirral Members will want to catch the Chair's eye today to make this point, too.
    Shortly after the 1979 election, the shop stewards wished to set up an all-party group of Members to protect and promote their interests in this place, and although the electorate have made changes in the composition of the Wirral group of Members who represent them in this House, there has been no change in the commitment on the part of those Members to honouring the pledge given back in 1979.
    My predecessor, Edmund Dell, was a Cabinet Minister; he made sure that no shipping order was agreed to by the Cabinet before Laird's interests were fully debated. Equally, without the expertise of the yard it would have received no orders at all after 1979. The Wirral group of Members made sure that the yard competed on equal terms; had they not done so, no orders might have been placed after 1979.
    The President of the Board of Trade told the shop stewards when he met them recently a little bit of the
    1214
    history of the placing of a crucial order after a sit-in in the yard. I should like to tell a little more of that story, because it is highly relevant to this debate.
    I recall the horrendous experience that we went through in the yard when Lord Tebbit was Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. A small group of workers thought that, if they called everyone out on strike, Lord Tebbit would be more inclined to give them an order than if they were working. At three mass meetings of the yard, the workers had refused to follow that line, but this tiny group persisted with their strategy and in the end managed to persuade one of the smallest groups in the shipyard to declare a strike and put up barriers around the yard.
    It is entirely to the credit of the men and women who walked through rent-a-mob back to work at that time that we are holding this debate today. Had they not shown that courage, the yard would certainly have closed. Many of those men and women are still working in the yard and are having to accept redundancy quietly and with dignity. They walk away down the road without causing industrial strife, knowing that if they caused it to protect their own jobs they would bring every other job down around their ears at Cammell Laird.
    After the men and women of the yard broke the sit-in, the Government were about to place a number of frigate orders for which Laird competed. When he met the shop stewards recently, the President of the Board of Trade said that there has been no special treatment for Laird. The yard won the order by fair competition.
    As the Minister of State for Defence Procurement knows, when the Government are about to place such orders, there is a frenzy of activity among hon. Members on both sides anxious to win the orders for their areas—knowing that if they win them they will put at risk jobs in other areas. Their first moral duty, however, is clearly to the people who sent them here.
    During the negotiations for this key order, the Wirral Members were sure that the competition was being rigged against Laird, but they did not know how. Late one night, one of the Members who was sure that his yard had won the orders came out of the bar and poked me with his finger saying, "Our tender has won both orders." I prayed that my face did not betray the crucial information that he had given me. We had had to put in tenders for the two boats, so we immediately knew that the Department of Trade and Industry, as then run, was asking for our fixed costs to be spread across both orders, whereas other yards were being allowed to submit a single order for both boats.
    I relayed this information to the right hon. Member for Wirral, West (Mr. Hunt), who relayed it to the man who is now President of the Board of Trade, who, in turn insisted in Cabinet that the then Prime Minister should not have her way and award the order to Swan Hunter: he insisted that it was his responsibility to place the order. There was no discussion in Cabinet; the Prime Minister decided that she, the Secretary of State for Defence and the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry would meet afterwards to agree the order, whereupon a prime ministerial minute would be noted.
    That was the first time that I realised how Cabinet is run. Far from everyone joining in and debating an issue, everyone meekly accepted that there should be no debate around the Cabinet table and agreed that this crucial question should be decided separately.
    The then Defence Secretary, now President of the Board of Trade, won the order for Laird not because he

    1215
    favoured it or felt a special attraction for Merseyside but because he had taken the trouble to phone the yard to ask what its single tender for both boats would be. On that basis, Laird won the competition fairly and squarely on price.
    Even in its current desperate situation, Laird is not asking for special treatment. We are asking the House to reflect on the consequences of the Government's "Options for Change". There seems to be no dispute in the House about the correctness of the strategy. Given the massive changes in eastern Europe, it seems right to adjust our defence budget accordingly—although I would enter a note of caution. We welcome the changes in the east, but for the past nine months or more tribalism has been emerging across much of Europe—not merely the old-fashioned tribalism that we experienced before the rise of the nation state, but tribalism armed with weapons, some of them nuclear.
    I therefore do not follow the conventional wisdom, often expressed in this Chamber and more often out side it, that the world is a safer place now that the Soviet empire has disintegrated. I think it is a much less safe place. The Government have begun the necessary task of debating and implementing "Options for Change" and the sort of strategy and weapons that we will need to back up the programme in a world in which tribalism reigns. This will necessitate a very different procurement programme from the one that we have followed since the war.
    I end with the need for the Government to think about how badly placed some of these communities are. They have served the Government well by expertly fulfilling their procurement programme in the past. We do not hold out a begging bowl or ask for outdoor relief from the Ministry of Defence or anywhere else. Our plea is that we be given time to adjust. I hope that the Minister in replying will discuss the programme of the immediate future for placing naval orders. Perhaps more importantly than that for our shipyards, I hope that he can tell us something about the placing of refit work. If he can, I trust that he will give an undertaking that when those orders, particularly for the refit work, are placed, the Government will consider any serious bid and not confine themselves to the bodies which normally compete for refit work.
    We do not simply need work; we need work behind which there is a business programme—I am happy to use that buzz phrase—which considers how yards will make the adjustment over the next few years to ensure that we can continue to build merchant and naval ships in this country. We should be able to take the massive skills in our shipyards safely into other employment which is unconnected with military trade.
    That is the plea that I make this morning, and I am sure that other hon. Members will wish to reinforce it. I am grateful for this opportunity to open the debate and to set out the needs of my constituents before we rise for the summer recess.
    9.50 am
    Mr. Barry Porter: I am obliged for this opportunity to speak in the debate. I cannot hope to match the eloquence of the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field), but I hope to match him in the intensity of feeling that we share on the Wirral.
    The hon. Gentleman has the honour to represent Birkenhead, which is perhaps not the prettiest town in the
    1216
    world, but it is our town. It is my town in the sense that I was born there and I count that as great an honour as the hon. Gentleman has in representing the town. My first memory of the shipyard was the launching of the Ark Royal by the Queen Mother in 1953. The history of Birkenhead and the Wirral is of a people who, if they did not work in the yard, certainly had a relation who worked in it or was in some way connected with the yard. It has that proud history, but it has it in common with many other shipbuilding towns, some of which no longer have yards.
    I agree entirely with what the hon. Member for Birkenhead said. Compassion is not a word that springs easily to the lips of hon. Members when my name is mentioned, but that cannot be said of the hon. Member for Birkenhead. We are not here today on a compassionate basis. We are not here to ask for money, because I know full well that there will not be any. In fact, we have been told that.
    Over the past few years, we have, in our various guises, explored every avenue: we have scraped, scratched, seen potential purchasers and looked for orders. With the help of Ministers and others, and especially with the help of the work force in the yard, we have been able, in our own small way, to keep the yard in existence.
    If the yard were to disappear, it would not simply be a disaster for the people of the Wirral; in view of what the hon. Member for Birkenhead has said, it would be a disaster for the country as well. The hon. Gentleman was correct to say that the world is not a safer place: it is an infinitely more dangerous place. While I can understand the reasons for "Options for Change", I believe that we should be moving cautiously.
    To stray from the subject of the debate for a moment, I must say in respect of "Options for Change" that I have reservations about the merger of the Cheshire Regiment with the Staffordshire Regiment. Indeed, I do not simply have reservations about the merger; I oppose it root and branch and I hope that the Minister will bear that in mind.
    We are not here to ask for money. We are not holding out the bowl. We are here to try to find a way forward, and the hon. Member for Birkenhead has already said what that way forward might be. He encapsulated in a phrase what we are asking for when he referred to a "breathing space".
    It is possible that there will be other types of work in the vicinity around Liverpool and Morecambe bays which the yard could take up in future. We might not build ships in future, although I hope that that is not the case. There is certainly other work on the horizon and that horizon is not too far distant.
    We have nearly a year before Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering Ltd. closes down Cammell Laird unless something happens. I do not believe that it is beyond the wit and ingenuity of the Government to find something during that time to allow the yard to continue and so allow the people of the Wirral to maintain that proud heritage.
    9.54 am
    Ms. Angela Eagle: I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) for his ingenuity in securing the debate. I also thank other hon. Members with interests on the Wirral and elsewhere for taking the time to come to the Chamber to put their case today.

    1217
    I want to supplement what has already been said and consider the effect that closure of the yard will have on the local community. The view is that closure would be catastrophic. At the moment, about 1,000 people are directly employed at Cammell Laird, but some 5,000 to 6,000 other local jobs in supply industries are thought to be dependent on the yard.
    The Wirral saw a dramatic collapse in its economy during the 1980s. There was a 15 per cent. fall in the proportion of people employed in manufacturing over that period. Of the nine divisions of the standard industrial classification, there were modest rises in only two of them in the Wirral over the period—in banking, insurance and financial services and the public sector. There were serious falls in the other seven divisions. There was a 22 per cent. fall in the shipbuilding, engineering and vehicle industry division, and that was above the national average.
    We are talking about a closure against the background of an already seriously depressed manufacturing sector and local economy. In 1971, 10,000 people were employed in the yard in shipbuilding. I agree with the hon. Member for Wirral, South (Mr. Porter) that most people who live in the area have worked in the yard or have relatives who have worked there. If the yard were to close, the effect on the psychology of the area for manufacturing and commercial investment and on individual confidence would be hard to grasp as being anything other than catastrophic.
    Unemployment in the Wirral is currently 14 per cent., although there are patches of much higher unemployment, particularly of the long-term unemployed who often tend to be skilled people who used to work in manufacturing and who simply cannot find jobs in other areas. There is also a very large youth unemployment problem which causes social problems. There are 19,088 officially unemployed people in the Wirral—one in seven of the work force. It is estimated that closure of the yard would add 2 per cent. to that total.
    We must bear in mind the fact that many of Cammell Laird's materials and services are bought locally. More than 600 local firms supply goods and services to the yard to an estimated value of £30 million. It is clear from what I have said that closure would have a serious effect. The local authority estimates that closure would cost the public exchequer about £111 million at current prices as a direct cost in lost tax revenues, increased welfare payments and retaining costs.
    The solution to the problem has already been outlined to some extent in our debate. All Wirral Members want to keep the yard open. Indeed, it is crucial that it remains open. In the past decade or so, demand in the yard has been influenced by two effects. The first has emerged over the past two years in the form of "Options for Change" and the implications of a reduction in naval building as a result of welcome changes in the world's political environment and our defence needs. The second effect was the general shrinking of shipbuilding.
    However, there is evidence that there will be an upturn in shipbuilding over the next decade if we can just maintain our capacity long enough to take advantage of it. It has been suggested that almost three quarters of the world's tanker fleet is more than 10 years old. The normal life span
    1218
    of a tanker is approximately 20 years. There will therefore be plenty of business in that area and we will be in a good position to compete for that so long as the yard exists.
    Diversification made necessary by "Options for Change" involves an attempt to move to civil engineering. There is the Hamilton oil development at Point of Ayr, and, as the hon. Member for Wirral, South said, there is much potential work to be had in the Liverpool bay oilfields and in the Morecambe bay area. Cammell Laird would be in a good position to take advantage of that.
    I add my voice to pleas for a breathing space, so that, after 1993, when what is left of our contracts will have run out, we can diversify and renew our ability to compete in a revived shipbuilding market and ensure that that crucial manufacturing sector for the Wirral and for the country can be maintained and protected.
    10 am
    Mr. John Hutton: I also congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) on his success in choosing this subject. It is an important and timely debate. My hon. Friends the Members for Birkenhead and for Wallasey (Ms. Eagle) and the hon. Member for Wirral, South (Mr. Porter) expressed the earnest hope of my constituents in Barrow that the Cammell Laird shipyard is able to remain open and enjoy a successful commercial future in the decades that lie ahead. We share a common heritage. We are shipbuilding communities and we are immensely proud of our traditions and contributions to the economy and defence of this country over many decades. It is tremendously sad to see a great shipyard such as Cammell Laird struggle and be unclear about its future. I look forward to hearing the Minister's comments offering a decent future for the shipyard at Cammell Laird.
    My constituents and I look to the Government to give a sign that they are conscious of the immense upheaval and distress that "Options for Change" is causing. Hon. Members welcomed the end of the cold war and recognised the immense opportunities that that offered the peoples of the world. At the same time, many constituencies have more to lose than anyone else as a result of the changes. As hon. Members have said, we do not have a begging bowl, but we are legitimately entitled to ask the Government to recognise that reductions in shipuilding capacity are tremendously difficult to replace. The shipyards are strategically important, and not only for our defence needs. As we know, it is immensely difficult to predict 10 or 15 years ahead—perhaps even three or four years ahead—what our defence needs will be and it is virtually impossible to replace a reduction in capability and investment. I hope that the Government are taking that point fully into account.
    I do not believe that, as a maritime nation, we can afford to see great shipyards such as Cammell Laird, Birkenhead and VSEL in Barrow go down the plughole. It would be criminal for the Government to sit back and allow that to happen.
    I want the Government to recognise that it is incumbent upon them to encourage a policy which will reward innovation and promote investment. We have heard about the immense opportunities that are available in offshore marine engineering, oil and gas exploration, submersible vehicles and perhaps remote-operated vehicles. We have a capability in our shipyards, not only in my constituency

    1219
    but in others, to take advantage of what many believe will be a buoyant, worldwide market for marine engineering products. The Government have a responsibility to tell us what steps they will take to promote those developments.
    Underpinning those points is a requirement that the Government recognise the immense economic potential in many shipbuilding communities. In the past, many of our constituencies have been dependent on providing ships for the Ministry of Defence. In my constituency, we have exclusively worked for the Ministry of Defence for at least the past 20 years and for a long time before that, but we have a wider capability than that. My interest in the matter leads me to conclude that the Government should introduce an expansion of the intervention fund scheme so that naval yards such as VSEL and Cammell Laird can take advantage of that source of funding.
    Hon. Members who represent shipbuilding communities want clearer information from the Government about their future naval procurement policies. In 1986, when VSEL in my constituency left British Shipbuilders and became a private company, we were expecting 27 SSNs from the Government and, along with our colleagues in Cammell Laird, we expected to build 15 of the Upholder SSK class. Following "Options for Change", those projections of 27 SSNs and 15 SSKs became 19 SSNs and only four SSKs. That is a huge reduction in the work load of Cammell Laird and VSEL. We want clearer information about the Government's future procurement policies and their strategy in respect of maintaining a vibrant shipbuilding industry. I am confident that our shipyards and shipbuilding communities can make a huge contribution to revitalising British engineering. The success of British engineering lies at the root and heart of the success of British manufacturing.
    10.5 am
    The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Mr. Jonathan Aitken): I have found today's debate a rather moving experience, because what the House of Commons does best is what has been happening in this short Adjournment debate—Members of Parliament fighting articulately for the interests of their constituents, particularly at a time of considerable anxiety and worry over the future of Cammell Laird.
    I am grateful to the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) for the realistic way in which he opened the debate. He certainly struck a chord with me when he said that it would be hard to think of Birkenhead and the Wirral without a shipyard. Almost my first job in politics was to work as private secretary for some years for the right hon. Selwyn Lloyd, who was born and bred in the Wirral. I spent many weekends working for him and sometimes answering mail from his constituents who worked at Cammell Laird. It is obviously a fine tradition of the area to have not just profound local pride but deep local roots, as exemplified by my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral, South (Mr. Porter) who, like Selwyn Lloyd, was born there. Hon. Members could hear in my hon. Friend's speech great commitment to a local area.
    I was glad to hear expressions of deep pride in Cammell Laird. They were entirely justified, because the yard has an enviable record of building warships and a wide range of merchant vessels to a high standard.
    Mr. Tom Clarke: The Minister will recall that, a week ago last Monday, he met a delegation
    1220
    from my constituency about the future of Inchterf, the proof and experimental range. Unfortunately, we have had an official decision to close the range. That has deeply saddened my community on the eve of the Glasgow fair holidays. I repeat the request from Strathclyde regional council and Strathkelvin district council that the Minister should visit the location before September when the decision is to be implemented.
    Mr. Aitken: I will certainly consider that request sympathetically. I do not want to respond off the cuff when we are dealing with an entirely different subject. I took carefully into account the hon. Gentleman's representations when he saw me with his delegation only a few days ago.
    I again refer to Cammell Laird and remind the House of how great its record of service has been, particularly during the second world war when it made a significant contribution to our defences, with the work force putting their efforts into completing an aircraft carrier, five destroyers, four frigates and seven submarines. Since the war, there has been a continuous record of fine service and achievement. The Ministry of Defence has been very happy with the high quality of work undertaken by Cammell Laird not just over the years but recently on the three Upholder class submarines which are being built in the yard. That order was won in open and fair competition with other yards, and the timely achievement of the build programmes for the submarines was a great credit to the work force and management of the company.
    In the few remaining minutes, I shall respond to the specific questions that hon. Members asked, all of which revolved around the plea for a breathing space. I listened sympathetically to that plea. It focused on two main areas—the shipbuilding programme and the ship refitting and repair programme.
    The Government currently have in hand a major programme of work in naval shipbuilding aimed at the re-equipment and modernisation of the Royal Navy. We have on order 19 ships and submarines which have not yet been accepted into service by the Royal Navy. The total value of those orders, including the weapons and equipment to be fitted into the ships, amounts to the equivalent of approximately £5 billion at today's price levels.
    However, as we have previously announced, there is to be a reduction in the submarine force levels. I have discussed the matter at length with the hon. Member for Barrow and Furness (Mr. Hutton). The reduction applies to both conventional and nuclear-powered submarines as well as to frigates and destroyers. However, I am sure that the hon. Member for Barrow and Furness was heartened by our announcement last week of the firm order for the fourth Trident submarine.
    All the changes on the world international scene and in our shipbuilding programme inevitably mean that a reduction is likely in the work load of the industry generated by Ministery of Defence orders. Overall, the potential capacity is in excess of the likely requirements of the United Kingdom warship building programme. That means that the shipbuilding industry will have to turn to new markets. In some yards, notable successes have been made in winning export orders, such as those for frigates for Malaysia, corvettes for Oman and fast patrol craft for Qatar.

    1221
    I am afraid that I do not have any great expectation of new naval orders during the period of particular anxiety at Cammell Laird—which I take to be the next 18 months before the work on the submarine programme is completed. I say that simply because we now have in place such a large shipbuilding programme that we do not plan to go to tender for the next batch of type 23s until autumn 1993. The possible order for the helicopter carrier is not likely to go out until late 1993. I am sorry to say that we have no plans to order more patrol submarines in the Upholder class.
    The hon. Member for Birkenhead referred to ship refitting opportunities, which are of particular interest to him. All shipyards with the required capability and capacity will be invited to compete for ship refitting work. In the next year or so, that is likely to be predominantly work on the ships of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. We think that there will be approximately half a dozen refits, mainly of ships of the RFA. The contracts are always well publicised in the MOD contracts bulletin.
    If hon. Members are interested in following the procedure, they should look at the recent advertising of the ship refitting requirements for the minesweeper HMS Atherstone. The adverts were published in April and the closing date for the bids is the end of July. Provided that a yard can produce the right price and meet our contractual requirements, there is no reason why it should not win some of the work. The House will appreciate that I cannot give precise details of what work will be offered for competition in the next 18 months or so, but I assure hon. Members that all the contracts will be fully advertised in the contracts bulletin as they arise.
    1222
    The hon. Member for Birkenhead raised the possibility of a bid from Cammell Laird and asked how it would be treated. It is our policy to consider even unsolicited bids from all those who are qualified to undertake the work. From everything that I know about Cammell Laird, I am sure that it is likely to be fully qualified to undertake such work. All such bids must be received within the published time scale and meet our general requirements of financial guarantees and so on. That is a matter which Cammell Laird could usefully examine.
    The hon. Member for Wallasey (Ms. Eagle) referred to the knock-on effects of unemployment at the shipyard. She said that 5,000 or 6,000 ancillary jobs could be lost in other areas. Of course, I understand that well. The hon. Member for Birkenhead was kind enough to refer to the high unemployment in my constituency. I understand how heartbreaking it is to have the scourge of unemployment, at the levels which exist in both Wallasey and Thanet, South, and on top of that to face the major hammer blow of the closure of a major shipyard. I am well aware of the need for a breathing space and the compassionate view for which my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Wirral, South argued.
    It is difficult for the Ministry of Defence to be specific in such cases. I was glad that there was consensus that the world had changed and that "Options For Change" went in the right direction. However, we must continue to recognise that the world is a dangerous place and that we shall continue to need a Royal Navy and well-built and refitted warships.
    I recognise the grave effects on local communities when circumstances such as those we are discussing arise. I wish that I had a magic wand to wave to solve the problems. I can only say that we have listened seriously and sympathetically to the good arguments made by all the hon. Members who have spoken in this short debate.

    Jubilee Line Extension
    10.15 am
    Sir Michael Neubert: In recent days, at the approaches to Westminster, vivid yellow signs have gone up, warning that there will be no access to Parliament square from Westminster bridge as from 17 July. The significance of that date is clear. The House of Commons rises today for the summer recess and closure before then would be in breach of the Sessional Order requiring Members of Parliament to have free access without let or hindrance to this place.
    The purpose of the closure is a £2 million operation to safeguard gas mains and telephone lines in the vicinity, in advance of work on the Jubilee line extension. The closure emphasises the significance and imminence of the issue and the urgency of the problem which I seek to raise this morning. The Jubilee line extension, one of the most exciting infrastructure projects for decades, now hangs in the balance.
    London Underground's scheme to extend the Jubilee line from the west end to Stratford in east London via south London, docklands and Greenwich has received all-party support, has passed all the parliamentary hurdles of the lengthy private Bill procedure and is ready to start. However, there must now be real concern that the scheme could be delayed indefinitely.
    It is a truism that the strength of a chain lies in its weakest link. It is ironic that, in the case of the Jubilee line extension, the weakest link has proved to be Olympia and York, perhaps the largest developer of property in the world. Under the pressure of the recession, which is especially acute in inner-city areas, both across the Atlantic in the United States and Canada and here at home in London, Olympia and York has been brought to the point of collapse. It is in administration.
    Olympia and York was to have made a contribution to the construction costs of the Jubilee line extension. That was right, because the benefits of the underground railway link would greatly enhance the value of the property developed by Olympia and York at Canary wharf.
    The contribution was to be £40 million last March, £60 million to follow next year, and £300 million—the balance of the £400 million obligation—over about 20 years. The lengthy period of payment means that with inflation the calculated net present value of the contribution is about £160 million. That is a large sum, but when it is compared to the £1·5 billion value of the whole project, it can be seen as a relatively small amount. If the project foundered for want of this one private sector contribution, it would be like choking to death on a crumb.
    Yet the Jubilee line extension is not being built simply to assist the fortunes of property developers. It must be stressed that it is a strategic necessity for south and east London and for our capital city as a whole. Some way must be found to build the line without further delay.
    What are the benefits of the Jubilee line extension? First, it would serve inner-city areas in Southwark, Bermondsey, Surrey docks, the north Greenwich peninsula, Canning Town, West Ham and Stratford. The extension would be the first west-east line south of the river, in an area with a traditional paucity of underground lines. Of 272 stations in London, only 28 are south of the river. I speak as one born at Blackheath, who has lived for most of his life south of the river as a south Londoner,
    1224
    apart from a few years spent in north London during the war. I have suffered, with many south Londoners, the disadvantage of not having the ease, convenience and comfort of an underground line. It is long overdue in our part of London.
    The line would revitalise and regenerate areas of inner London that have so much need of that process. I note that the Secretary of State for the Environment announced the winners of the city challenge competition this morning—£750 million of public money will go to places such as Hackney and Newham. The latter would benefit from the Jubilee line extension, as would all east London.
    The extension is important for local reasons and for the regeneration of London, but it is not simply a little local difficulty. The line would improve access to London's first channel tunnel terminal at Waterloo, thence to Stratford on the proposed fast rail link, and to London City airport. Another irony, which I have already mentioned in the House, is that that part of London which is closest to our new home market of continental Europe should be the least developed. That also points to the fact that the strategic development of east London, which is so close to Europe, is long overdue.
    Mr. Mark Wolfson: While he is focusing on the European importance of London, does my hon. Friend agree that Paris—a competing capital for European business—is already much better served by modern public transport systems than London, and that we need the line to keep London competitive?
    Sir Michael Neubert: I concur with my hon. Friend's judgment. I am about to mention the importance of international competitiveness between capital cities.
    The line will provide 11 new tube stations, nine of which will have a major rail interchange and three a major bus interchange. Four new crossings of the Thames will be created.
    At Westminster, a station will be created which is appropriate in stature to the legislative and executive heart of the United Kingdom, a station which will reflect the importance of Westminster in the capital city. As Members of Parliament, we must be conscious of the throngs of tourists—especially at this time of year—who come to see the finest of our parliamentary and executive buildings and who find that the station at which they arrive is grossly inadequate for their numbers and for the prestige and importance of buildings in the vicinity.
    My hon. Friends may not altogether understand that the development of Westminster station is a crucial part of the proposed phase 2 development of the parliamentary buildings. Our new parliamentary building depends on the reconstruction of Westminster station, as it will be built on top afterwards. As parliamentarians, we have a direct interest in the outcome of this matter.
    By promoting the location of part of London's additional commercial activity away from the traditional and crowded central area, the Jubilee line extension will indirectly help to relieve congestion on the central London rail system. By shifting the focus of activity a little to the east, it will ease the problems of London, which has tended to develop in the centre and, since the second world war, has developed intensively in the west because of Heathrow. As a result, there has been a great imbalance in the development of our capital city.

    1225
    London, along with New York and Tokyo, is recognised as one of the major world cities but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Mr. Wolfson) said, its position is under the most intense pressure from two European rivals—Paris and Frankfurt, representing the axis between France and Germany.
    The start of work on the Jubilee line extension would be a signal that the first step, to redress the common conception of London as a congested city lacking modern transport infrastructure, is being addressed seriously.
    The Jubilee line extension has received Royal Assent, and contracts are ready to be let. Construction could be under way within weeks, which would enable the line to be opened by mid-1996. In connection with construction, I must mention my interest as parliamentary adviser to the Federation of Master Builders.
    Mrs. Audrey Wise: I entirely agree with everything that the hon. Gentleman has said so far. His mention of contracts reminded me that valuable contracts for train manufacture, as well as construction contracts, will depend on the extension of the Jubilee line. I do not know whether he will agree that that means that the extension is important not merely to London but to the national economy, and not least to my area, where many jobs depend on train manufacture. If the line does not go ahead, we will be lucky to maintain the train manufacturing industry in this country.
    Sir Michael Neubert: I am glad to have heard the hon. Lady's intervention because I also want to stress the national importance of the project, even though I speak as a London Member and am obviously concerned about the implications for London.
    If the Jubilee line extension does not go ahead, London will have no significant underground developments until the turn of the century. No other scheme could be built sooner, and funds have not been allocated for any other scheme. There would be serious implications for transport and development prospects. Even with no further development in the Isle of Dogs area, transport to and from docklands would be seen as fragile. The whole area would depend on a single mass transit system—the docklands light railway—funnelling all access to the area through Bank and Stratford stations. That line has experienced considerable teething problems and is not out of them yet. Both those stations are overloaded and in need of upgrading.
    Connections to important British Rail railheads at Waterloo, Victoria, and London Bridge, among others, are inadequate and would be seen as such by decision makers and prospective tenants. Firms which have moved in to the Isle of Dogs might well move out again. There has already been some sign of that since the collapse of Olympia and York. Existing buildings there would remain partly let, and the momentum for achieving full occupation would be lost. More importantly, the potential for remaining sites in the Isle of Dogs, Leamouth, the royal docks and Greenwich would be undermined. Those sites would certainly be restricted to users with low intensity transport requirements, severely limiting opportunities for east London where much-needed jobs would fail to materialise.
    1226
    There is also the question of the amount of money already spent on the Jubilee line extension. It has cost London Transport more than £100 million to bring it to its present stage, and the contracting industry has spent nearly £20 million preparing tenders. The London Docklands development corporation has spent nearly £0·5 million on legal and other fees to secure an agreement with London Transport to protect the corporation's land interests and to ensure a good quality scheme through docklands. If the project were abandoned now, it is estimated that further abortive costs would range from £35 million to £85 million.
    The issue of the Olympia and York contribution must be seen in the context of those established costs to the taxpayer. Any delays in starting the project would increase costs for rebuilding teams and mean higher bid prices. Each increase of 1 per cent. adds £15 million to the final cost.
    Having stated all those factors in the equation, I would not wish my hon. Friend the Minister to conclude that I am suggesting that the Government should waive the private sector's obligation to contribute the sum agreed with Olympia and York. Of course that obligation must be met, for the reasons that I have already given, but the Government have the key role and responsibility for organising the collective act of will which is necessary on the part of all parties. The failure of Olympia and York to come up with the cash must be seen as a temporary impediment, something to be overcome with ingenuity, a degree of free thinking and negotiating skill. It is self-evidently in everybody's interest for the project to proceed without delay. The administrators of O and Y would be failing in their duty if they did not secure the potential value of their stake in the extension of the Jubilee line.
    It is not simply a matter of the Jubilee line extension in isolation; docklands as a whole depends for its future on the rapid development of adequate infrastructure. New roads and rail links are imperative if the project is to reach its full potential. The pace of a private property development has outstripped the much slower provision of public infrastructure. As a result, spectacular state-of-the-art office developments stand surrounded by continuous road and construction works—an unattractive prospect for prospective tenants. At a time of high real interest rates, under-occupation of property constitutes a burden on the resources of the entrepreneurs who have opened up these new opportunities, as we have seen with the biggest of them, O and Y.
    Canary wharf accounts for only 150 acres, as opposed to the 5,500 acres of docklands. The development of docklands is an immensely exciting project. From the start, the concept has been bold and imaginative. Our response to this setback over funding must be equally bold, equally imaginative. Docklands is our gateway to the 2Ist century. We must ensure that it succeeds.
    10.30 am
    Mr. Nick Raynsford: I congratulate the hon. Member for Romford (Sir M. Neubert) on his success in initiating this debate and on drawing attention to the crucial importance of the Jubilee line extension for the whole of east London. The case is incontrovertible. The development of large parts of east London depends on this

    1227
    line above all extending proper communication networks and links into an area which is seriously lacking in them now.
    I should like to say a few words about the specific implications for the London borough of Greenwich, which is badly served by public transport. Because of that, it suffers from acute problems of traffic congestion. The Minister is well aware of that problem, and I am grateful to him for taking time a few weeks ago to come to Greenwich to see at first hand the appalling problems of traffic congestion and pollution resulting from the inadequate public transport network. I know that he recognises the importance of improving the facilities for the Greenwich area and other parts of east London.
    The hon. Member for Romford talked about the paucity of underground stations in south London—a mere 28. Greenwich has none, so even by south London's disadvantaged standards, it is particularly disadvantaged. The improvement in the network of underground trains and other links to the Greenwich area, such as the docklands light railway extension, are vital for the future well-being of the area.
    The Jubilee line is particularly important because it is a link to the Greenwich peninsula—the largest single site available for development in the whole of inner London, comprising 296 acres of land, largely derelict, heavily contaminated and in urgent need of action. It is a real blot on that approach to London. The line is the key to the successful development of the area.
    During the past two or three years, intensive discussions and negotiations have been proceeding, involving British Gas, which owns much of the land on the peninsula, the London borough of Greenwich—the planning authority, local authority and landowner of some sites in the area—and many other parties, including a consortium of housing associations that would play a crucial role in developing a substantial number of affordable homes for people in the area who face chronic problems of homelessness and bad housing.
    The development must go ahead in the interests of the area as a whole and London as a whole, but it will not go ahead without a proper rail link into the area. As I said, there is no connection between Greenwich and the underground network. Although the Greenwich peninsula is central—it is across the river from docklands—it is isolated, with poor links and communications. Its development potential will not be realised without that extension. Only one station is proposed for Greenwich, but it is critical and holds the key to the successful development of the peninsula. Bearing in mind the considerable transport needs of the area and the development potential of the peninsula, I have no doubt that it is crucial that the Jubilee line extension, including the station at north Greenwich, goes ahead.
    Labour Members have serious reservations about the Government's approach to infrastructure investment in London and their view that the development of underground links must depend on contributions from the private sector. The folly of that approach is demonstrated by the problem affecting the Jubilee line: the whole project has been cast into uncertainty because of the failure of Olympia and York to make its contributions. Having said that, I should stress that British Gas has made it clear to the Government that it is prepared to make a contribution
    1228
    to the north Greenwich station. There is no obstacle in the way of the Government proceeding with the line to Greenwich.
    We look with real trepidation across the river at the disaster in docklands and the acute problems in the wake of the Olympia and York bankruptcy. We know that the vitally needed infrastructure development and transport connection that our area so urgently requires are in the balance simply because of an agreement reached some years ago by the Government, which required a contribution from Olympia and York as a condition for building the Jubilee line extension. In its absence, the whole project is uncertain.
    I would not suggest that the Government should let Olympia and York or its successors off the hook. As the agreement has been reached, it is absolutely right that the Government should seek to hold the developers to account. I must stress, however, that the wider economic interests of east London and the communities so badly served now make an overwhelming case for proceeding with the development. It is essential that the development proceeds.
    The Minister has been kind enough to meet a delegation of representatives from Greenwich and other local authority areas affected by the line. He has shown his support and sympathy for their view. That interest, support and sympathy is welcome, but the ultimate test for those of us in south-east London who are concerned about the future of the whole area and, in particular, the interests of the people of Greenwich is whether the Jubilee line extension proceeds, as it must. There must be no doubt that it must proceed as quickly as possible. The development of the area and its future depend entirely on that line.
    10.37 am
    Mr. Simon Hughes: I shall be brief, as I know that two colleagues wish to contribute to the debate. I shall try to facilitate that, and the Minister's reply. I hope that he has some significant comments to make.
    I, too, welcome the persistence of the hon. Member for Romford (Sir M. Neubert) in getting this subject on the agenda before the summer recess. The debate is timely because, in the judgment of many of us, a decision on this matter needs to be made before the House returns from the recess. There are all sorts of reasons why we cannot afford to wait until October or later. I think that the Minister will leave the Chamber today convinced of the completely generic view held across the House, and in political parties, constituencies and geographical areas, that this issue is important.
    Having come nine tenths of the way towards going ahead with the first new and substantial underground extension for many years, we have shuddered to one of those temporary halts such as passengers experience when coming into a mainline railway station, when they are close to the platform but cannot get out and there is nothing to be done about it. What we need now is to restart, get to base, and continue the journey.
    As the Minister is aware, this is a matter not just of economic regeneration, but of the social regeneration of isolated communities. The project would have an enormous impact in terms of increased mobility and

    1229
    accessibility to work, shopping and recreation. Those communities would then be part of the network of the capital.
    The Jubilee line extension would also make an enormous difference to the quality of life of Londoners, because it would greatly reduce congestion in those parts of London where it is at its worst, and would speed up journey times in those areas where completing a journey is most difficult. It is also important to connect London Bridge and Waterloo. Those two mainline termini are on the same side of the river and not far apart, and it is absurd that one cannot get from one to the other with facility. That journey often takes a ridiculously long time. In fact, getting to London Bridge from other parts of central London, including this place, is extremely difficult. That terminus is used by millions of people, and it must be properly included in the transport system. The Jubilee line link would achieve that.
    It has been reported that some Department of the Environment Ministers believe that the development corporations should be rolled back as soon as their development programme is complete. It would be inconceivable to roll back the London Docklands development corporation without confirming the Jubilee line extension. One of the preconditions of the regeneration programme was that the necessary infrastructure should be included.
    The Minister and I were at Greenland dock pier recently, and I know that he will be pleased at the good news about the river bus. It has been given a lifeline for a further three months as it continues to improve its economic viability. It has now started to take passengers again from the Greenland dock on the Surrey quays peninsula. That is exactly the type of encouragement that we need for the community. It is a signal of the possibility of London leading the way out of the recession.
    Nothing could be more encouraging for the capital city this summer than hearing the news that the Jubilee line extension has the green light. That would persuade people that the corner could be turned. If that happened, people in the boroughs along its route and in the City would believe that there is not only a vision for London, but the imminent prospect of realising it. There is a great opportunity to be grasped, and I am sure that the Minister will use all his ingenuity to ensure that that is achieved soon.
    10.42 am
    Mr. David Amess: I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Sir M. Neubert), who is a fellow Essex Member—inaccurately described in Collins dictionary—on securing this opportunity to discuss the docklands. Our constituents have been involved in building the Canary wharf development, of which we can be rightly proud. It is an exciting combination of building and water. If we can overcome the present difficulties, it will be a great attraction for visitors, who will seek to copy that development in their own countries.
    The worldwide economic slump that we have suffered in the past three years has impacted in a serious way on docklands. However, the Government's economic strategy
    1230
    is entirely right. We must do all we can to reduce inflation and to continue to reduce interest rates. Above all, we must keep a firm control on public expenditure.
    The docklands development is important for jobs. It has already provided 26,000 jobs; if the buildings at Canary wharf are occupied, that will provide 62,000 jobs. In total, the development offers a potential 150,000 jobs. Therefore, it is extremely important that the docklands development is a success.
    I have a real interest in docklands because I was born in the eastern part of it at Stratford and Plaistow. I can recall the way in which trading patterns altered as I grew up. It was sad to see the docks, which were once so busy, eventually decline and wasteland appear. I pay tribute to the developers for having the vision to undertake the development of docklands.
    I know that my hon. Friend the Minister is committed to the docklands development, as is evident from his LDDC tie. I know that he wants the docklands development to be a success—and it must be a success. We owe it to the people who had that vision to go ahead with the Jubilee line extension. I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for Romford, my hon. Friend the Minister and I will celebrate the year 2000 with a party on the top of Canary wharf, having enjoyed a speedy and efficient journey to the docklands.
    10.45 am
    Mrs. Audrey Wise: I shall be brief, as I am keen to hear the Minister's reply. I shared the vigil of the hon. Member for Romford (Sir M. Neubert) last week when he tried to debate this matter on the Consolidated Fund, but unfortunately his debate was not reached. I congratulate him on his persistence in achieving this debate today.
    I wish to ensure that the project is not seen simply as a London issue. Often, London and the rest of the country, especially the north-west, are portrayed as locked in conflict. I must emphasise that many people in Preston are desperately keen on the Jubilee line extension. Obviously, what happens to the transport system in London is important to the capital, but it is also important in the day-to-day lives of Preston people, because we have a large factory which is desperate to bid for the substantial orders for trains which will immediately follow the go-ahead for the extension. With the privatisation of British Rail, railway orders will be subject to confusion and probably delay. I am worried that that privatisation, and the possible delay, if not abandonment, of the Jubilee line extension, could mean that, by the time orders for trains for the underground and the rail system are made, we shall not have a train manufacturing capacity left. That would be a disaster.
    The problems are only too vivid for me, because on one side of the street I have a British Aerospace factory, which is in the process of closing, and on the other there is GEC, which is desperate to bid to build the trains for the Jubilee line. I hope that the Minister will bear that factor in mind. The Jubilee line extension is important for the national economy as well as for London.
    10.47 am
    The Minister for Transport in London (Mr. Steve Norris): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Sir M. Neubert) on securing this debate. In all

    1231
    sincerity, his speech was a masterly introduction to the subject. It rendered nine tenths of my prepared speech entirely redundant because he outlined exactly the implications of the Jubilee line in an extremely competent way.
    I should also apologise to my hon. Friend for the fact that he did not reach his debate on Thursday. I know that, such is his assiduity in such matters, he was up all night, as was the hon. Member for Preston (Mrs. Wise), waiting for his debate to come round. I replied to the debate preceding the one on the Jubilee line, so I bear some responsibility for the fact that we did not reach my hon. Friend's debate. I am delighted that he secured the debate today.
    I acknowledge the contributions from my hon. Friends the Members for Sevenoaks (Mr. Wolfson) and for Basildon (Mr. Amess). I shall ensure that my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon gets a docklands tie from the chairman of the development corporation, Michael Pickard, who will appreciate my hon. Friend's support. The hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Raynsford) spoke about the particular importance of Port Greenwich and the area that he represents.
    In the Adjournment debate on 18 May initiated by the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes), we made a thorough review of the technical background of the Jubilee line and to some extent debated the benefits that the line conveys to individual parts of its route, so I hope that the House will forgive me for not going over much of that ground in the short time that we have for today's debate.
    We should not lose sight of the fact that there is no doubt of the Government's firm commitment to the regeneration of docklands. About £9 billion of private investment commitments exist in Docklands. Over 28 million sq ft of new floor space has been built or is currently under construction there. To correct a point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon, employment there was 27,000 in 1981 and is now 60,000. That shows the tremendous development that has taken place there.
    I say that because we should not lose sight of the appalling condition of the vast majority of the area before this whole exciting and imaginative concept of regenerating docklands became a reality under Conservative Administration. In terms of the involvement of the Department of Transport, I remind the House that nearly 60 miles of roads in the area have been upgraded or built so far. We have completed schemes on the Royal Albert dock spine road, the Connaught crossing and the lower Lea crossing. We have under construction the Limehouse link—that scheme will be opened in 45 weeks' time, as we read on the sign that we pass on our way to God's own county at the end of a busy week in Parliament—the Poplar link and the East India dock link. There are to come substantial improvements to the A13, and the east London river crossing scheme will open up docklands in a tremendous way.
    The first phase of the docklands light railway opened in the summer of 1987. That is a £77 million project involving seven and a half miles of light rail system. It has been a tremendous success in stimulating development in the Isle of Dogs. The Bank extension, which opened in November 1991, did much to expand the attractiveness of the DLR,
    1232
    and the Beckton extension, to be opened next year, will go a long way towards enhancing the attractiveness of the area.
    Let us not lose sight of the social regeneration of docklands, and I underline the point that hon. Members have made about employment. Unemployment in the area has fallen since 1986 against the background of the regrettable rise that has taken place elsewhere. The number of residents has increased, from 39,500 in 1981 to 62,000 today, and 17,000 homes have been built or are under construction. Home ownership has risen from 5 per cent. in 1981—my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon knows from experience the type of environmental improvements that come from home ownership—to over 40 per cent. today.
    About £122 million has been spent on social and community projects up to March 1991. A further £105 million has been spent on the Limehouse link housing programme. There is the new post-16 college and a 1,000-place city technology college in Rotherhithe. My hon. Friends in particular will warmly welcome that development. Over £13 million has been spent on listed buildings and conservation areas, and more than 100,000 trees have been planted in Docklands during the period of its regeneration. Our record in docklands, apart from the considerations of the Jubilee line extension, has been exceptional. It is a clear demonstration of the extremely substantial commitment by the Government to that area of London.
    My hon. Friend the Member for Romford set out the broad parameters of the Jubilee line extension. It is a 10-mile railway, about seven and a half miles of it underground, and that is the key to the extraordinarily large amount of money that the line will cost. It is very expensive to undertake that amount of tunnelling in a major city such as London. I was interested to learn from officials that the crossings under the river are no more expensive than tunnelling under some of London's most expensive property, which the line must also do.
    Three new stations on the route from Green Park to Stratford will be constructed at Southwark, Bermondsey and north Greenwich. There will be eight other stations, with many interchanges to London Underground and British Rail lines and, as we have heard from hon. Members who represent constituencies south of the river, there will be improved connections between the west end and docklands, improved access to those inner-city areas south of the river which are not at present served by public transport as well as they could be, reduced congestion on existing railways, and four new river crossings.
    I acknowledge what the hon. Member for Preston said about the way in which, in addition to those immediate transport benefits, there are beneits to the economy as a whole—particularly for the construction industry, as my hon. Friend the Member for Romford pointed out—and for the railway industry. It was a fair point for the hon. Member for Preston to make, but, bearing in mind the substantial cost to the public purse that the scheme entails, the House will know that the traditional and classic cost-benefit case for the Jubilee line was not as strong as, for example, other major projects in London, such as crossrail or the Chelsea-Hackney line, which will also bring tremendous advantages.
    Despite the fact that on a mechanistic, cost-benefit basis, the line was not particularly top of the list, the Government were prepared to proceed, recognising that

    1233
    there were substantial, if not quantifiable, regenerative benefits. On that basis, the Government's commitment was essentially of partnership—a concept recognised not newly in this debate, but three years ago, when the then Secretary of State made it clear that it was a partnership commitment. My hon. Friend the Member for Romford outlined the details of that partnership.
    I come to the heart of today's debate. My hon. Friend the Member for Romford said that we should regard the failure of Olympia and York as a temporary impediment, and I hope that that is exactly how it will be regarded. It is not inconsistent for us to seek contributions from the private sector when the public purse is being asked to disburse billions of pounds for projects that identifiably and specifically—as in this case, for the owners of Canary Wharf—convey substantial material advantages, in this case running into many hundreds of millions of pounds.
    In those circumstances, I hope that I will be forgiven for injecting unfamiliar controversy into our deliberations, which have been commendably all-party so far. "You cannot have it both ways" is a phrase to be remembered. Either we recognise that there is a huge benefit here which is to be conveyed to whoever owns the Canary Wharf development, or, because of the temporary impediment to which my hon. Friend referred, we simply transfer that impediment, regardless of the impact, on to the public purse. Should not the Government, on behalf of the taxpayer, recognise that we have a responsibility and say that we shall, on behalf of the taxpayer, negotiate a contribution from those who will benefit so much, recognising a small proportion of the amount of gain to them?
    Bearing that in mind, we must recognise that, as I said, one cannot have it both ways. In my view, we must continue to make it absolutely clear—as the Secretary of State has done repeatedly, and as I have reminded the House in other debates—that it is our clear obligation on
    1234
    behalf of the taxpayer to insist on that partnership agreement, which will secure a huge advantage to the developer and a contribution to the hard-pressed taxpayer. No one is more committed to the regeneration of docklands than my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and myself. To underline the strength of that point, all the Government's and London Underground's planning has proceeded on the clear basis that the private sector contribution to which I alluded will be forthcoming. We see no prospect of authorising the start of construction unless and until that contribution is assured.
    The hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey referred to a train that halted just a few yards from a station. Let us all hope that, in the ensuing weeks, the train will reach its destination and work on the line will proceed.

    Royal Assent
    11 am
    Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified her Royal Assent to the following Acts:

    Appropriation (No. 2) Act 1992.

    Finance (No. 2) Act 1992.

    Community Care (Residential Accommodation) Act 1992.

    Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992.

    Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

    Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

    Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992.

    Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Disclosure of Information ) Act 1992.

    Peterhead Harbours Order Confirmation Act 1992. Ulster Bank Act 1992.

    Cattewater Reclamation Act 1992.

    River Humber (Upper Pyewipe Outfall) Act 1992.

    Social Fund
    11.1 am
    Mr. Paul Flynn: The object of this debate is to draw attention to a report which the Minister has done his best to stifle at birth. Far from being stifled, it is crying aloud for action.
    The report, by Meg Hubey and Gill Dix of the social policy research unit at York university, entitled "Evaluating the Social Fund", presents the findings of a major survey commissioned by the Department of Social Security. I presume that the Minister then responsible expected the survey to confound the social fund's many critics by showing that it had been a success. Sadly for the Government, the report reached them at a time when the social fund is under attack once again from all sides. It has no friends. Included in its critics are the Social Security Advisory Committee, which has called for radical changes in how it operates.
    We do not know exactly how long the Minister sat on that report before allowing it to be published a week ago, but we know that it was a matter of months rather than weeks. When I tabled a question three weeks ago, asking what stage arrangements for publication had reached and for a copy to be placed in the Library, the answer that I received on 25 June was:
    "The report will be published following examination by Ministers."—[Official Report, 25 June 1992; Vol. 210, c. 308.]
    It is wrong that publication of an important research report, financed by public funds, should be held up pending examination by Ministers.
    On receiving that answer, I wrote to the Minister for Social Security and Disabled People, who is in his place today, seeking clarification. I asked him whether that meant that he was examining the report to see whether it needed doctoring before publication. If so, it was outrageous that academic research should be subjected to political censorship. Was publication being delayed so that the Minister could make policy decisions without first allowing an informed public debate to take place? Or had he deliberately delayed publication until the House rose on 16 July to prevent any possibility of parliamentary debate until the autumn? Those questions remain unanswered; I have had no reply so far.
    Meanwhile, the report has been published. It was published last Wednesday in strange circumstances. It was published much to the surprise of its authors, who had been told that publication was to take place the following day. They learned of the change not from the Minister but from an unofficial tip-off two hours before publication. They also discovered that the announcement of publication was being tagged on to the end of a written parliamentary answer. The only indication of the York report's contents in that written answer was the Minister's final sentence, which said:
    "I am pleased to note that the findings confirm the message of the Secretary of State's annual report that the fund has provided cash assistance for exceptional needs to millions of people; and also recognise the excellent job being performed by social fund officers."—[Official Report, 8 July 1992; Vol. 211, c. 224.]
    Although those words are in the report somewhere, they are not obvious. But the report shows that the social fund totally fails in its objective of concentrating help on those in greatest need. It shows that, by any measure that the
    1236
    authors could devise, those whose applications to the fund were refused were in great need—sometimes in greater need than those who applied successfully.
    The Minister's answer, reproduced faithfully in a DSS press release, was a gross misrepresentation of the findings of that major research project. I hope that he will dissociate himself from it.
    It is impossible, in the time allowed for this debate, to do more than pick out some of the more striking findings of this important report. The survey, carried out in October to December 1990—allowing long enough for the social fund to bed down since 1988—investigated 1,724 people on low incomes, including 968 social fund applicants. It also involved a novel technique of in-depth interviews with a small number of applicants and simulated decision-making exercises in which 15 social fund officers took part.
    The fundamental fact that emerges throughout the report is the inadequacy of the basic weekly rates out of which people are expected to meet the whole of their normal living expenses. As a result of the policy pursued since 1979—freezing the real value of benefit while other incomes rise—people living on income support find it increasingly difficult to make ends meet.
    By an amazing coincidence, another report was published today giving damning new evidence of how the poorest in society have become relatively even poorer in the past 10 years. Is it not a strange fact that those reports are coming in a great rush at this time—the dog days of Parliament when Members are thinking of their holidays and the recess ahead of them? It is disgraceful practice that that flood of reports is arriving now.
    Part of the evidence of that report is that, in the 1990s in Britain, even food is a problem to many families. The report states:
    "The main problem facing all the families and particularly emphasised in households with children and by pensioners was simply providing enough food at each meal."
    The in-depth interviews revealed that some families were economising on fuel
    "by going without heating for parts of the day, not using the central heating at all, sitting in the dark in the evenings, or going to bed early."
    Only four of the 15 applicants interviewed in depth had a telephone. The others, including people with disabilities, regarded a telephone as essential both for emergencies and to maintain social contacts, but it was
    "an expense beyond their means."
    Some had had to give up their telephones when their incomes fell.
    Holidays were virtually unknown. Only 6 per cent. of social fund applicants reported spending anything on holidays, and fewer than one in three spent money on leisure activities of any kind. There was little possibility of saving. The report said:
    "60 per cent. of survey respondents said that they never managed to put money aside for expenses that did not come up every week, and a further 17 per cent. said that they hardly ever managed to do so. Only 3·3 per cent. of respondents had any savings at all at the time of the interview."
    In their attempts to manage, they left the less urgent bills unpaid, especially the poll tax,. Of the 15 in-depth interviews, only seven people had paid the poll tax in full, a few had made one or two monthly payments, and the rest had paid nothing. Given the choice between food, fuel and the poll tax, who can blame them?
    These facts are shameful in themselves. In relation to the social fund, their significance is that, with weekly

    1237
    benefit rates as inadequate as this, any system of one-off payments for special needs is bound to come under enormous pressure, and the social fund tries to contain that pressure by screwing on the lid, imposing totally unrealistic cash limits, and placing increasingly rigorous restrictions on the purposes for which payments can be made.
    As a result, most of the needs which the social fund was supposedly designed to meet remain unmet. One third of the lone parents in the survey and more than a quarter of the couples with children did not have adequate bedding. One in seven of all those interviewed did not have adequate floor covering.
    Where help was forthcoming from the social fund, it was usually in the form of a loan, which people had to repay by deductions from their already inadequate weekly benefit income. The report states:
    "Most respondents expressed very negative feelings about the experience of living on reduced incomes following loan deductions … over a third of loan recipients in the survey dealt with social fund loan repayment by cutting back on spending and going without other things."
    The "other things" were most often food, clothing and the payment of fuel bills. They paid their debt to the social fund by getting in debt to the gas board.
    Because social fund payments are discretionary, making an application is always a gamble. A lone parent said:
    "They never give you any information as to what you are entitled to and not entitled to. They just give you the forms and tell you to send them in. That's it. Sometimes you come out feeling terrible."
    There were twice as many negative as positive comments about the process of applying to the social fund. Some 34 per cent. of the comments described it as
    "terrible, ridiculous, unfair, depressing, humiliating, degrading."
    Applicants for crisis loans were particularly critical, 21 per cent. complaining that it took too long. That complaint was made recently by the Social Security Advisory Committee. In a chapter about young people in its latest annual report, the committee says that a 16 or 17-year-old who is awarded income support on grounds of severe hardship has to wait one to two weeks for it to come through. Meanwhile, they have to go through the additional hassle of applying for crisis loans. The committee fairly quotes the view of local office staff that that is
    "a waste of staff time, social fund resources and an unnecessary difficulty for the claimant."
    I asked the Secretary of State what it would cost to pay income support immediately instead of one to two weeks later and received a reply, not from the Minister but from the ubiquitous Mr. Bichard of the Benefits Agency, who assured me that, because wages and other benefits are paid in arrears, payment of income support in advance in these circumstances would not be possible.
    It has been a revelation to many Back Benchers to receive letters from civil servants, because it lets us see how much civil servants take on themselves. If the Minister decided that such a method of payment was possible, I suspect that Mr. Bichard would find it perfectly possible. However, many of the replies show the supreme power of the civil service.
    I watched a programme called "Target" on Sky television in which there was an extraordinary interview
    1238
    about new secrecy, the inability of hon. Members to see letters from the Benefits Agency and other agencies that are sent to other hon. Members. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster said that they could be seen in a publication produced by an admirable Member of Parliament. He said, "We have helped him." I presume that he means the Government. However, they have not raised a finger to help in the publication of the report to which I have referred. The publication in which the letters appear is an admirable document, and I hope that before long the Government will publish the letters in Hansard.
    The Government's claim that they are devoted to sweeping away the cobwebs of secrecy is gossamer thin. For over a year those letters have remained secret, but I am sure that they will soon be published in Hansard. That delay shows the increasing importance and power of civil servants, who seem to act outside the control of Ministers. After receiving odd information from Mr. Bichard and Mr. Fogden and other civil servants on several other issues, I appealed to Ministers, but my letters were not answered by Ministers: they were diverted to Mr. Bichard and Mr. Fogden.
    The authors of the York survey attempt to establish by sophisticated statistical techniques the type of application to the social fund that was most likely to succeed. However, the attempt failed because
    "the inability to predict probabilities of awards and refusals from general needs-related variables suggest that people who receive social fund awards are not in greater general need than those who are refused · we cannot show that those who got awards were in greater general need than those who did not; nor can we conclude that the social fund is meeting its objective `to concentrate attention and help on those applicants facing greatest difficulties in managing on their income.'"
    That is a remarkable conclusion.
    It is hard to imagine a more sweeping condemnation of the whole basis of the social fund. People with health problems at risk of needing institutional care, with damp accommodation, heating problems, and lacking cooking facilities and floor coverings, were no more likely than others to get help from the fund. Those lacking washing or drying facilities or sufficient beds were less likely to get help.
    The impression that the social fund is a cruel lottery was confirmed by the exercise of having 15 social fund officers brought together and asked to make decisions on some hypothetical applications. They were not working in the pressure of an office with demands on their time. They were in a laboratory situation and had time to consider before deciding. The results are unbelievable. A single parent was in need of a washing machine and the application, made two years after the introduction of the fund, was placed before those 15 professional officers who are used to taking such decisions every day. Two of the officers said that the person should have nothing, 11 decided that he was entitled to a loan, and two said that he was entitled to a grant.
    There was an application from a pensioner in need of clothing, and the decision could not have been more mathematically confusing. Five of the officers said that he was entitled to nothing, four said that he was entitled to loans, and six said that he was entitled to grants. The effects of the social fund cash limits were shown when 15 social fund officers were asked to decide in cases that were, first, subjected to their local office budget priorities, and then considered without budgetary constraints. When the

    1239
    constraints were removed, those experienced people decided that grant expenditure should go up by 49 per cent. and loan expenditure by 41 per cent. That is a telling finding. There were not just more payments, but bigger payments—up 28 per cent. on average for grants and up 24 per cent. for loans. Eight of the 38 loans were converted to grants.
    The Minister will no doubt argue, as he always does, that the cash limits are generous, but that exercise suggests otherwise. When he announced the limits for 1992–93, he claimed with his usual sleight of hand that they were 30 per cent. above the April 1991 figures, which they were. What the Minister forgot to mention was that the April 1991 limits were so low that they had to be increased no fewer than five times during the year to keep the fund afloat. To maintain the level of spending, the 1992–93 budget would have to be £339 million instead of £302 million. There has been not an increase of 30 per cent. but a cut of 11 per cent.
    It is not only claimants who would benefit from the removal of the cash limits. The job of social fund officers would be infinitely more satisfying if they could exercise real discretion. The report said:
    During the exercise in which they had made social fund decisions in the absence of budgetary constraints, some officers reported feeling that a burden had been lifted from them. They felt a previously unknown freedom to interpret the Directions rather than to work with a tightly prescribed priority list. In a telling phrase, they would be 'able to fit things into the Directions as opposed to making things up to fit'."
    The "tightly prescribed priority lists" referred to here are drawn up by each district office, and tell social fund officers what kind of thing they can make payments for without exceeding their cash limits.
    In many parts of the country, the priority lists have become so restrictive that even the most basic needs can no longer be met. A typical example, recently reported to the Child Poverty Action Group, was provided by the East Lowlands district in Scotland, where last month the budget was 11 per cent. overspent. As a result, that district is no longer making budgetary loans for space heaters, pots, pans and crockery, essential home repairs and maintenance, removal expenses, push-chairs or prams, floor coverings, tables, chairs, and many other things.
    To make matters worse, the guidance on priorities issued by district managers is often unlawful, either because it takes the form of directions rather than of guidance, or because it conflicts with the Secretary of State's directions and guidance, excluding payments to whole categories of people who ought not to be excluded. Surveys of local guidance and priority lists carried out by my office in 1990 and 1991 showed that this was happening in most areas.
    Similar complaints are made each year by the Social Fund Commissioner in her annual reports. Her latest report, published last week on the same day as the York survey, says that many local office priority lists
    "give cause for concern. This may be because they are mandatory, and prescribe the decision for the SFO to make, or because they seek to exclude cases from consideration under Direction 4(a)(iii)"—
    which allows payments to ease exceptional pressures on the applicant and his family—
    "or because they use client groups to determine priority without consideration of individual circumstances."
    The commissioner makes it clear that such guidance must be ignored by social fund officers. But how can they be expected to distinguish between lawful and unlawful
    1240
    guidance issued by their district manager—and what would happen to a social fund officer who had the temerity to set himself or herself up as a judge of the legality of the manager's guidance?
    There is a simple solution to these problems: do away with the cash limits and allow social fund officers to decide applications on their merits within a clear set of rules. Local priority lists, which are often artificial, would then disappear, removing the illogicality.
    However, that suggestion implies that there is, in fact, a clear set of rules governing the social fund. There may be a place for discretion in the social fund, but there is also a need for clearly defined entitlement to payments for needs which are predictable and definable. That is the course advocated by the Social Security Advisory Committee in its report "The Social Fund—a new structure" published in March.
    Mr. Charles Hendry: It is hard not to contrast the six Labour Members who have turned up today with the massed ranks of them who turned up earlier in the week to vote for a whopping rise in their expenses.
    Did not the social policy research unit say that 50 per cent. of people agreed with the idea that loans were a fair system, that three quarters were satisfied with the level of the loans made, and that two thirds were satisfied with the level of repayments?
    Mr. Rhodri Morgan: Come to any of our surgeries.
    Mr. Flynn: The hon. Member for High Peak (Mr. Hendry) will be relieved to know that the extra money that comes to my office will greatly assist in paying a proper London wage to those who worked on publishing the document that I have used, and on providing an alternative to the masses of civil servants on the Government side who provide fictitious press releases for them. The Opposition are woefully underfinanced for challenging the Government, with their virtually infinite resources. We make no apologies about the extra money.
    I am about to finish my speech and I look forward to what the Minister will say. However, the information that the hon. Member for High Peak cited earlier was highly selective, and amounted to a distortion of the report. I encourage him not to dwell on a brief which has undoubtedly been provided by the Whips, but to read through page after page of the report, and then to read all the other reports on the state of the social fund.
    The social fund is friendless now. Before it was introduced, the Fowler review, on which it was based, was universally condemned. Sadly, all the worst fears of those who attacked it have now been realised. It is a lottery. What matters is not what people's problems are or how serious their needs, but where they live, the disposition of the local social fund officer, or the current state of the budget in the office. Apart, possibly, from the poll tax, the social fund is the greatest failure that the Government have ever produced. It stands condemned by all.
    I do not expect a radical response from the Minister this morning, or a commitment to a thorough reform of the social fund, but I ask him to spend some part of the next three months, while Parliament is in recess, studying the great mountain of unanimous evidence that the social fund does not work. My last word to him this morning is that perhaps he might think about the views of the people who use the system. They are the most vulnerable and the least

    1241
    articulate people in society—those least likely to complain. Yet, as recorded in the document, they found the experience of applying for a social fund grant or loan unfair, depressing, ridiculous, humiliating, terrible, and degrading.
    11.28 am
    The Minister for Social Security and Disabled People (Mr. Nicholas Scott): I congratulate the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) on his success in obtaining the debate, and on his sustained interest in the social fund. That interest does not always make my life comfortable; nevertheless he pursues it with great assiduity. Although the social fund represents only a small part of overall social security provision, it is right that the system which seeks to provide exceptional help for people in exceptional circumstances should be subject to sustained interest and scrutiny.
    I have listened carefully to what the hon. Gentleman has said about the social fund. I disagreed with almost all of it, and shall try to respond to some of his arguments during the next quarter of an hour.
    As I have made clear on several other occasions, we have before us the Social Security Advisory Committee's report on the fund, and the social policy research unit report, which has provided the opportunity for our discussion, has been published.
    I shall first tackle the "conspiracy theory" about the publication and handling of the report. There has been no undue delay—I totally reject that suggestion. The Government commissioned the report and paid for it. The terms under which it has been handled are exactly in accordance with long-standing provisions for research contracts which, to the best of my knowledge, have been followed by Governments of both parties in recent years.
    The process followed on this occasion is the same as that followed on other occasions. The precise day on which the report was published was a matter of the Government deciding on which days various announcements were made. We had to find a slot in the process, as anyone who has been in government clearly will recognise. There is nothing underhand or improper, and nothing that has not followed all other occasions on which such reports have been commissioned and produced. There is no mystery and no undue delay, and certainly no conspiracy is involved.
    Since the research was carried out, a number of things have happened. First, substantial extra resources have been put into the Social Fund in recent years. Secondly, we have tackled some of the administrative shortcomings of the operation of the Social Fund to make it more responsive to the needs of our customers. If I have time, I shall come back to that in detail. The report must be seen in the context that time has moved on and policy has moved on since the research on which it is based was carried out.
    Mr. Flynn: We are familiar with the argument. Research has to be carried out over a long period and the Government then say, "Things have changed since then." That is why the conspiracy theory has many fans among Opposition Members. For how many months has the Minister had the report? Would it not have been better to
    1242
    publish it immediately? We could then have had a far more appropriate discussion because it would have been nearer the time at which the study was carried out.
    Mr. Scott: We commissioned the report, and the normal process on such occasions is that a final draft of the report is sent to the Department. Officials consider that draft to see whether the researchers have fulfilled their commission. Various discussions then take place between our officials and the researchers. Any gaps that need to be filled are filled so that the report is a proper piece of work when it is finally published. I congratulate the social policy research unit at York on the competent and professional way in which it carried out the report. I make no secret of the fact that I shall study the findings carefully. I simply point out the valid fact that, since the research on which the report was based was carried out, a number of changes have taken place in the system.
    I will talk for a moment about the principles behind the social fund. Schemes for making payments for unusual and exceptional needs are at the margins of the overall provision for social security. The social fund represents less than 0·5 per cent. of the social security budget which, as hon. Members will realise, is running at more than £70 billion for this financial year. Meeting individual, exceptional and irregular needs, which is what the social fund is about, is even more difficult and a great deal more sensitive than addressing the general problem of providing for regular needs.
    Over the past 50 years, many attempts have been made to find a fair solution to the problem. Until the social fund came into existence, previous attempts under Governments of both political persuasions had ended in failure. I return to a point made by the hon. Member for Newport, West in which he fell into a trap. He failed to distinguish between the task of the social security system as a whole to meet regular needs, which can be met by a regulated pattern of provision through regular—normally weekly—social security benefits being paid to meet those needs, and the exceptional and unusual needs which occur infrequently and unexpectedly in relation to specific individual circumstances. Manifestly it is a more difficult and sensitive task to respond to those needs than to respond to the generality of need. When the hon. Member for Newport, West reflects on the contents of his speech, it is important for him to draw the distinction between the two distinct types of need in society.
    We set off down this route in 1934 with the Unemployment Assistance Board establishing a principle of exceptional assistance. The problems of defining what can be legitimately classed as exceptional need and how payment should be made have been subjected to continuous scrutiny and debate ever since.
    The hon. Member for Newport, West no doubt recalls that Beveridge in the 1948 reforms made provision for the payment of discretionary exceptional needs payments administered by the National Assistance Board. Like the single payment system that followed, payments under the scheme spiralled from one payment for every 10 people on benefit in 1949 to one payment for every three on benefit in 1979. That process showed clearly that the scheme was no longer addressing exceptional needs but was becoming part of a more general provision.
    Opposition Members will be as familiar with this feeling as are Conservative Members. Many people who were in low-paid employment saw people who happened to be on

    1243
    benefit getting large grants for needs which may have been there but for which people in low-paid employment had to provide out of their earnings. Many people perceived that to be an unfairness in the scheme.
    In 1977, the Supplementary Benefits Commission thoroughly reviewed the scheme. Its report makes good reading and I commend it to the hon. Member for Newport, West if he has not yet turned his attention to it. It covered the problems, the abuses, the anomalies and the basic inequalities which were being produced by the exceptional needs payments system of the time. Many proposals were made and many solutions were offered.
    The regulated single payment system came into effect in 1980 and started with high hopes of remedying some of the problems of the exceptional needs scheme. By 1986, it was clear that the single payment scheme was wholly out of control and revised regulations were introduced. It became clear shortly afterwards that a more radical approach would be necessary.
    I do not know the extent to which the hon. Member for Newport, West speaks for his party on the future of the social fund. If he intends to go back to a system analogous to the old single payments system, he should remind himself why that system fell into disrepute and had to be abolished. After 1980, the cost was doubling every two years in real terms, out of all proportion to the increase in the number of people on benefit, to the level of unemployment or to any other measure. The payments were unfairly distributed. Four fifths of the money went to fewer than one in five claimants in 1987. In 1985, the scheme cost only one twentieth of supplementary benefit decisions and for half of all appeal hearings. The system continued to be unfair to people on low pay who had to budget for many of the things that people on benefit were able to obtain with large sums paid for out of the taxes that employed people were paying.
    The system was open to manifest abuse. Before the changes to the regulations in 1986, one local office, for example, serving 21,000 customers received 4,000 claims for bedding within a few weeks and 2,500 claims for furniture within four days. There was also frequent abuse of the help available for deposits to secure accommodation.
    Mr. Flynn: I did not mention the old system and my party's policy does not suggest that we go back to it. The right hon. Gentleman's attack on the old system is well known and well rehearsed and I have heard him deliver it at least 20 times. We are discussing a serious attack on the social fund. Will he now deal with it?
    Mr. Scott: I intend to deal with it, but it is impossible to consider its future or any changes that we might make to it without first examining alternative schemes that have been tried before and the origin of their failure, which has been manifest. The Labour party manifesto seemed to have something along the lines of the single payment scheme in mind—a return to a total grant scheme in which all loans would be converted to grants. The distinction between that and the single payment scheme is only marginal.
    I note that opponents of the social fund no longer speak of replacing it; they talk of restructuring it or of altering its balance—not of undermining the fundamental principles of the fund.
    Mr. Alan Williams: Does the Minister believe that those with equal need should have equal entitlement? If he does, can he refute the fact that equal entitlement is not available under this scheme?
    Mr. Scott: I do not agree. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman disagrees with the principle behind a controlled, cash-limited budget——
    Mr. Williams: I do.
    Mr. Scott: Costs under previous schemes spiralled out of all control, so before the right hon. Gentleman commits himself to a return to them I advise him to have a word with whoever is shadow Chief Secretary to discover whether he or she is prepared to commit the party to uncontrolled provision in this area. All experience shows that such schemes are open to manifest abuse and to spiralling and uncontrolled costs.
    I could go on talking about the failings of the single payment and exceptional needs payment schemes, failings which the social fund was designed to deal with and which it has dealt with largely successfully. One of the failings of the old single payment system was that those who fell one side or the other of the terms of a particular regulation received payment, or not, as the case might be. Introducing an element of human judgment and discretion overcomes that problem to a considerable extent. Of course, a limited budget means that some people will not get grants, perhaps because they live in one place and not another, but local budgets administered and profiled by local managers, and operated by social fund officers, add an element of discretion and of the ability to meet local needs in local circumstances.
    The social fund is not so flawed as to need immediate replacement. Any careful reading of the SPRU report supports that analysis. The SPRU provided a complex, detailed, competent, professional and comprehensive report on the workings of the fund. It took more than two and a half years to conduct the work leading to the report. It interviewed more than 2,000 people, many of them in depth. It is impossible to summarise the findings of the report in a brief Adjournment debate. No doubt there will be opportunities when the House returns in the autumn to take a more careful look at it. I shall certainly spend a large chunk of my summer recess absorbing the report and learning what lessons I can from its authors. The hon. Gentleman analysed it in a rather superficial way—digesting the report requires days and weeks, not a single morning.
    The report says that many people are being "substantially helped" by the fund; that there are high levels of satisfaction among many groups who receive awards—naturally there is rather less satisfaction among those who do not; and that, interestingly enough, there is a general acceptance of the idea of loans. When we launched the fund, not many of us expected such a high level of acceptance.
    Not only have we improved the administration of the fund but we have put a great many more resources into it to reflect the pressures on it. In the next few weeks and months, I shall be examining with great care the conclusions of the authors of the SPRU report to determine whether we need to make any changes. On the fundamental principles of the social fund, I am unshakeable: it is far better than any of its predecessors, and it does a good job for millions of people.
    Mr. Keith Vaz: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. This morning's Financial Times contains what appears to be a report of the Bingham inquiry which seems to have found its way not to Members of Parliament but to members of the press. Have you received any notice from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he is to make a statement about the report to be published by Lord Justice Bingham; or have you received any assurance from the Leader of the House that once the report is published, and if it contains the sort of information that appears in the Financial Times, Parliament will be recalled to discuss it?
    When this matter was raised last week with Madam Speaker, she deprecated the way in which the Bank of England chose to send copies of its report to members of the press instead of to Members of Parliament in the first instance. Will you ensure, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that a copy of the Bank of England's letter is placed in the Library of the House? I understand that the Governor has apologised to the Speaker for the behaviour of the Bank of England.
    Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that point of order, but it is now too late for statements. I shall draw his latter remarks to the attention of Madam Speaker.

    Schools (Religious Education)
    11.46 am
    Lady Olga Maitland: Religious education in our schools is in a crisis, despite the Government's efforts with the Education Reform Act 1988, when they battled to provide a framework ensuring that children receive a mainly Christian education in their religious studies. Frankly, that is just not working. Many children today are being cheated of their fundamental right to a Christian education, and the result is an appalling lack of basic knowledge of Christianity.
    A MORI poll in 1991 found that 57 per cent. of the 18 to 24 age group could not say what happened on Good Friday, and 62 per cent. could not identify Pontius Pilate—yet between 80 and 90 per cent. of the population, or of those polled, regard themselves as Christians. All the polls found that barely 3 per cent. belonged to Hindu, Muslim. Sikh or Buddhist faiths, and I stress that it is not they who are asking for special treatment.
    We find ourselves being apologetic for acknowledging the obvious—our Christian faith. The daily act of Christian worship is often a mish-mash of multi-faith worship, which in turn has become a secular religion of its own. Its themes centre on contentious issues such as racism, sexism and western exploitation of the third world—issues which have nothing to do with the heart and soul of Christianity.
    Many RE lessons have shifted from traditional Bible study to a disproportionate emphasis on other faiths, with Islam, Buddhism and so on rendering Christianity a minority faith. The push for this has come from influential teacher trainers, RE advisers and local education authorities. As a result, children, together with their parents and teachers, are frustrated because they crave a balance.
    A parent in my constituency, Mrs. Kay Reid, has a little girl who attends the Avenue primary school. She said to me yesterday:
    "There is so much emphasis on other religions, like children performing a Hindu wedding, that I ask 'What is wrong with putting Our Lord first in Britain which is a christian country?' This liberal view that we should have a little bit of this and a little bit of that means that children end up with no clear picture of christianity. Because my daughter goes to Sunday School, she is able to tell her friends about Jesus."
    Is that an incredible scenario? I am afraid that it is not. That is happening in schools all over the country.
    The emphasis on multi-culturalism has left children bewildered. For example, I received a letter from a 14-year-old girl in Liverpool. She wrote:
    "Please can you help me? I have been forced to learn the Hindu religion for three whole years now. Since I started first year seniors, I have learnt nothing about Christianity. My dad went in and complained and the headmaster told him that he taught a multi-faced religion at his school. My dad asked why Christianity was not included and the headmaster said that he did not want to offend the Muslims. All we learn about is Hindus, Muslims and the Vishnu religion. I don't mind knowing about other religions, but why can't I be taught about my own? Last week my class had to go to a Hindu temple to see how the religion works."
    She included a circular from her school, the Childhall community comprehensive, which detailed arrangements for the visit to the temple. The circular included a note:

    1247
    "The Hindus do not allow the wearing of shoes in their temples. Therefore, could you be sure that your child's socks cause no embarrassment? As this is a place of worship, I expect their behaviour to be extremely respectful."
    That trendy liberalism has swamped us everywhere, but rarely have I found it so deliberate and disturbing as in religious education. It is hardly surprising that we are producing a rootless and restless society with no moral and spiritual benchmarks. Concern has reached such a pitch that parents, teachers and children are crying for help. They have become aware that children will be unable to answer my questionnaire that I am issuing through Christian Call. It contains basic questions on Christian knowledge, such as:
    "Can you recite the Lord's prayer? Can you name any six of the 10 commandments? Have you studied the apostles' creed? Name the parts of the Trinity. Who betrayed Jesus? Why do Christians celebrate Christmas, Easter and Whitsun'?"
    That last question often stumps people. It is:
    "Have you read or studied the Bible?"
    I regret to say that I have heard reports of teachers treating Bible stories as fairy tales. My questionnaire continues:
    "Have you read the gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John? Have you studied or read the 23rd psalm'?"
    I received a letter from an angry teacher who taught at the New Milton junior school in Hampshire. He complained bitterly that no RE appeared in the curriculum. Children were not taken to church. There were no harvest festivals and Christmas was not celebrated. When he asked the children what they knew about Jesus, he was told that Jesus was God. When he asked who his Father was, the answers included Julius Caesar, Henry VIII and George VI. When he asked where Jesus died, the answer was "Don't know." The answer to the question, "Where was Jesus born?" was "Don't know." When asked how Jesus died, one child said, "Tied to a cross."
    That was a depressing litany and that teacher resigned from the school because he felt that he was unable to carry out his spiritual duties. It is hardly surprising that early-day motion 446 on Christian religious education has been signed by 52 hon. Members from both sides of the House.
    It is also very worrying that some standing advisory councils on religious education—or SACREs—are being manipulated and others appear to ignore good advice. Resource material for teachers is highly questionable. One of the latest fads in RE is a teacher's handbook entitled:
    "New methods in religious education teaching, an experimental approach by the RE advisor for Islington, three teacher trainers and two RE teachers."
    One would laugh if it were not so downright dangerous. It contains barely a mention of a Christian God. There is more emphasis on dangerous mind-bending exercises designed to teach meditation, which I believe has no place in the classroom.
    The handbook claims that its version of RE is
    "Much more interesting than old-fashioned scripture."
    It states that RE cannot be taught unless it also teaches about politics, society, exploitation, expression, sexism and racism.
    The final result of such teaching is that it often causes anxiety in children who are confused by the views of partisan indoctrination. Meditation, guided fantasy and other mind-bending techniques are suggested for children from primary age upwards. For example, nine-year-olds at Woodborough school carried out an exercise entitled, "Who am I?" That was based on an "Alice in
    1248
    Wonderland" illustration of the caterpillar. The children had to imagine that they were something else. Answers like, "I am a brown rabbit," or a heavy, hairy very juicy peach have absolutely nothing to do with the teaching of the gospels of the Christian faith.
    Exercises on meditation and breathing exercises for children, which are more widespread than we can possibly imagine, can be regarded only as highly suspect. How can local education authorities and the SACREs allow such abuses of RE to happen? This is a Christian country and we live by a Christian ethos. The Education Reform Act 1988 has provision for a daily act of collective worship which is meant to be wholly or mainly Christian in character. However, the evidence is that schools are failing in that regard.
    The RE adviser in the London borough of Redbridge suggested a thematic approach for the spring term school assemblies last year. Apart from Christianity, themes included Elvis Presley, Rod Stewart, Raquel Welch and Brigitte Bardot and every conceivable faith from the martyrdom of the Sikh guru Arjan onwards. Other themes included when the first top hat appeared in London; when the first supermarket opened; the American militant black Muslim leader Malcolm X and Alex "Hurricane" Higgins; the snooker champion; and national days in Gambia and Nepal. A poem on Mahatma Gandhi's death was considered a useful topic for seven-year-olds, as was one about violent black South Africa.
    Is that not a waste of public money on such resource materials? The local education authority in Dudley in the west midlands offered an alternative syllabus in RE—folk religion. That included astrology, hippie commune cults and the occult. I am glad to say that, as a result of the Education Reform Act 1988, Dudley is now scrapping
    "non-religious stances such as Marxism and communism."
    A parent in north London called Georgette Behar, a school governor at Robbinsfield infants school, told me that there was no religious education in her school because the headmaster had told her that he did not believe in anything and so did not believe that he could talk about Christianity or any other religion. Barely a year after the 1988 Act was passed, the chair of the education committee in Ealing, Hilary Benn, issued a press release stating:
    "Multi-faith worship consists of a general religious, moral and ethical content which is not distinctive of any one faith or religion. Under this system schools will be able to use materials for worship from all faiths and take a thematic approach reflecting the values and experiences common to all faiths."
    Mr. Andrew Rowe (Mid-Kent): Does my hon. Friend recall that the Archbishop of Canterbury, in his excellent sermon at the start of this Parliament, made the case clearly that Muslims and those other faiths find it much easier to relate to a strongly expressed and firmly held Christian faith and worship than to some kind of mish-mash which poses as accommodating them?
    Lady Olga Maitland: I could not agree more wholeheartedly. In the 1987 general election, I was the parliamentary candidate for Bethnal Green and Stepney, where 35 per cent. of the community were Islamic and the parents were very positive about Anglican church schools. Their views were taken into account.
    I refer to Ealing to demonstrate the projects that were suggested to be used in class. I have a teacher's outline which states:
    "Use the South African situation."

    1249
    Children are asked to sit on the floor, and teachers say to them:
    "You are a black young person living in a country with a population of nearly 33 million, 24 million of those 33 million are black like you, nearly 5 million are white, but the 5 million have most of the power. Because of the Groups Areas Act, your family have to move into an African township. You are not free to live where you like."
    The children must then give examples. They are then told to listen to a soundtrack of "Cry Freedom". That strikes me as far removed from Christian education.
    Another difficulty is that parents find it extremely difficult to complain and to obtain a satisfactory response. That has certainly been the case in Ealing. A popular model for SACRE is based on the syllabus that has been adopted by the Rotherham local education authority. I am sorry to say that it has been adopted by my own LEA in Sutton. Significantly, the Diwali festival is featured on the front page, but not our faith, Christianity. Taken as a whole, Christ's teaching is barely mentioned.
    A page devoted to the syllabus reads more like a social science course with key words such as "self-understanding, exploration, investigation, analysis, lifestyles, concepts, moral values, open-mindedness, critical mind" and so on. Christianity is included—in a shopping list of religions after Judaism and before Islam. There is no sign that Christianity has more significance than any of the other five religions. Clearly, it is not a mainly Christian syllabus. It is very much a matter of a child taking it or leaving it on the shelf in favour of another religion, perhaps with more amusing festivals.
    Manchester LEA is no better. Its syllabus, "Multi-Faith Manchester", has an introduction which begins:
    "We understand the term to include the normal meanings given to the related words 'spiritual' and 'ethical', including non-theistic standpoints."
    It spells that out further by saying:
    "No policy for multi-cultural education can avoid consideration of racial prejudice and racism."
    The rest is a loose Cook's tour of world religions which is more obsessed with inter-faith dialogue than with any study of our own Christian faith.
    Bradford's agreed syllabus for religious education is entitled "Living in Today's World", and, like the others, has little time for Christianity. Among its general objectives for four to nine-year-olds is a section on self-awareness and enjoyment. A detailed diagram of the inter-relationship between religions, using light as a theme, links a complete mishmash of ideas and religions, from Christmas lights to Florence Nightingale, birthdays, volcanoes, Diwali and Hannukah.
    Our great and glorious 19th century hymns are under pressure. Teachers are advised to change words that might offend Muslim children, especially references to Jesus as the Son of God, and are warned that representations of the crucifixion are obviously sensitive issues for Jews and Muslims and need to be presented carefully.
    What is to be done? I ask my hon. Friend the Minister to include my suggestions in the Government's forthcoming White Paper and revised circular. Will he make the complaints procedure easier for parents who are unhappy about how RE is being taught in schools? Grant-maintained schools should be allowed to opt out of a local authority's influence and develop their own RE under the mainly Christian requirement of the Education
    1250
    Reform Act. That is not a licence to ditch RE, for that would come under the new inspectorate. The Government should consider giving a clearer guideline regarding what is put into RE and what should be left out. Is there not a case for the Department of Education warning against dangerous meditation techniques? Christianity must he given a clearly defined and fully recognised status. It is, after all, the established historical faith of Great Britain.
    Religious education nowadays tends to put Mecca and Lourdes on the same level, but are they equivalents? That just reduces Christianity to a take-it-or-leave-it faith. Schools need to be reassured by the Department of Education that it is quite acceptable to spend 80 per cent. of their teaching time on Christianity. It is extraordinary that good schools now worry about that. The Department for Education must ensure that religious education is about genuine religious study and not political debates about western imperialism, feminism, gay rights and the allegation that Christ's teaching is little more than Eurocentric education. We must tackle the fact that two thirds of LEAs are clinging to their old RE syllabuses. Many of them deliberately undervalue Christianity. The time has come to bring them all into line with the provisions of the 1988 Act.
    I should like to take heart from Sutton's education department. It was so stung by parents' complaints and criticisms that it has drawn up guidelines based on the Act for collective worship in schools. The document is not yet published, but it is a welcome start. I am encouraged that in that document there are more mentions of Christianity in its 20 pages than I have seen in years of Sutton's education materials. The crunch will really come when the Government's new schools inspectorate comes into operation next year. My concern is that the inspectors may not be wholeheartedly behind the spirit of a mainly Christian education.
    Surely there must be room for the Churches to take some responsibility, especially in RE. I was encouraged to hear that the Archbishop of Birmingham's office feels keenly that the moral and spiritual elements of the curriculum should not be judged by a secular body, especially in Church schools. Would this not be an excellent opportunity for ecumenism to show its real strength? All Christian religions must co-operate in defining what is acceptable in schools today and perhaps supply inspectors who are committed Christians.
    This is a cry for help from the bottom of the hearts of the people of Great Britain. The debate would never have come about if I had not had such a swell of information from all quarters. I very much hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will take my words to heart and respond to the anxious parents of this country.
    12.7 pm
    Mr. Derek Enright: I apologise to the House for speaking on this matter.
    Mr. Harry Greenway: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. With respect to the hon. Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright), I do not want to stop him speaking, but I do not think that he has come to an arrangement with my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland), who has made an arrangement with other hon. Members.
    Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Order.
    Mr. Enright: That is right, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I put down my name at the beginning of the day. If the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) does not wish me to speak, I shall not do so except by intervention.
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: That is a matter for the hon. Lady.
    Mr. Enright: I am at a disadvantage. I taught religious education for 20 years. The hon. Lady's remarks are offensive to people who teach religious education. My four children were taught absolutely splendidly. We did a not unreasonable job in our teaching.
    I take particular issue with the hon. Lady's topics. There are two laws—love God and love your neighbour. Last week, "love your neighbour" was the Gospel at mass. It is an important part of Christianity and should be taught. Equally, other faiths have to be taught. I speak as a Catholic under the direction of the hierarchy and splendid guidance of Bishop David Constant. In Catholic schools, Hinduism, Sikhism and the Jewish faith are all rightly and properly instructed. I have taught those subjects. To suggest for one moment that they are a mish-mash is appalling.
    The hon. Lady does not understand what education is truly about. It starts with the family. No one will know who Jesus is or know the gospel and epistles unless he or she is brought up with such teaching in the family. That is a crucial part of education. The hon. Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Greenway) will bear out the fact that teachers of not only religious education but all subjects need the backing and willingness of the family if they are to succeed.
    The hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam mocked some of the subjects taught. I refer her to the beatitudes and the corporal works of mercy, which are an essential part of the Christian faith. The beatitudes say, "Blessed are the peacemakers". Does that mean making nuclear bombs and throwing them all over the place? Or do we teach a passive attitude? The teaching of the beatitudes is crucial, but when one does so, it is difficult to explain the selfishness, greed and determination to succeed at any cost and no matter whose cost which is rampant in our society and has been taught to us.
    It is right that we should reach out to the third world. It is right that we should talk to our brothers and sisters there. The religious content of what we say is the heart and core of being a Christian. That is how we show that we love Christ and that we are trying hard to be Christians. We do not pretend to be perfect; we merely try. Christianity should he taught in the context of the home, openness, looking out and tolerance and understanding of others. In that way we shall succeed truly in being Christians.
    12.11 pm
    Mr. Harry Greenway: I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) for initiating this most important debate and for her interesting speech. I meant no offence to the hon. Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright) when I said that I had arranged with my hon. Friend to speak in the debate. I did not want to miss the chance to do so.
    The hon. Member for Hemsworth addressed the subject in a particular way. I went to a funeral the other day of an 18-year-old constituent whom I had know all his life. He
    1252
    was an immensely brave person who died of multiple sclerosis. He talked to me on his deathbed about death. The funeral was one of the most moving spiritual and religious experiences that I have ever had. The music of Elvis Presley was played at that funeral not to offend those of us who were keen on the Christian religion but because Elvis Presley was a love of that young man. The music fitted completely in the context of the Christian funeral. We must understand that such experiences can be translated into the classroom and real spiritual and Christian understanding can arise from them. That is an important point. It is important to get that point across as a basis for understanding how religion can be taught.
    For many years, I took assemblies of more than 2,000 children two or three times a week, with 160 or 170 teachers on the stage with me. One must start with all those people where they are. One cannot take them out of the world in which they live and teach them religion in a vacuum. So it was with young Daniel. His funeral included the music of Elvis Presley because it had been part of his life. The lives of modern children in my constituency and many others are subject to pagan influences and pressures, which, unfortunately, are difficult to deal with. But if one starts where children are, one takes the right Christian approach.
    After all, the great quality of Christianity and the difference about it is that Jesus came to people where they were. He did not bring down tablets of stone and say, "This is how it has to be." That is what we have to do with children today to put the subject across. I make no apology for saying that.
    I agree wholly with my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam about the Ealing syllabus. Is she aware that the syllabus, which has been withdrawn by the Tory administration, made no reference to Jesus, God or the bible? That was its basic problem. My hon. Friend put her finger on it. Unfortunately, acts of worship in schools have deteriorated for many years. In many schools they have ceased to be acts of worship. Assemblies are often simply programmes of announcements from the headmaster or headmistress, with perhaps a prayer if one is lucky. That is not good enough. That sort of thing can be tightened up. There is nothing to stop a sound act of worship taking place in all schools, whether large schools, such as those with which I have been associated, or small schools.
    One must start with children where life is for them today and take them from there to some special teaching point. One might start with a football match or the fact that everyone has a birthday. But there must be a point with which every child and adult present can identify if one is to take people forward into a teaching experience. One cannot teach anyone in a vacuum from a position at which they are not. It is vital to start where they are.
    My hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) wants to speak, so I shall curtail my remarks. Assemblies need to be rethought, and become acts of worship again, as they should be. The curriculum must be nationally organised and not left to local whim. The matter has not been resolved satisfactorily at local level, even though the syllabuses were well intended and aimed to take account of local social and religious differences.
    Mr. Enright: Diocesan syllabuses are not drawn up at national level. Does the hon. Gentleman suggest that the Catholic church should change its practice and draw up its syllabus nationally?
    Mr. Greenway: I am talking about maintained schools. Denominational schools have their own arrangements for religious education, and rightly so.
    It would help if there were national guidelines. My hon. Friend the Minister might address that. Such guidelines would overcome the excesses that we faced in Ealing and other local authorities where the subject was allowed to go too far from the experience of the people of Britain. After all, our culture and that of our children is based on Christianity and nothing else.
    12.17 pm
    Dr. Robert Spink: The facts are absolutely plain. We are a Christian society and we should teach the Christian faith. We should teach an awareness and understanding of other major religions but only in an academic manner. We should be basically Christian. We should re-establish in all schools regular acts of communal worship with real hymns such as those which the hon. Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright) and I remember singing when we went to school.
    I do not know whether hon. Members are aware—perhaps not, because the attendance is not good—that even in the Palace of Westminster on a Wednesday morning at 12.45 pm there is an act of worship in the Crypt Chapel. I should be delighted to see more of my hon. Friends there with me.
    Even in my constituency of Castle Point some schools are reluctant to engage in simple things such as acts of communal worship, singing real hymns and teaching the Christian faith. Such schools deny our children a sound moral basis and the opportunity to understand and love Jesus Christ. I welcome the fact that my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) introduced this important debate.
    12.19 pm
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Mr. Eric Forth): I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) for bringing this undoubtedly important matter before the House and for giving hon. Members an opportunity to express their strongly held convictions on the subject, which they hold dear to their hearts.
    Four years after the Education Reform Act 1988 and following much work on the national curriculum, it is appropriate that we should turn our attention to religious education, not least because widespread concern is developing about it at local and national level. I emphasise that the Government share that concern and I hope that my hon. Friends and hon. Members are aware of the personal interest and commitment of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State—who made a point of ensuring that among the first people he met when he took on his new responsibilities were the Archbishop of Canterbury, Cardinal Hume and the Chief Rabbi. The Minister of State, Baroness Blatch, takes a close interest in such matters and gives them her personal attention.
    In the context of what has been said, it is worth emphasising that, as many have pointed out, the Education Reform Act 1988 left responsibility for religious education at local level. The Act required the new agreed syllabuses adopted by local education authorities after 1988 to
    1254
    "reflect the fact that the religious traditions in Great Britain are in the main Christian, whilst taking account of the teaching and practices of the other principal religions represented in Great Britain".
    The Act also introduced a requirement that daily acts of collective worship in county schools should be
    "wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character".
    In addition to these changes, local authorities were required to establish standing advisory councils on religious education known as SACREs and referred to by my hon. Friend to advise on religious education and collective worship. In addition to the curriculum and including religious education, the Act requires local authorities to set up local complaints procedures so that parents and others may complain if they feel that the curriculum is not being dealt with adequately in a school.
    Notwithstanding what my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam has said and the many graphic accounts that she gave of the system's shortcomings, some progress has been achieved since 1988. One third of local education authorities have reviewed, or are reviewing, their agreed syllabuses. The National Curriculum Council's recent analysis of SACRE reports noted that that represents, believe it or not, a level of curriculum development in RE unparalleled since 1944. Even that relatively modest progress is something that we have not necessarily seen before.
    Local SACREs have been active in encouraging schools and local authorities to give more attention to religious education. That is a positive sign. We should also acknowledge the part played by representatives of the Churches and of other faiths in contributing to that work. However, that does not mean that we should he satisfied, because the corollary of what I have pointed out—the burden of what my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam said—was that two thirds of agreed syllabuses have not been reviewed since 1988. I must admit that in some schools religious education is notable only by its absence from the curriculum.
    I assure my hon. Friend and other hon. Members that in the Department for Education we are actively considering what more we can do by encouraging local bodies to develop religious education or to bring their syllabuses more in line with what is required.
    Under the present framework, decisions on the content of RE are a local responsibility. I agree with David Pascall, the chairman of the NCC, who said only last Friday that local responsibility is proper since RE must take into account the views and beliefs of the local community in order to meet the needs of pupils effectively. He correctly identified the root of the problem when he said that, if religious educaiton is being marginalised, this reflects a failure by individual schools and local bodies to meet their responsibilities. We must address those issues at that level.
    In that context, my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam referred to the fact that only a small proportion of the population are represented in ethnic or religious minorities. That is the case. Census results which will be published soon will verify the latest figures. My hon. Friend must take into account the fact that that proportion is much higher in many communities. It would be wrong for us not to acknowledge that the proportion of ethnic and religious minorities—those with religions other than Christianity—is very high in some schools,

    1255
    communities and local education authorities. That factor must he taken into account in our considerations during this debate and beyond.
    I have emphasised that local authorities have the main responsibility for RE, but we must ensure that local education authorities and schools are discharging those responsibilities and statutory duties under the Act properly. The first and most important step, as my hon. Friend said, is inspection. In the Department for Education we ensure that we follow up cases where Her Majesty's inspectorate reports that the provision of RE at a school is inadequate, but one must accept that the number of schools inspected under the present regime is pitifully few. The new inspection regime that we shall introduce from next year will make a dramatic difference to the extent to which schools are inspected and to which the inspectorate will be charged to consider religious education and spiritual and moral values along with everything else in the curriculum, which will give us important new information to work on.
    Together with inspection, there is a system of complaints. While I note what my hon. Friend said about the difficulties faced by parents in making complaints, nevertheless the procedure is there and I encourage as many people as possible to use it. The complaints system can be demonstrated to have been effective when it has been used by parents, and that is the key factor. Complaints are relatively few and far between. One might conclude from that that my hon. Friend's concern might not he shared as widely as she would expect, but I suspect that, as in so many other things, people who feel aggrieved are not aware of the complaints procedure or are not taking full advantage of it. I hope that the debate will help to bring the attention of parents to the fact that the complaints procedure exists. Parents who feel aggrieved and unhappy should take the opportunities available to them.
    In addition to my hon. Friend, influential bodies are beginning to take up the debate on religious education. The Archbishop of York recently suggested that the Church of England and other faith groups should come together to develop model syllabuses that local authorities could consider adopting. Mr. David Pascall has offered the NCC's help in such a venture. That could be part of a wider range of work planned by the NCC, including a review of how the curriculum contributes to pupils' spiritual and moral development, an examination of agreed syllabuses produced since the 1988 Act to share best practice, work on the planning and delivery of religious education in schools, and work in consultation with the new office of Her Majesty's chief inspector in monitoring the curriculum. In those important respects, the NCC commitment to religious education is clear.
    I note the concerns expressed so eloquently by my hon. Friend about the proportion of time devoted to Christianity. The Department has legal advice that in most cases the mainly Christian requirement referred to in the statute will be reflected by
    1256
    "most attention being devoted to Christianity."
    That advice was sent to all local education authorities in March 1991. That might go some way towards meeting my hon. Friend's reasonable request.
    The view has been expressed that there may be some limit on the number of religions studied in schools. Although I am aware of the need to ensure that pupils are not confused by teaching that does not give them an understanding of the distinct nature of individual religions, as my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Kent (Mr. Rowe) pointed out, it would be difficult to set limits on the number of religions to be studied. That is an area that should be considered carefully.
    The Government and the Department are aware of the widespread concerns about this important matter.
    Dr. Spink: My hon. Friend has just mentioned the Government. May I draw the attention of the House to the empty Opposition Front Bench for this important debate?
    Mr. Forth: Indeed, but I want to emphasise——
    Mr. Enright: May I point out that a spokesman in our education team asked me to speak on behalf of the Opposition?
    Mr. Forth: The important conclusion to be drawn from the debate is the concern that is widely and deeply felt about this matter. It has been reflected by my hon. Friends who have attended and contributed to the debate. I want to leave them in no doubt that my colleagues in the Department and I are seized of the level of anxiety. The matter has been actively studied by the Department and will continue to be so. I can assure my hon. Friends that the Secretary of State and the Minister of State will continue to pursue these matters until they are satisfied, as I hope my hon. Friends will be, that this vital matter of religious education in schools in being dealt with properly and responsibly, and reflects the nature of society as we understand it.
    Mr. Rowe: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I know that you are jealous, as is Madam Speaker, of the privileges of this place. I should like to seek your advice on what seems to be prima facie a case of contempt of the House. The facts are briefly stated.
    A senior executive of a nationalised industry, British Rail, came to see me in my office three weeks ago. I sought assurances from him about a part of my constituency. I got no satisfaction from him, but I made it clear that this was a major political interest of mine. I now discover that yesterday he had a meeting in my constituency with the leaders of the three political groups locally and has forbidden them to tell me about it, although it was about this very subject. I should be glad of your ruling Mr. Deputy Speaker.
    Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Private meetings between individuals and chairmen of nationalised industries are not a matter for the Chair. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman's comments will he noted.

    Wheel Clamping
    12.31 pm
    Mr. John Spellar: Although this is not my maiden speech, I should like to begin by paying tribute to my predecessor, Peter Archer, now Lord Archer of Sandwell—an honour richly deserved and widely appreciated, and worthy of a man who is held in the highest regard in this House, his constituency and throughout the country. I have often heard that he will be a hard act to follow, and I can only reiterate those sentiments.
    I sought this debate because it is now self-evident that the problems created by wheel clamping on private land have, in the classic phrase, increased, are increasing and ought to be diminished. The cowboy dampers must be stopped. We cannot allow these outrages to continue throughout the summer, which is why we need to debate the subject here today before the summer recess.
    I am pleased to see the Home Office Minister in his place. We missed our hour-and-a-half debate at an ungodly hour last seek. It is important that this subject is in the remit of the Home Office, because that is where the major decisions will have to be made.
    I have already received a helpful letter from the Minister for Roads and Traffic, who highlighted two main reasons why we need a decision on this. The first is the increasing number of reports on the disturbing incidence of private clamping and the occurrence of outrages. There have been reports in the press, a campaign is being run by Today, and the matter has been raised elsewhere in the media, including "That's Life" and notably the Ed Doolan programme on Radio West Midlands. I should also like to pay tribute to the work being undertaken by the motoring organisations, the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club. They have been campaigning on behalf of their members—not only on individual cases, but on the wider general issue.
    Another reason that has made the subject pertinent for debate today is a recent decision by the Scottish courts. They have held that wheel clamping vehicles on private land and demanding a release fee is, under Scottish law, illegal extortion and theft. No one could have put it better. That is why I and more than 80 Members of the House have signed an early-day motion on wheel clamping. That is why I have a 10-minute Bill scheduled for when the House reassembles. Before then, I hope that the Minister can tell us of some progress in his discussions with other Departments and announce some action.
    I accept that the Minister's task is not an easy one and that, undoubtedly, there are careless, thoughtless and dangerous parkers. The question is, what is the appropriate remedy? The car dampers are not normally the landowners—the work is sub-contracted to them—but they are the judge, jury and court bailiff rolled into one. They perform all those tasks at the same time.
    It has been difficult to get this matter resolved in the courts. The AA and the RAC have taken up a number of cases on behalf of their members, but in every instance, either the money has been paid back before the case has come to court, or the dampers have gone out of business. The motoring organisations believe that some of them re-emerge somewhere else in a different guise to carry on
    1258
    the same business—M. Mouse wheel dampers become D. Duck wheel dampers. The motorists have never been recompensed for their frustration and inconvenience.
    It is especially unfortunate that no case has come before the courts, because the legal opinion sought by motoring organisations suggests that even under current legislation wheel clamping is potentially unlawful in England and Wales, especially as it is rare for a parked vehicle to cause damage to the land. Some of the so-called legal backing for private clamping draws its authority from the old laws that enabled landowners to retain animals that had strayed on to their land and eaten their grass and crops. I know that some cars may be described as gas guzzlers, but that is taking things too far.
    The nub of the issue is, what is the problem that private clamping—according to legal opinion, that is trespass on a vehicle—is supposed to solve? It cannot solve the problem of obstruction, because immobilising a vehicle must be the most inappropriate way of doing so. It comes down to the use of the land for parking. There may be problems with parking near offices and hospitals, but what about waste land? If owners want to restrict access to that land and charge for its use, they should erect a barrier or fencing. I am sure that the Minister would agree that we cannot tolerate land being leased or sub-contracted to clamping firms for the sole purpose of holding up a motorist and profiting from him by extracting a fee. The more they clamp, the more they make.
    The Conservative party has always set great store by motivation and incentive. It should consider how those qualities work in this instance, because the basic incentive of the wheel damper is to make the parking problem worse and to extract more money. That money is not spent on trying to solve the problem. His sole purpose is to get fees from those who park on certain land. It has got so bad that, in many places, cars are left deliberately on waste land so that other drivers are enticed on to it. They are then trapped and have to pay a release fee. I understand that some dampers are even offering profit-sharing schemes to landowners. They are constantly on the lookout for new sites. I am sure that the Minister would agree that that is a scandal.
    It is worth considering some of the cases which have excited public interest in recent weeks and which have led to increasing demands from all sides of the House for some redress. Just this week a driver who found himself in a dead end went on to rough land to turn his car. He was immediately blocked in by a wheel clamping firm and his car was clamped while the engine was still running. In another case, someone picked up a friend from a station and dropped him off at a hotel. He parked on an empty bit of land in front of a disused shop opposite the hotel just long enough to put the friend's bags into the hotel and to emerge to go to a meeting. That car was clamped. In another case someone parked in front of a hotel on part of a private roadway, just as he had done many times in the past five years. When he left the hotel, he found that his car had been clamped. The hotel apologised and said that the firm was causing great inconvenience to its guests. It eventually managed to track down that clamping firm. Someone else parked on vacant land next to a coach station and left his car for a couple of minutes to see if a coach had arrived. In that time his car was clamped.
    Those cases highlight one of the main problems—the rapid response of the wheel dampers. In many cases it appears that they watch land, ready to clamp anyone who

    1259
    parks on it. Some clamping firms advise their employees to get the money and to get the clamp off as quickly as possible because they do not want to discourage other people from parking.
    I have been told about an hon. Member who, at 3 o'clock one afternoon, parked on land behind a trade union office and had his car clamped. He telephoned the clamping firm and was told that it would cost £50 to have it released. He said that he had to attend an urgent advice surgery session and needed his car immediately. The firm replied that for one of its staff to attend and release the car within two hours would cost another £50. Fortunately, the hon. Member knew enough to get the local police to deal with the matter, but he had to call the police twice to get the clamp removed. There are some disgraceful cases.
    It is interesting to note the way in which the attitude of the police, and even of the Government, has changed in the matter. A year or so ago the police regarded it as essentially a matter between private citizens. Now, many police authorities and chief constables are becoming increasingly worried about the abuse that is occurring and the difficulties that they are having to face in the matter. That change of attitude should be noted generally.
    A particularly worrying case involved a woman who parked her car on some waste land near a theatre in a town with which she was not familiar. At about 11 o'clock at night she came out of the theatre to find her vehicle clamped. I was informed by telephone today of a similar case in London. The lady who parked on some waste land was told that it would probably be a couple of hours before her vehicle could be released. Would we want any member of our family to be on waste land in an unfamiliar town waiting for a vehicle damper to turn up? We should not subject people, particularly women, to such treatment.
    I was told of the amusing incident of an AA emergency vehicle which went on a breakdown call-out. The engineer could not find the vehicle, stopped to investigate on foot, and found on returning to his vehicle that it had been clamped. At least the AA was able to get one of its recovery vehicles to lift the clamped van on board, take it to the depot and have the clamp removed. That story highlights the absurdity of what is happening.
    The charges are also outrageous, £50 a day being the going rate. If one does not have the money and must go and get it and return the following day, the charge is £100. That seems to be the bottom rate, and in many areas it can cost much more. The record that I have is £240 at Hebden Bridge. Lord Ingham may wish to go to Hebden Bridge, but that is a high price to pay for a visit.
    I have information about a health visitor whose vehicle was clamped while she was visiting a convalescent patient. The stories are legion. Similar cases have been drawn to the attention of hon. Members in all parts of the House, and I am pleased to see in his place the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Waller), who hopes to take part in the debate to lend support to my case. This is a widespread issue and it is getting worse.
    The Scottish courts have ruled that wheel clamping is extortion. I am not a legal expert, but I am advised that under English law the offence of blackmail is close to extortion, as is the law of trespass, operating not just against the vehicle owner but against the damper. The Home Office has sufficient legal experts to study the problem and reach the right answers.
    1260
    I hope that before we rise for the recess the Minister will announce firm action against these modern-day highwaymen and will take action against cowboy dampers who are causing misery to motorists, our electors.
    12.43 pm
    Mr. Gary Waller: I strongly support the case made by the hon. Member for Warley, West (Mr. Spellar), and I am grateful to him for allowing me to take part in his debate. We are united in our view that the practice of wheel clamping on private land should be regulated by law.
    The media have given wide coverage to some abuses that have occurred. There are widespread examples of wheel clamping firms which, frankly, have been trying to get away with murder by charging motorists extortionate sums to have their cars unclamped or to retrieve them when they have been removed. In the few cases where victims have challenged the charge in court, the firm has generally accepted defeat, ungraciously or otherwise, so that there are no judicial decisions which could provide guidance to motorists. Cases in which victims have fought back are undoubtedly just the tip of the iceberg. No one can know how many people have paid large sums without seeking to assert their rights.
    I support the view that motorists are at least entitled to full information about the consequences of parking on private land without permission. Maximum fees should be laid down in regulations, and arrangements must be made for clamps to be removed within a reasonable period. Those whose vehicles are clamped should be informed what action they need to take to have their cars released.
    In the past, the Government have been complacent about the issue. That is demonstrated by the response, in November 1990, to the RAC by the then Minister for Roads and Traffic, when he said:
    "there is no obvious role for central government involvement".
    There is a need for central Government involvement and for the law to be changed. As the hon. Member for Warley, West said, there is a case for wheel clamps to be used on vehicles parked on private land, but the need for the practice to be controlled is at least as great on private land as it is on the public highway.
    Reputable firms exist—indeed, a firm in Keighley can make a claim to that status. It is in their interest that the cowboys should not be allowed to tarnish the reputation of that type of business. Above all, motorists should know where they stand and should not go on being mugged by some extremely unsavoury organisations.
    12.46 pm
    The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. Michael Jack): I congratulate the hon. Member for Warley, West (Mr. Spellar) on raising this subject. I am glad to be able to participate in the debate. I am sorry that we did not meet at an earlier hour but the clock beat us on that occasion. I also congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Mr. Waller) on his contribution. He has a long and honourable tradition of interest in transport matters in this House, and I am delighted that we have had a chance to look at those issues this morning.
    I, too, am aware of the considerable concerns on the subject expressed by correspondents in the press. I congratulate both hon. Members on the fact that they have

    1261
    drawn the House's attention to specific examples of bad practice. They have done the House and the country a service in so doing.
    It struck me that many of the attitudes displayed to the problem are akin to acts of piracy. Perhaps I could add another description: we may be dealing with parking pirates. Clearly, some important issues underlie what the hon. Member for Warley, West said and I shall try to deal with them.
    The hon. Member for Warley, West and my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley mentioned motoring organisations. I was much taken by the clear advice in the RAC's briefing to Members for this debate. I am sure that those legitimate organisations which my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley mentioned will take notice of the four-point advice steps that the RAC gave. They seem to be clear, good common sense about the right way to go about the problem.
    The hon. Member for Warley, West rightly drew the House's attention to those practising in the wrong way, which is at the centre of our debate. I shall do my best to respond to the many interesting points that were raised.
    It is important to clarify the scope of what we are debating. The issue relates to the practice of wheel clamping properly carried out on private property. The question is whether the owner of the private property should be allowed to immobilise a vehicle parked on his land without his permission and charge a fee for the vehicle's release. Our principal concern should be to satisfy ourselves that the right balance is struck between the legitimate interests of a private landowner to protect his or her property and the rights and reasonable expectations of the motorist. The hon. Member for Warley, West said that other motives may lie behind that exercise. I have taken careful note of what he said, and I assure him that I shall look carefully into the specific points he raised.
    I cannot offer a firm conclusion on some of the issues this afternoon because they raise untested areas of the law. However, I underline my assurance that the concerns that the hon. Gentleman expressed are being urgently considered. I shall come to further developments on that.
    Hon. Members may be aware that some wheel clamping is legitimate on public roads. That activity is regulated by section 104 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the release fee of £38 for that legitimate exercise is properly prescribed. Such clamping has made a significant contribution to solving the problem of parking in and around central London.
    The hon. Member for Warley, West spoke about the Scottish judgment, which has raised the profile of the issue. The question of the legality of this activity was answered by the Scottish Court of justiciary in the negative. It found that private wheel clamping amounts to extortion and theft under Scottish law, and we are currently considering the implications of that judgment for England and Wales. The position is not straightforward. As in so many other areas, the laws of Scotland and those of England and Wales are not the same. That begs the question whether private wheel clamping in England would amount to theft.
    Under Scottish law, it is not necessary for a charge of theft to prove an intention permanently to deprive an owner of his property. The essence of the offence appears to be appropriation, by which control and possession are
    1262
    taken from the owner. English law, on the other hand, provides in section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 that a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
    It is clear, therefore, that the finding of the Court of Justiciary has no direct relevance to the position in England and Wales. It would be a matter for a court to determine in any particular case whether the fixing of a wheel clamp to an improperly parked vehicle amounted to dishonest appropriation, or whether it involved any intention permanently to deprive the owner of the vehicle. It would not be proper for me to offer a view on the likelihood of such a charge being sustained, although hon. Members may feel that it would be straining the meaning of the Act a little if it were.
    Mr. Speller: Will the Minister ask the Department to consider whether the offence of blackmail under English law might have an impact on these cases?
    Mr. Jack: I carefully noted what the hon. Gentleman said about that when he spoke about another aspect of this complex area of yet untested law. I shall evaluate what he has said, but I should now like to turn to other aspects of the law.
    Theft is not the only offence that may be relevant. Other elements of the Theft Act 1968 offer a further perspective on this matter. Section 21 makes it an offence for a person, with a view to gain for himself or another, or with intent to cause loss to another, to make any unwarranted demand with menaces. Again, of course, it would be for a court to determine, but a court could find that an offence had been committed if, for example, a demand for payment was made against the threat that the vehicle would otherwise continue to be immobilised and, particularly, if the fee was deemed to be excessive. That applies even more so if no notice had been displayed warning drivers of the risk of clamping.
    That brings me to the RAC advice on that matter. I am sure that the House will not need reminding that any assault against the person of the motorist or, indeed, the clamper would be an offence. The civil law may also be relevant. The act of fixing a clamp to a vehicle could amount to the civil tort of trespass to goods, which involves direct physical interference with goods without lawful justification. I understand that such a tort can be committed even without damage to the goods, although any damages recoverable would not normally be substantial unless there was physical damage.
    Refusing to return a vehicle unless a fee is paid may also be actionable as an act of conversion under civil law. I am aware of at least one recent case involving that branch of the law in which a motorist was able to secure the immediate release of his vehicle. Clearly, some of the nuisance which hon. Members have described can arise if people employed by a wheel-clamping firm operate in an unpredictable or irresponsible manner. The hon. Member for Warley, West graphically described a number of such cases. If a court were to decide that a civil wrong or criminal offence had been committed, it would have to reach a decision on the facts of the case about where liability should rest.
    It is clear that there is widespread and justifiable concern about the practice, but we should not overlook the real nuisance which can be caused by drivers who park

    1263
    their vehicles on private property without regard to any inconvenience they may cause to others. I appreciate that there is a legitimate need to prevent problems with access to land which may be needed, for example, to move vehicles on or off it. The examples cited by the hon. Member for Warley, West went further than that, and I shall consider what he said.
    Owners of private property can, not unnaturally, become frustrated by people who regularly park on their land, sometimes blocking access for themselves, their families or their clients. Most of the concern expressed in the debate has been for the drivers whose vehicles have been immobilised, and the consequences that follow when they try to get their cars released. I share those concerns, but it is important to bear in mind that we are talking about someone who has parked on private property to which he has no right of access, sometimes in direct defiance of notices specifically identifying a plot of land as a private car park. As the hon. Gentleman said, there are examples involving the trade in clamping in which such strictures have not been followed—but I am glad that he raised that point.
    Such actions do not necessarily give the owner of the property the right to take whatever action he wishes, however unreasonable, to deal with the nuisance. but I think that it is necessary to acknowledge that there are two sides to the issue. As the hon. Gentleman said, the owner of property may, of course, take other steps to prevent parking on his land—a barrier or a gate can be effective—but if those steps fail, should he necessarily be prevented from taking other remedial action?
    If further remedial action is justified and within the law, what steps can the motorist reasonably expect the landowner and the damper to have taken? I sense from the debate that many of the complaints which hon. Members and others have brought to my attention concern the manner of clamping as much as the clamping itself. The posting of clear warning notices, and a sensible approach to the level of fee and the manner of its collection—including, as the hon. Gentleman rightly drew to the attention of the House, a regard for the particular circumstances of the motorist after his car has been clamped—are the kind of issues which must be high on the agenda for future discussions.
    As I have outlined, it seems that in certain circumstances a court may find that wheel clamping on private land amounts to a criminal offence or civil wrong. It is unfortunate that, so far as we are aware, neither the civil nor the criminal law has been authoritatively tested in the courts on the broad issue. There are—as the House will appreciate—difficult legal questions here which the
    1264
    Government are urgently considering. I appreciate hon. Members' frustration that the situation is not clearer. Indeed, I share that frustration—I have seen some such situations for myself—but I assure them that we are considering the matter urgently, including the question whether any action is needed to prohibit or to regulate the use of wheel clamps on private property.
    I shall take fully into account the examples which both hon. Members who spoke in the debate raised. If the hon. Member for Warley, West cares to provide more detailed information in correspondence with me, I invite him to do so, and it will all be considered. Once again, I congratulate him on raising the matter——
    Mr. Spellar rose——
    Mr. Jack:—and before I finish my speech, I shall give way to him.
    Mr. Spellar: Will the Minister tell us when the deliberations are likely to come to a conclusion, and when he will be able to make an announcement?
    Mr. Jack: One of the factors which has become clear during the debate is the complexity of the untested law involved. Something which has become clear to me in my short time at the Home Office is that sometimes to act in haste means to repent at leisure. We must carefully consider the implications of what has been said. In my speech I have tried to balance the needs of the legitimate private landowner who may say, "This is causing a nuisance; I have no option but to resort to clamping," with the considerations put before me by the hon. Member. He said that people were almost turning clamping into a business so that the legitimacy argument was lost. He also said that bad practice had come as people sought to make gains.
    Our task must be to consider the full implications of both sides. Private people in residential areas may have a legitimate case for saying that clamping is the best way in which to deter people from blocking the entrances to garages, for example.
    The hon. Member for Warley, West highlighted another matter which is a new aspect of debate in the House. I am personally delighted that he has gone so far in highlighting it. I give him the assurance that we will look at the matter with all urgency. I am aware that we must make quality decisions in the area if they are found to be appropriate. I should like a little time to study the matter to ensure that we can examine fully the evidence put before us. Clearly the Royal Automobile Club——
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.

    MOD Jobs (North Yorkshire)
    1 pm
    Mr. John Greenway: I am grateful for the opportunity to catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker, just two hours or so before the House rises for a very long recess, and to raise a matter of considerable importance to my constituents and to the constituents of my hon. Friends who represent North Yorkshire seats. I am grateful that my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) is in the Chamber to support me in this brief debate. I also thank my hon. Friend the Minister for finding time to respond to the debate. It is a great pleasure to see him in his post and he is clearly enjoying life in the ministerial ranks.
    I draw the Minister's attention to the fact that I am wearing the tie of the Armed Forces and Parliament Trust. More of those ties are being seen around the Corridors of the Palace. I was one of the first three guinea-pigs who entered the Armed Forces and Parliament Trust scheme which was introduced by the then Speaker and by Mr. Neil Thorne, who then represented Ilford, South.
    I have found membership of the trust to be an extremely enjoyable and illuminating experience. One thing it has taught me is the importance of Ministry of Defence establishments in North Yorkshire, not least the importance of the Royal Air Force base at Linton-on-Ouse where I was placed for my year on the scheme.
    North Yorkshire has a fine tradition of Ministry of Defence work. It is home to a number of distinguished regiments and armed forces. Apart from RAF Linton-on-Ouse, my constituency has the newly commissioned early warning station at RAF Fylingdales up on the moors. I visited the station some months ago to see the huge work load there with civilian jobs of some quality involved in the preparation of the station and now, thankfully, in its manning.
    There are two Ministry of Defence establishments at Strensall—Strensall barracks and the Strensall Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers depot. I shall devote most of my remarks to that depot. As my hon. Friend the Minister knows, our right hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces announced on Tuesday the intention to close the REME depot at Strensall. Other matters have affected North Yorkshire Ministry of Defence establishments in recent months and have given rise to some concern.
    The future of the support command for the RAF establishment at Harrogate, where more than 1,000 civilians are employed, is still not settled. I must tell the Minister, on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate (Mr. Banks), that many of us are still unconvinced by the Government's arguments for the removal of those jobs from North Yorkshire to Brampton and to RAF Wyton in Cambridgeshire. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will bear it in mind that we are still not convinced of the Government's case on that and that he will respond to our request for more information about the costings which do not seem to us to have been properly worked through.
    There are, however, some bright spots, and it would be wrong to concentrate exclusively on the potential problems stemming from proposed closures. At Leeming and at Catterick there has been a substantial enhancement of armed forces and civilian personnel requirements—to
    1266
    which my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks will refer, in the hope of some reassurance from the Minister on the future of Catterick following the announcement this week of the proposed transfer of the Royal Air Force Regiment from Catterick to Suffolk.
    We are also grateful that at York, at the Imphal barracks in Fulford, the former north-east district headquarters is to have an enhanced role, following "Options for Change". The new eastern district headquarters will take on an even more important role than before, which is good news for many of my constituents in greater York who work at the Imphal headquarters.
    Equally, it would be churlish not to pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Mr. King) who, as Secretary of State, piloted through the "Options for Change" programme, listened to our entreaties and retained all the Yorkshire regiments—a much-deserved retention because of their fine traditions and recruitment records. That action did not go unnoticed.
    The latest string of announcements have nevertheless created the impression that much of the Ministry of Defence activity in North Yorkshire is being shut down. People want to know whether there are to be any more announcements, any more skeletons in the cupboard, or whether we now know the full extent of the changes, which will affect people's jobs, about which they are understandably anxious.
    The announcement this week that the REME depot at Strensall is to be shut down has caused considerable dismay. Two hundred and fifteen civilians work there. The consultation document, of which I have a copy, makes but fleeting and almost dismissive reference to the reasons behind the decision. It offers no properly worked out argument for the closure, referring merely to only 25 per cent. of the work load coming from York and to the fact that the volume of its dependency is not expected to increase in the future.
    There follows the sweeping statement that having reviewed the position there is a decision that 41 district workshop at Strensall should close on financial, engineering and operational grounds. That is the sum total of the Government's argument.
    That argument does not bear much scrutiny, because 41 Command is the only workshop facility for telecommunications test and calibration in the Ministry of Defence. The closure of the workshop would have far-reaching effects on support for the British Army and all our armed forces establishments. What is more, if the depot is closed, no facility between Leicester and Stirling will provide the support that Strensall provides. About 141 Ministry of Defence establishments depend on Strensall; all would incur higher transport costs, although we are not told how much higher or what the collection arrangements would be.
    There has been a suggestion that collection sites might be established. Who would man them? I suggest that there is a real danger of only small savings accruing from the closure going ahead. I do not dismiss the need to find savings in defence expenditure, but in this case those savings could be more than outweighed by the extra costs, because of the logistical difficulties that would ensue from the closure of this fine facility and the consequent dispersal of its professional skills.
    Perhaps the Minister can tell us why he and the MoD believe that we can close Strensall and transfer the work to

    1267
    Catterick or contract it out when no case has been made to support that. I accept that it is about 50 miles away, but the Catterick depot supports the mainline infantry. It will also have extra work when it supports the 6th Armoured Brigade when it returns from Germany in due course. The Strensall depot supports the Rapid Reaction Corps, that jewel in the crown of the "Options for Change" programme.
    The Strensall depot provides vehicle and communications equipment maintenance support. The facility at Strensall also provides the Army with flexibility. That was illustrated in May when I drove along the A6 autoroute in France during the last recess. Driving in the opposite direction was a convoy of white United Nations ambulances. They made an impressive sight. Being aware of the troubles and difficulties in Yugoslavia, my wife and I were much relieved by that sight. At long last, we were doing something about the problem. Little did I know then that those ambulances and vehicles were prepared, maintained and serviced for their journey at the Strensall depot in my constituency. In fact, I live round the corner from the depot and perhaps it was rather remiss of me not to notice that all that work was going on.
    The Strensall depot was able to prepare those vehicles very quickly and at short notice. That shows the value of the depot to the British Army. We do not know when we will have to call upon our armed forces to respond in times of war, a subject which we had to discuss in this place not so long ago in respect of the middle east, or for relief operations. It would be a retrograde step to shut the Strensall depot when the argument in favour of closure seems so threadbare.
    I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will respond to my points and perhaps say whether we can come to some better arrangements about the proposal. As I understand it, the normal consultation period with the unions for a closure announcement of this kind is about 20 working days. That is not long enough at the best of times. However, given that the House is to go into recess and many people will be on holiday, it is incumbent on the Minister to respond to the not unreasonable request that the consultation period should be extended and that no formal decision to close Strensall depot should be taken at least until after the House returns after the recess.
    I should like to go a stage further than that. In any event, it would be premature to close the depot until the market-testing initiative on contractorisation, referred to in the consultation document, has been carried out. It seems crazy to say that we think that we can settle some of the current work load through contractorisation and that there will be a market-testing initiative to discover whether that is feasible, but we will close the depot before we have the results of the market test initiative. I cannot see the logic in that argument and, understandably, neither can the work force.
    We all want to save expenditure and cut waste, particularly in administration. The Strensall and Catterick depots are close to each other and closely interrelated, as has always been the case with the various barracks around North Yorkshire between Catterick, Strensall and Imphal. Given that they are so closely related, why cannot one depot remain as a satellite of the other? At this juncture, I should not like to suggest which way round that should be, because I understand that they are of a similar size, but my suggestion would prevent waste administration and it might lead to the satellite depot shedding some staff,
    1268
    particularly if the contractorisation experiment worked. Expenditure that is likely to be incurred on various military establishments having to send their work loads all around the country, with extra transport and collection costs, would be better spent on maintaining a depot, albeit slimmed down, at one or other site. I suspect that it might be in Strensall, given that Catterick is to expand its operations under the "Options for Change" programme.
    I hope that I have demonstrated to my hon. Friend the Minister that the proposal raises many questions and that we need more time to prove that Strensall depot, which has a fine history and fine traditions—I pay tribute to all the staff who have worked there—should be given an opportunity to show that it still has an important role in the support of our armed forces. I hope that my hon. Friend will agree that we should have more time to put our case.
    1.16 pm
    Mr. William Hague: I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) for raising this subject and for allowing me a few moments to make a contribution. Like my hon. Friend, I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Minister is present.
    I am prompted to participate in the debate by the announcement on Tuesday that the RAF Regiment is to move from Catterick, after a long association with the town, and be concentrated entirely in Suffolk. We in the Richmond and Catterick area are very sad to see the RAF Regiment go. It has had a long association with the area and it is well liked. Many generations have enjoyed working there. The regiment's relationship with, and contribution to, the local community have been extremely positive. However, we accept that the decision was taken after a long review. The decision is not a surprise. Difficult decisions must be made during the "Options for Change" process. Some battles will be won for North Yorkshire and some will be lost, but we accept that my hon. Friend the Minister and his colleagues have a difficult decision to make.
    I was pleased to receive a letter from the Minister of State for the Armed Forces earlier this week, stating:
    "Everything possible would be done to avoid redundancies amongst the 75 civilian … employees at RAF Catterick. The Army is likely to have an alternative use for the base. This could provide job opportunities for the existing civilian employees, and there may also be opportunities for alternative employment in Catterick garrison."
    I ask my hon. Friend to ensure that high priority is given to ensuring that those 75 civilian employees will be found alternative employment. I ask him also to make a decision as soon as possible about the future of the base, even though the RAF Regiment is not to leave until the end of 1993 or early 1994. The sooner my hon. Friend decides the future of the base and whether the Army will use it, the better it will be for all concerned and the sooner the local community will know how the matter will develop. I hope that my hon. Friend will be able to.find an alternative use for the base by the Army.
    In many ways, this matter is exceptional. Over the past few years, the extent of Ministry of Defence employment, the number of armed forces and the number of service men based in my constituency have continued to expand, particularly because of RAF Leeming being established as a major air base and the expansion of Catterick garrison. I emphasise to my hon. Friend the Minister that that is

    1269
    extremely welcome in the area. Notwithstanding a few problems of noise compensation that we still have to sort out at RAF Leeming, the local community and the armed forces work extremely well together and have a good relationship. That demonstrates my other point.
    The north is an excellent region in which to locate a larger share of the armed forces. It has lower property prices. Money has greater purchasing power because the salaries of those who work in the armed forces are lower. Many people can work close to their homes. The north is an excellent place to locate an ever-increasing proportion of our armed forces.
    1.20 pm
    The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Mr. Jonathan Aitken): I begin by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) for introducing this important debate. I have been much impressed by the concern that he has rightly shown for his constituents and by his expertise on military matters, which he kindly said was due in no small measure to his experience as a guinea pig, as he put it, in the Armed Forces and Parliament Trust.
    I listened to both my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale and my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) with particular sympathy. I know their constituencies reasonably well. I once aspired to represent the Thirsk and Malton constituency which, following subdivisions, both their constituencies now include. Although my period as a prospective parliamentary candidate was not the most successful episode of my career, I formed a great affection for the people of Yorkshire and a love for the countryside of Yorkshire. Therefore, I have some feeling for the places that my hon. Friends described, such as Strensall and Catterick. So I reply to the debate with some local knowledge as well as on behalf of the Ministry of Defence.
    My hon. Friends were right to say that Yorkshire is a county of great military excellence and tradition. This is rather an all-Yorkshire occasion. Although the impartiality of your office precludes you from doing anything but listening to our debate, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am sure that as the Member for Parliament for Pontefract and Castleford you concur with the kind tributes that were paid to the excellence of the various regiments and depots in Yorkshire. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, North-East (Mr. Kirkhope), who is present on the Front Bench in his silent capacity as a Government Whip, has also expressed great concern on behalf of his constituents who are affected by some of the decisions about Harrogate. He will also echo the good and justified tributes that were paid to the various installations and regiments in Yorkshire.
    Some 17,500 Ministry of Defence personnel are based in Yorkshire. The county has the fifth highest number of MOD posts in the United Kingdom. Pro rata to population, that rises to third highest. In addition, the Ministry spends some £200 million annually on equipment in the Yorkshire and Humberside area, providing direct employment for about 4,000 more people.
    Among the main defence establishments in North Yorkshire is the large garrison at Catterick. Of course, the city of York has been chosen for the headquarters of the
    1270
    new enlarged eastern district. My hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale has already mentioned the various RAF bases and fine regiments, so we can safely say that Yorkshire is well represented in the order of battle of both the RAF and the Army. There are three county regiments—the Green Howards, the Prince of Wales's Own Regiment and the Duke of Wellington's Regiment—in addition to contributions from other regiments.
    The problem that my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale has rightly raised of some 189 jobs at the 41 district workshop in York must be seen from the perspective from the great pride that everyone feels about the wider defence presence in Yorkshire. The Ministry faces some difficult decisions as a result of "Options For Change". I fully understand and sympathise with the shock that my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Ryedale and his constituents must have felt when we announced that we proposed to close 41 district workshop in the constituency. I certainly appreciate his anxiety about the effect that the closure will have on employment in the area.
    I welcome the opportunity to explain why we have to make reductions in the Army's static workshop organisation and why we propose that the workshop in York should be among those to be closed.
    The Army's static workshop organisation now consists of a workshop in Northern Ireland, three base workshops in England, nine district workshops in England, Scotland and Wales, a small workshop at Long Marston and one base workshop in Germany. The organisation as a whole is working at well below capacity: overheads are high and greater efficiency could be achieved.
    "Options for Change" requires a significant restructuring of the Army, and although the variety and diversity of equipment—will remain largely unchanged, there will be a considerable reduction in the volume of the repair load. It has been calculated, for instance, that the base repair load—that is, the in-depth overhaul of equipment, will reduce in the post-options era to less than 60 per cent. of the former requirement. We have therefore had to conduct a review to assess the number of workshops required to support the Army in future.
    The district workshops, of which York and Catterick are examples, are located in areas of Army concentration throughout the United Kingdom. They provide first and second line support for Regular Army and Territorial Army units and undertake a limited amount of base repair work. The current in-house work load is of the order of 1·4 million man hours a year. In addition, some 800,000 man hours of work are carried out under contract. It has been calculated that the redeployment of units to the United Kingdom from the British Army of the Rhine will raise the annual in-house load to some 1·5 million man hours. However, even this will leave a significant amount of spare capacity in the workshops and we reluctantly, but inevitably, came to the conclusion that some should be closed, including, I regret to say, 41 workshop in York.
    My hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale asked questions about a specific problem, to which I should like to reply, and he made certain requests. First, he asked, justifiably, whether 20 days was too short a period for meaningful consultations and whether we could do a little better than that, particularly when the House is in recess and some people are away on holiday. I can grant that request easily, because the Ministry's consultation period provides for a minimum of 20 days, which can be extended if the closure raises difficult issues, as we acknowledge it

    1271
    does, and if the unions or the local Member of Parliament asks for an extension. I hope that my hon. Friend feels that we have met him on that request.
    My hon. Friend asked whether we could arrange for the necessary clearances for him to visit the workshop. We shall be pleased to make those arrangements for him.
    I find it harder to grant my hon. Friend's second request to postpone the closure pending the outcome of the market-testing initiative. I cannot agree to that, because of the huge over-capacity in the workshop organisation, which will increase. There is simply insufficient work load to maintain the workshop organisation at its present level, and closures must be made. The market-testing initiative will be carried out only in the workshops that remain.
    Next my hon. Friend asked whether the two workshops in Yorkshire could he retained, one as a satellite of the other. Again, I cannot see my way to agreeing to that. It simply would not resolve the problem of the great over-capacity that exists in the Army static workshop organisation.
    My hon. Friend also asked whether we were worried that there would he no workshop capable of performing highly technical telecommunications work in the calibration field, particularly between Stirling and Leicester. I can confirm that there is no facility at Catterick. We expect to place specialised work out to local contract repair. There will he a good opportunity for many local telecommunications companies. In addition, where really specialised work is necessary, local collecting points will be provided to move the work, where necessary, to other Army workshops. We can give further details of that in the consultation period. I hope that I have dealt with the main points of my hon. Friend's plea on behalf of Strensall.
    My hon. Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks asked about the RAF Regiment and the changes affecting Catterick. I was delighted by his warm tribute to that regiment. Last Tuesday my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces announced changes to the future size and shape of the regiment. The reorganisation follows an exhaustive study which has been an important part of our programme to create a more efficient structure for the RAF for the future.
    I assure my hon. Friend that it is the required size and shape of the RAF Regiment, which was carefully examined, which will result in the announced move from Catterick. I believe that the majority of the affected RAF staff will be relocated to other RAF Regiment duties. Unfortunately, there will be some officer redundancies, but we hope that the alternative use of RAF Catterick by the Army will provide job opportunities for the existing civilian work force. It may also create job opportunities at the Catterick garrison. I understand my hon. Friend's concern, but I think that I am right to say that, in this case, the effect on his constituents and the local economy will not be great.
    Difficult decisions have had to be made. I am afraid that I cannot please all my hon. Friends in their requests. Yorkshire has 17,500 service men. Therefore, I hope that my hon. Friends will agree that the changes are fairly small and will not unduly affect the military situation and its installations in Yorkshire.

    Southern Africa (Drought)
    1.30 pm
    Mr. Simon Hughes: I am grateful for the opportunity on this last day before the summer recess to debate, albeit briefly, the current drought in southern Africa. It is no coincidence that this debate follows a substantial and significant one in the other place yesterday, because many Members on both sides in both places, as well as the Government, are aware of the enormity of the potential disaster facing Africa today. It is because that disaster could be so unprecedented in its scale that it is vital that the House should speak on behalf of the country and say what we should and could do to prevent it.
    Two of today's earlier debates have centred on regeneration and job retention in docklands and in north Yorkshire respectively. Nothing that we debate about social security, employment security or the domestic security of our residents is in the same league as the debate on southern Africa. Many members of the public understand that; therefore, we must adopt a wholly different type of stance in addressing this issue.
    My interest in southern Africa goes back a long time, but only a month ago today, at the invitation of the director of Oxfam, I had the privilege to touch down with him and four others in Zambia for a five-day visit, followed by a similar length visit to Zimbabwe. To be completely honest, I think that Oxfam originally hoped that my right hon. Friend the Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Sir D. Steel) would undertake the visit. He was unable to go, so I was asked to go in his place.
    The new direct or of Oxfam, Dr. Bryer, accompanied me, together with Justin Forsyth of Oxfam, who is expert in southern African affairs, and its press officer, Liam Curran. We were also accompanied by an experienced BBC television crew, Bill Hamilton and Baz Solanki, who have visited Albania and elsewhere and reported vividly from other countries as they go through major crisis.
    The purpose of our visit was clear. Reports had reached us that the sub-region of southern Africa was facing the worst drought in living memory. Oxfam is 50 years old this year, and throughout its existence it has taken up the challenge of trying to respond to disaster and famine throughout the world. It believed that the best way to respond to this drought was to send a delegation so that people could see with their own eyes and report back.
    Within two days of returning from Zimbabwe and Zambia, we went to see the Minister for Overseas Development and her officials, who received us courteously. I believe that that meeting was effective. I had talks with the Labour spokesman, the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd), and her colleague the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours). On the following Monday, I visited the Vice President of the European Commission, with the Oxfam team responsible for such matters. Oxfam officials have also had several discussions with officials in the Overseas Development Administration and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office elsewhere in the United Kingdom and in Brussels.
    We came back to present the message of what could and should be done. A great thing about the visit was the way in which it was planned. I take no responsibility for that, but applaud the way in which Oxfam thought it through. By taking an experienced and competent television crew,

    1273
    we could report back direct to the widest public in this country. People also saw the films in other countries across the channel. In the week that we came back there was BBC television coverage on four days—morning, lunchtime, afternoon and evening—as well as on children's "Newsround" later that week.
    The result is that we have been able to contribute to what the debates yesterday and today seek to do—to raise the profile of the issue and to ensure that in this country we are not unaware of the severity of the crisis.
    I do not want to go over what was said yesterday in another place, as those who follow our proceedings can read the report and it would be repetitious simply to go over facts. However, I urge people to refer to that debate and to view it alongside this one.
    I want to describe the present picture, and to share some reflections on my visit. I am grateful that I had the benefit of an earlier conversation with the Minister on the subject, and I hope that we can identify new ways in which we can do something. The purpose of the debate is not merely to make people aware of what is going on, but to make them realise that we can do something as a country and we can use our influence at home and abroad.
    Briefly, I shall describe the scale of the problem. It is not a cliché to say that it is the worst drought in living memory, and that is confirmed by the facts. The region is normally a net exporter of food to the rest of the world, especially grain and cereals, and it is the grain basket of Africa. It is a part of Africa that is normally self-sufficient and is not regarded as subject to this sort of crisis. Because there was no rain last year, and because in some parts of southern Africa there has been no rain, or below average rainfall, for the past 11 or 12 years—we were told that by some of the people that we visited—the crisis has not suddenly arrived but has built up over many years.
    The figures have been identified by the United Nations, according to the best advice given to it. Potentially, 18 million people could die of famine. That is more than one quarter of the population of this country. People have already died because of the drought in southern Africa. Because of weakness through lack of food, they have not been able to survive. We visited villages in the eastern provinces of Zambia and the southern part of Zimbabwe where, within the preceding day or two, people had received their first food for weeks. They had been living on roots and berries, which have no nutritional value but give a little moisture and a semblance of food. In some cases they had rubbed the leaves of plants to make salt, which was the only other food for them to eat.
    Water is the life source, and some people either have none or they find a little stagnant water left in the bottom of a pool perhaps a mile away. They might find a drop of water in an almost empty well or in a borehole in the back of beyond away from the villages. Rivers and streams are dry, and reservoirs that normally contain 100 ft of water are all but empty.
    We visited places where the villagers, often women, had to walk 10 miles to borrow a bucket—because they had none—and walk another 10 miles to collect a bucketful of stagnant, polluted water from a source shared by wild animals, and then carry it back to their families. It will not surprise the House to hear that they face not just hunger and malnutrition but the diseases that follow, such as
    1274
    cholera, TB, malaria and dysentery. Already, there have been significant numbers of deaths among the elderly and children, and even the healthy middle-aged.
    We were told by one family that it had 20 cattle last year. Fifteen had died through lack of water and food and the remaining five were too weak to be of any use. In many parts, people have no cattle to produce food for them, and their income and wealth have been destroyed through no fault of their own. Instead of acres, mile upon mile, of fields growing green, providing crops for the people of rural southern Africa and others, there is a brown horizon yielding nothing.
    Relief agencies and Governments have been asked to respond and provide the grain needed immediately. But including the other crisis area of Africa, the horn, we are still about $550 million short of the money needed to buy the food and provide the aid needed to meet the immediate crisis.
    The countries concerned are democracies which are grappling to cope with imposed, though agreed, terms for their economic development. Those terms were laid down by the International Monetary Fund. They are doing their best to turn old demand economies into capitalist economies. They are removing subsidies and thereby increasing food prices to their people. They are trying to balance their books and pay off their debts, and so far they have not defaulted.
    In addition to trying to cope with incredibly difficult economic problems—far more difficult than we face in the present recession—they are facing additional hardships such as the prevalence of HIV and Aids and thousands of refugees coming over the border from countries such as Mozambique, where there is war as well as famine. So this is an accumulated crisis.
    There has been a good response from Britain and the European Community, but we need a general awareness that more must be done. A part of the world that can normally look after itself—and look after us in large measure—is saying not that it needs handouts but that it cannot now do everything to help itself. Given the tools, it will do the job, but it desperately requires help to overcome the immediate crisis. It needs food and cash, and we must ship it quickly through the coastal into the landlocked countries in the centre of the region. We must ensure that it is distributed effectively. That will enable us to prevent drought from creating famine and disaster from becoming an unparalleled crisis in the history of the continent. We can also create the possibility of survival and restructuring thereafter. For that, many obvious things are needed: seed, fertiliser, tools, tractors, technical equipment, and so on.
    To show how desperate the position is, may I complete the picture by illustrating the consequences? If there is no water, the hydroelectric scheme cannot produce as much electricity. Therefore, it cannot supply as much industrial production and industry will lay off people. Those people become unemployed and produce less, sell less and earn less. The country's balance of payments problems are therefore far more difficult to resolve. So the whole of the economy and everyone in the region are directly affected as a result of what may appear on the surface to be a crisis of the rural economy.
    The agenda for our response should he as follows. First, as President of the European Community for the remainder of this year, it will be within our term of office to decide about this issue, and we must ensure that the

    1275
    shortfall in pledges is soon made up. Secondly, we must ensure that the pledges are converted into effective delivery, a point which my hon. Friends and I made strongly to the Vice President of the Commission, when we said that it was all very well making a pledge, but we must deliver the goods. Thirdly, to judge by Baroness Chalker's reply in another place yesterday, there will be an opportunity next week to see whether we can alter the terms of debt repayment—the Trinidad terms—so that Zambia, which is in a different International Monetary Fund category, does not have to repay its debt either at all or under such rigorous terms.
    In much of the correspondence which the television programmes have generated for me, people have said that we must write off the debt once and for all to give those countries a chance of survival. Lastly, there are opportunities to alter what everyone in those countries talks about—structural adjustment. That means altering the structure of those countries' economies so that they are not required to be so economically and financially self-righteous that they cannot carry out their principal duty: to feed the people whom they are elected to represent.
    I wish to finish with a personal comment. I make it only because I hope that it will give the debate the immediacy that it deserves. When I arrived back at Heathrow, I was greeted with the devastating news that an elder brother of mine had died, having caught malaria on his honeymoon. This has been reported in the press and I repeat it only for that reason. If the death of one person in one's own family can have such a personal devastating effect on so many, as other colleagues in the House have experienced in their lives, I hope that that will persuade us of the reason and urgency to do something about these 18 million people who are already suffering while we still have the time to do something about it. I hope that we will realise that, for many millions of people, what we decide this summer is nothing less than a matter of life and death.
    1.48 pm
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Mark Lennox-Boyd): I congratulate the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) on initiating this Adjournment debate. It is timely and he has spoken well and with great feeling as he described, in his closing words, the crisis facing southern Africa. I know of his visit to southern Africa with Dr. Bryer and Mr. Forsyth and of his discussions with my right hon. and noble Friend Baroness Chalker. If I do not manage to answer all his points in the few minutes left, I am comforted by the fact that he has had a full discussion with my right hon. and noble Friend.
    The hon. Gentleman's concern is shared by everyone in the House. It is important to appreciate the scale of the problem and to give the threat of famine in the region its due place on the international agenda. The drought, both in terms of its geographical spread and its severity, may be—as described by the hon. Gentleman—the worst to affect the southern part of that continent this century. With regional production of basic food grains down to about 40 per cent. of the normal level, and with shortage of water leading to the widespread slaughter of livestock and to an increase in diseases among the most vulnerable groups, especially the elderly, up to 18 million people are at serious
    1276
    risk. A region which can normally expect to be largely self-sufficient in cereal crops is having to import more than 11 million tonnes of food.
    These basic facts provide some measure of the problem. Lives are at real risk and, as the hon. Gentleman said, there is grave threat also to the processes of economic and political reform which have been making significant headway in the region over the past year or so. These are threats which the international community must recognise and act quickly and decisively to avert.
    The hon. Gentleman was kind enough to say that Britain has taken a leading role in responding to the crisis. He had discussions with President Mugabe, who confirmed that. We provided an initial package of assistance for the worst-hit countries at the beginning of March and, since then, the Minister for Overseas Development has made bilateral commitments of aid which, so far, amount to more than £48 million. This aid has been balance of payments support to help cope with the burden of extra food imports, food aid, technical assistance and support for both local and British-based voluntary agencies.
    The Government have also pressed for a generous response from the European Community. I shall say more about that later. On 4 May the Development Council approved additional food aid totalling 800,000 tonnes. Some 370,000 tonnes of that additional aid will go to southern Africa and we shall contribute more than £11 million towards the cost.
    The drought appeal conference in Geneva in June—at which, sadly, my noble Friend the Minister for Overseas Development was the only Minister from a donor county—produced a positive response from the international community as a whole. In terms of the specific categories of assistance covered by the appeal, pledges made at the conference, which came to about US$600 million, fell short of the appeal target of $850 million, but these included substantial commitments from some major donors, including notably the Americans and the Japanese. Other donors, including the Dutch, the Canadians and ourselves, have made substantial extra commitments since the conference. We shall continue to take every available opportunity, both in the European Community under our presidency and in other international forums, to urge others to join in responding generously to the needs of southern Africa.
    It would be wrong to imply that the solution to the crisis is solely help from outside. The countries of the region have acted with commendable speed to put the machinery of co-operation in place. A regional task force of representatives from the member states of the southern African development co-ordination conference was set up in April. Six transport corridor groups have been established to supervise the importation of food, and they are liaising closely with national emergency co-ordinators and with the logistics advisory centre now operating in Harare with the support of the world food programme. It is encouraging to note that this co-operation transcends political differences, with the port and railway authorities of southern Africa playing a vital role in the massive logistical effort that is now under way. If there is a positive aspect to the drought, it is this readiness on the part of all the countries of the region to act together at a time of crisis. That gives some comfort for the future.
    I am glad to be able to tell the House that, after discussions that lasted well into last night, agreement has

    1277
    been reached in Rome on secure corridors for the safe passage of relief supplies in and through Mozambique. That is excellent news not only for the people of Mozambique but for those in neighbouring landlocked countries, and it is a further step towards the peace that Mozambique so badly needs.
    I said that I would say a few more words about the European Community response, which the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey mentioned. Given the nature of the procedure involved, I consider that the approval given on 4 May to a substantial programme of additional food aid was something of an achievement. Of course, as the hon. Gentleman also said, delivery is equally important. I assure him that the Commission is fully alive to the need for a proper delivery process.
    Nearly half the Community's total food aid programme for 1992 had been shipped or was on the point of shipment by the end of June. Another enormously important factor, of which I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is aware, is the vital necessity for food aid shipments from the Community and from other bilateral and multilateral donors to be managed and co-ordinated properly over the next few months so as to ensure an even flow of supplies between now and the next harvest, in March.
    Mrs. Ann Clwyd: As the Minister knows, the House will be in recess for the next three months. We are told that the crisis will intensify in September. Can the hon. Gentleman assure us now that, if things get worse, every effort will be made by the Government and by the EC, and that all the machinery is in place, to ensure that emergency action is taken to send food to the people as soon as possible? As the Minister has said, pledges have been made and have not yet been delivered. That is a matter for great concern to the House.
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: In the four minutes remaining to me, I had intended to deal with some of those points.
    My right hon. and noble Friend referred specifically to the drought at the meeting of the Development Council of the European Parliament yesterday. I have no doubt that the subject will be on the agenda at the next Development Council, and that both my right hon. and noble Friend and our colleagues in the EC will take it extremely seriously during the coming months.
    The Paris Club is meeting next week and will consider Zambia's request for debt relief. That is the appropriate forum for the consideration of debt relief issues, and we shall continue to work there for the application of more generous terms on the lines of the original Trinidad proposals suggested by the Prime Minister.
    The hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey asked about Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe is different from Zambia, in that it has been able to service its debts in full, and thus to maintain its creditworthy status. We
    1278
    understand that it has no plan to seek debt relief. Indeed, because it is anxious to maintain its creditworthy status in commercial and financial markets, it does not intend to change that approach.
    The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the deaths of livestock, and recovery and rehabilitation problems. Of course, there is a severe impact on livestock. In Zimbabwe, for example, 40 per cent. of commonly owned and smallholder cattle may die. In the commercial sector, numbers are likely to fall by as much as 25 per cent. The threat to wildlife is mainly confined to the south-east of the country, where a major cull is being carried out to help to ensure that at least some of the animals survive.
    We know that emergency humanitarian aid is not enough, and that we must consider recovery and rehabilitation. That must be the next step, and it will include helping to rebuild livestock holdings and ensuring that supplies of seed are available for the next planting season.
    There can be no doubt that the people of southern Africa face great hardship over the coming months. The task of the international community will be to ensure that hardship does not turn into grave loss of life and widespread dislocation of the region's political and economic structures. That is the threat which must be faced and overcome.
    I assure hon. Members that the Government will keep a careful eye on developments in the region in the coming months and will remain in close touch with their European partners and with other bilateral and multilateral donors. My right hon. and noble Friend the Minister for Overseas Development will visit some of the worst-hit countries in September and will have the opportunity then to assess what more may need to be done.
    I will conclude on a slightly more hopeful note on significant developments which are under way in southern Africa. We have seen progress towards the ending of long-standing conflicts in Angola and Mozambique, towards economic renewal and more open and accountable government, and towards a transition to multiracial democracies——
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
    Sir Teddy Taylor: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It was announced a few minutes ago that the German central bank has rejected the appeal from the Chancellor of the Exchequer and has increased its discount rates by 0·75 per cent., which will clearly have a fundamental effect on British economic policy. May I ask you whether it would be in order for the Government, if they so wished, to make a statement during the next hour on the implications of this alarming decision for British economic policy?
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: I have received no notice of any Minister intending to make such a statement. I think it rather unlikely that there will be such a request.

    Occupational Pension Schemes
    2.1 pm
    Mr. Michael Bates: I am grateful for the opportunity to debate occupational pension schemes. The schemes have a membership of about 11 million people and are important in this country. Some 300,000 schemes are in operation. The debate on pensions over recent years is welcome. As our population ages and people can look forward to periods of retirment of 20 to 30 years, the need for properly funded retirement via occupational pensions and state pensions is increasingly important.
    There has been a great deal of success in occupational pension schemes, and we should start on that basis. We should mention that, in 1979, 54 per cent. of pensioners had a second income from an occupational pension scheme. That figure has now risen to 69 per cent., which is very welcome. We should also recognise that, in addition to occupational pension schemes, the number of people who can supplement their income has doubled from savings during that period. That is most welcome. The number of people who own property as another asset has increased during the period. As the wealth of the nation grows, pensioners can participate in that wealth, which is to be approved of greatly.
    I want to bring a number of points before the House. One of the first problems that the industry and Government may face in coming months is surpluses. The fact that surpluses have built up in pension funds over the past 12 to 14 years is a credit to the economic conditions that have existed for the principal part of that time. The key point is what to do with those surpluses.
    Who owns the surpluses in pension funds? I suggest that ownership of pension funds must lie with the employees and with the members of the pension fund. That key point must be accepted. The argument is helped by recent judgments in the European Court. The case of Barber ν. Guardian Royal Exchange established that pensions are deferred pay. Deferred pay, by its nature, must belong to the person who has earned the salary. Ownership is very much in the hands of the employees.
    I do not welcome the way in which, in recent years, the surpluses that have been built up in pension funds have been attacked by predators and over-enthusiastic companies. I approved of the Conservative social security legislation which was introduced with the principal objective of placing limitations on what such surpluses can be used for. That was an excellent initiative, but it has still to be applied. The sooner the new rules are applied the better.
    Other tactics, perhaps not as overt as taking over company pension schemes and creaming off their assets or taking loans from them, also give rise to anxiety. I refer to certain subliminal activities which have come to my attention—for instance, the practice of placing directors in the membership of an employee pension fund and allowing them to take up and backdate their benefit entitlements in the fund, following which, six or nine months later, they are given a transfer out of the fund and into their own executive scheme, taking with them a high transfer value. This causes concern among members of pension schemes and it must be dealt with.
    Some employers are over-enthusiastic about taking contribution holidays. Some of them take employer contribution holidays of between five and 10 years. Given
    1280
    the ever-lengthening period of retirement these days, there will be ever-increasing demands on pension funds, so they will require increased resources. That in turn will require increased contributions, so employers must not set a bad example by taking these contribution holidays.
    The security of pension funds has been much on our minds, given the tragic circumstances surrounding the Maxwell pensioners, but we must be careful not to over-legislate and place too heavy a burden on the 300,000 pension schemes in this country which operate successfully and effectively on behalf of employees.
    Much of the great debate, inside and outside this Chamber, surrounds schemes with large memberships—multinational pension fund schemes, for instance. However, as we know, the vast majority of occcupational pension schemes are run by small manufacturing companies and small chains of shops with 20 or 30 staff. It may be right to impose on larger schemes professional actuaries who have to attend board meetings and be subject to increased compliance with legal requirements—that may tighten up on the investment and management of the large funds. We do not want, however, to place an excessive burden on smaller schemes. After all, where would the money to comply with more legislation come from? It would have to come from the pension funds themselves, to the detriment of their members.
    Much of the protection required is already in place. Trustees must be better educated to know their rights and what to look for as they attend trust meetings. They need to know more as they take on responsible positions in companies and in occupational pension schemes.
    We also welcome the review by Professor Goode initiated by the Department of Social Security. Most of us were extremely impressed with the quality and expertise of that distinguished committee. We have a great deal of confidence in the quality, knowledge and expertise of those people to produce sensible solutions which will be for the benefit of pensioners.
    We must also consider portability. The nature of employment has changed. In the 1930s and 1940s, it was normal to think that people would spend 30 or 40 years with one company in one job. That was particularly so in the north-east of England. People would work in a mine from the time that they left school until they retired, or they would stay with a shipyard for their entire working lives. However, the nature of employment has changed. People change the nature of their duties and their professions and jobs. They also change employment on many occasions.
    Under current legislation and the operation of occupational pension schemes, people who are mobile and move between different pension schemes can be disadvantaged because benefits have to be left or frozen within a particular scheme or transfers must be taken from a scheme, but the transfers are not a full and accurate reflection of the true value of the contribution in that fund.
    We must recognise that there is a greater need for portability and mobility in the work force. We must encourage that, because it is good for the economy and for business. We must make it as easy as possible for people to move between jobs and to secure and build up pension benefits. Some people might argue that that is the responsibility of the individual, that people should take that decision and on their heads be it. However, if people fail to make adequate pension provisions during their working lives, they will become the responsibility of the

    1281
    state, which the taxpayer has to fund. We can legitimately take an interest in ensuring that people make adequate contributions into pension schemes to secure adequate benefits in retirement.
    One cannot mention portability without referring briefly to the position in the European Community. I should welcome comments from my hon. Friend the Minister about pension benefits in the European arena because it would be helpful to draw comparisons. As we head towards a single market, the picture that I drew earlier of increased mobility in this country will be increased many times over. People will take advantage of the tremendous opportunities available through a single market to move between different employers and to change their professions, not just within the United Kingdom, but within the European Community.
    Such movement raises questions about the funding of those pensions. The original European communication issued in 1991 by the Commission contained a provision for portability of pension benefits and for securing pension benefits as people move between member states. That was very welcome, but that provision was not adopted in the final document and that was very disappointing.
    One appreciates that there are problems with different tax structures and that it is difficult to allow tax benefits in different member states. It is difficut to achieve harmonisation in that area. However, if we want a true, single European market and true mobility of labour, we must address that problem. I should be grateful if my hon. Friend the Minister would comment on that.
    Many other things can be done for pensioners which relate not directly to pension schemes, but to the economic conditions that surround pensioners. We often hear from the Opposition the accusation that inflation is not the most important economic indicator. It is all right for hon. Members who will secure index-linked pension benefits, hut, for the vast majority of people—11 million—who do not have index-linked pension benefits, inflation and the control of inflation are of dire importance and are vital to their security and to maintaining the value of their pension benefits. We must bear that point in mind. We must imagine what it would have done to an occupational pension scheme in 1977, when the rate of inflation was 23 per cent. and a pension fund was limited to an increase of 5 per cent. Clearly, the Government have a duty, and the control of inflation for the benefit of pensioners is paramount.
    The maintenance of low rates of taxation is another way of assisting occupational pensioners. The introduction of the 20p band for pensioners was a great assistance, particularly for pensioners receiving state and occupational benefits. The welcome increase in income support for pensioners is also a great assistance. There are things that the Government can do and I am pleased to say that they are doing them successfully.
    If we want increased pension benefits, an adequate standard of living for an aging population and a decade of retirement, which is an excellent idea, we must strive towards flexibility of retirement ages. It is nonsense to suggest that everybody reaches an appropriate retirement age at exactly the same time. Individuals have different approaches to when they would like to exercise their retirement benefits. The ability to fund them is the key.
    1282
    The individual must accept that it is his responsibility to fund pension benefits and pension schemes. Perhaps in the past we were used to getting our pension benefits on the cheap, certainly compared with other European Community states. Contributions by our employees are at the low end of the scale. The individual must say, "If I want to secure those benefits and to choose my date of retirement, those benefits need to be funded." That is the responsibility of the individual and the individual alone.
    2.17 pm
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Miss Ann Widdecombe): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Langbaurgh (Mr. Bates), first, on obtaining the debate and, secondly, on the extremely lucid way in which he has made a wide range of points. His speech follows well on his excellent and well-acclaimed maiden speech on housing. My hon. Friend will be able to bring a great measure of judgment and expertise in serving his constituents. It is a tremendous pleasure for me to answer such interesting and thought-provoking thoughts. Given the time constraints, it is unlikely that I shall be able to address each of my hon. Friend's points, but I hope to be able to to respond to the most important.
    My hon. Friend is right to welcome the review of trust law which the Government have implemented under Professor Goode. I am particularly grateful to my hon. Friend for making it clear that a balance is to be struck between, on the one hand, protecting the members of pension funds and making sure that the law is sufficiently tight to protect their assets and future pensions and, as far as possible, to avoid the excesses that we have seen as a result of the Maxwell affair, and, on the other hand, not drawing the rules so tight that they make it impossible for small funds to function or that they provide a major disincentive for employers to set up occupational pension schemes. That is an important balance to be struck. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for pointing it out.
    The Government have always been aware that the security of pensions is a major issue. It was addressed in the Social Security Act 1990. Several measures in that Act have been implemented and we are still considering others. That is a tribute to the Government and a refutation of the frequent claim that somehow we know that problems were brewing in occupational pensions two years ago, well before any knowledge of Mr. Maxwell's activities, but did nothing about it. We were already implementing measures or consulting on measures to strengthen the law.
    We took cognisance of the balance that my hon. Friend discussed when we introduced the self-investment regulations, because we wanted to limit self-investment because we recognised that it was in the interests of members of pension funds to do so. However, we did not want to limit it in such a way that we would cause funds and employers to wind up prematurely or make it impossible for them to function sensibly within whatever limits we introduced. Therefore, there was a period of consultation before we introduced the 5 per cent. limit. I suggest to my hon. Friend that that is evidence of our great desire to maintain the balance to which he referred.
    My hon. Friend was right to put occupational pensions in the overall context of pensioner incomes and to assess how far occupational pensions have contributed to the welfare of Britain's pensioners. He asked me to make clear what pension benefits exist in the rest of Europe. In many

    1283
    of our European competitor countries highly developed occupational pension schemes such as we have here do not exist. Even in countries that have large occupational pensions schemes such as Germany or Holland, the schemes are not all run on exactly the same principles.
    There is a healthy mix between private and public provision in Britain. Perhaps a good demonstration of that is the fact that the average income from occupational pensions is almost exactly the same as the state pension. The state pension makes a significant contribution to a pensioner's income. It is precisely that healthy mix which enables us to sustain an increasing pensioner population and maintain services for our pensioners which are not readily available in the rest of Europe.
    I shall take the request of my hon. Friend to draw some comparisons with Europe. In much of the rest of Europe people already have to work much longer for their pension. For example, in Denmark the retirement age is 67. In the Netherlands people must have 50 years of insurance before they even qualify for a pension. The pension received by people who live in France or Germany depends on how much they have earned. Low earners end up with extremely low pensions.
    In Britain a basic state pension is available to all with a contributions record. In both France and Germany people pay health insurance out of their pension. In Britain national insurance contributions stop when people retire. They simply draw their pension. Only Britain provides a separate pension for a spouse who has not worked. As that represents some 60 per cent. of the basic pension, it makes an enormous difference in any European comparisons.
    In other countries, assessments for income support or its equivalent take account of children's income as well as that of the pensioner. In this country, we consider solely the income of pensioners. As my hon. Friend pointed out, half our pensioners own their homes and those at the poorer end of the scale can receive help with rent of up to 100 per cent., whereas housing costs are a major drain on pensioners' incomes abroad.
    In France, pensioners pay £4·50 a day for the first week in hospital. In this country pensioners have no deductions for the first six weeks. In Belgium, they pay up to 10 per cent. of the cost of their treatment and in some other countries there are no automatic free prescriptions for pensioners or there is a system, for example as in France, where pensioners are entitled to free medicine but have to pay and claim back the cost. In most other countries, the cost of living is higher. That puts into context the good deal that pensioners have, if we look outside the narrow provisions of the state pension.
    In the past 13 years, there have been significant improvements in pensioners' average incomes. Our policy to encourage such improvements has been in two strands. First, we have pledged—and have succeeded in ensuring—that basic state pensions provide a secure foundation for retirement, by increasing them in line with the movement in prices. Secondly, we have encouraged private provision for retirement, both through personal and occupational pension schemes, and by aiming to create a stable economic environment in which savings and investments can grow and maintain their value.
    It was important that my hon. Friend the Member for Langbaurgh drew attention to the role of the control of inflation in promoting pensioners' incomes. He was right
    1284
    not merely to rely on the automatic uprating of occupational pension schemes but instead to point to central economic policy.
    As there is no Opposition Front-Bench spokesman in the Chamber it might be rather ungenerous to draw the obvious comparison with the 1970s, when many pensioners' savings were effectively wiped out and when few of them—or far fewer than today—enjoyed the comfort of an occupational pension in addition to their state pension. Since 1979, pensioners' incomes from savings have more than doubled, whereas under the last Labour Government they fell by 16 per cent., and average income from occupational pensions has nearly doubled over the same period. The number of recently retired pensioners receiving income from occupational pensions has increased from 54 per cent. in 1979 to 69 per cent. today.
    Dr. Robert Spink: Hear, hear.
    Miss Widdecombe: That is a tribute to the success of our occupational pension strategy, and I am glad to have that sign of support from my hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink), whom I welcome to the Chamber.
    While it is true that many pensioners rely on benefits for much of their income, during the past decade private incomes have become much more important. Social security now accounts for only about half of pensioners' average incomes, compared to three fifths at the end of the 1970s. That important shift in emphasis from state to private provision has given us much-needed flexibility in the way that we manage the wide range of pension provisions that my hon. Friend the Member for Langbaurgh referred to.
    Real benefit expenditure on the elderly has risen by one third since 1979, but we have been able to target that towards poorer pensioners. My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, the previous Secretary of State for Social Security, who is also in the Chamber in another guise, was firmly of the opinion and managed to carry through with great success the focusing of extra help on those pensioners who are generally regarded as being less well off. As a result of those measures, we have been able to reduce the proportion of pensioners among the poorest fifth of the population from 40 to 28 per cent. during the Government's term in office. Even among that group, the extra help that we have been able to give through increased income support pensioner premiums has contributed to a 15 per cent. real increase in their average incomes.
    In the remaining minute of my time I shall turn from the general state of pensioners' incomes and European comparisons, on which my hon. Friend invited me to comment, and assure him on an issue on which he touched at the end of his speech when he called for a flexible decade of retirement. Contrary to speculation in the press and from the Opposition, the Government have not yet reached a view on how to equalise state pension ages. We are wholly committed to equalisation, but we have not decided on any one method. I can assure my hon. Friend that a flexible decade or flexible period of retirement in any one of a number of forms is under consideration. It is one of four principal options being considered by the Government. When we finally reach our conclusions we

    1285
    shall have taken into account the expert advice that we have received from him. I conclude by again thanking my hon. Friend for raising this important subject.
    Mr. George Galloway: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It is fortuitous that the Leader of the House is by your right hand, which is where he should be. Have you had any indication from the Government that there will be, even at this eleventh hour, a statement about the plan to confiscate Scottish water? I note from yesterday's proceedings that the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry did the decent thing and made an important statement to Parliament about the proposals to privatise Parcelforce. We learn from the newspapers that the Government plan to steal Scotland's water. It would be an outrage if Parliament were to break up for the longest recess in living memory without our knowing what the Government plan for that most precious of natural resources, Scottish water.
    Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): I have received no information that any Minister intends to make a statement, and I think it highly unlikely.
    Mr. Mike Watson: Further to that point of order—
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it on the same point of order?
    Mr. Watson: It is, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: I am sorry, but I have ruled on that.

    Bolton General Hospital (Ward Closure)
    2.31 pm
    Mr. David Young: The subject of this debate is the closure of a long-stay, continuing care ward for elderly patients in my constituency. The closure was carried out without any statutory consultation procedure. The issues involved far transcend the closure of one ward; they go to the root of the whole policy of the district health authority on long-stay, continuing care in the three constituencies of Bolton.
    The Minister may not be aware that, following a debate in 1981 that I initiated to get the Bolton hospital centralised on one site, money is only now coming forward to build the remainder of what is to be the new Bolton general hospital, updated into a facility ready to deal with the care of the people of Bolton.
    Bolton district health authority does not seem to have thought through a policy for beds for the long-stay elderly in need of continuing care. The proposal was that one block in Bolton general hospital, H block, was to be used for continuing elderly care until the elderly patients can be transferred off the main site which was to be used for acute patients.
    There was a broad-brush approach to consultation in Bolton concerned with the Mereworth exercise. It was intended that patients should then be transferred to another hospital off site. It was to be Hulton hospital. It is an old hospital and lacks modern facilities. It lacks privacy, space in bathrooms and space in dayrooms to give the dignity that elderly people require and quality of life they should have. The district health authority had promised that H block on the Bolton general hospital site—I should tell the House that the different sites are some miles apart—should be maintained until the older hospital some miles away was updated.
    We need a clear policy statement from the health authority about how it intends to care for elderly patients. Although it has talked generally about improving the facility at Hulton Lane hospital, to date, that facility has not been upgraded. Now we find that some of H block will be closed despite the promise to maintain it until the other facility was upgraded and ready.
    I am not arguing against the proposed new use of the vacant wards, but one should not rob Peter to pay Paul. If the district health authority has a sincere policy for long-term, continuing care for the elderly, it is vital that the facilities for them are updated in line with those in the newer hospital.
    One problem is that the district health authority has never appeared to determine how many long-term continuing care beds are required at the hospital. A notional figure of 120 has been bandied about, which appeared in a discussion paper by an eminent consultant. It has never been incorporated into the district health authority's policy. An additional concern is that the health authority has taken no note of the fact that by 2001 the number of people over 85 in Bolton will have increased by 47 per cent.
    From April 1993 the local government authority will be responsible for community care. Long-stay continuing care beds in hospitals will be affected by the provisions made by the local authority. People will be aware that those authorities are concerned about whether they can provide the facilities in the first place. Working parties

    1287
    have only just been set up between the district health authority and the local council to consider the number of beds required. It is high-handed to close wards before those discussions have taken place.
    What adds to the local community health council's concern is that on 6 February 1992 health officials in Bolton assured open meetings of the community health council that H block would remain in operation until new developments were completed at the general hospital. They also said that money would be spent on the development of the Hutton Lane hospital. On 5 March, just one month later, it was confirmed, by telephone, to the community health council that H1 ward would close by the end of March. That was done without consultation and the staff were redeployed into other disciplines. A belated consultation exercise is now taking place, but that will do nothing to restore the morale of the staff who have seen a specialist team broken up overnight and dispersed into other specialties.
    We used to allege that such arrogant bureaucracy occurred only in eastern European states. Offering consultation once a ward has been closed, the staff redeployed and the patients reallocated is like offering a man who has been hanged a fair trial by those who hanged him.
    Consultation must take place when proposals are made about the elderly because they are among the most vulnerable in the community. For physical or mental reasons, many of them cannot put up a fight on their own behalf, and many of their relatives cannot do so because they are elderly.
    Guidance is given in the Community Health Council (Amendment) Regulations 1990 about the need for a consumer-orientated strategy among authorities, and it says:
    "The principle of making the NHS more responsive to the needs of the consumer is central to the reforms announced in 'Working for Patients'."
    It goes on:
    "True consumer involvement is more than just a consultation exercise to 'rubber stamp' a decision that a DHA has, in effect, already taken. It involves DHAs in taking the initiative in forging links with their local communities in advance, before there are controversial plans in the offing; this will be best achieved by developing a shared understanding"—
    among other things, there being consultation on substantial developments or variations in services. I support that Bolton district health authority argues that the change was not substantial, and, no doubt because it is a grey area, it will try to avoid the responsibility of acting in the way suggested. But if we are to build up confidence in the NHS, we must go further than simply following what might be described as the legal regulations. A body—such as the district health authority in this case—that has acted with such arrogance does much to destroy the faith in the NHS of the people of Bolton.
    I would not have pressed for today's debate but for the fact that we are due to recess for the summer, and some important questions must be answered. As there is no allocation in this year's estimates for the upgrading of Hulton Lane hospital, we must be told what the upgrading will involve and how much will be spent. Blair hospital in Bolton, another continuing care facility for the elderly has been closed and about £500,000 is expected from its sale. Will any of that money be used for upgrading Hulton Lane
    1288
    hospital? As a result of the premature closure of H1 ward, £280,000 was saved by the authority. Will any of that be used for the upgrading?
    Precisely what proposals does the district health authority have? All the goodwill and sympathy in the world will not provide one bathroom in Hulton Lane hospital. Answers to such questions are vital because it has only recently been announced that Bolton hospitals will be going for trust status, and trusts vary from one part of the country to another. The key point is that they are commercial enterprises. Their aim is to be profitable, and once an enterprise changes to a commercial basis, its facilities move along those lines. Even if that does not happen immediately, as the years pass pressure for that activity grows.
    Beds for the elderly in need of continual care are a financial liability. It becomes increasingly necessary to ask, now that applications are being made for trust status, what will be the position of long-stay elderly people in Bolton? Those key questions transcend the closure of just one ward. We must ask whether the closure of Blair hospital and H1 are the beginning of a movement, which began without statutory consultation, to remove continuing elderly care from the people of Bolton. If not, what are the district health authority's detailed proposals for the facilities that they will provide? What will they be and how will they be financed? What assurances do we have that, if the NHS trust is approved, it will carry over commitments and obligations made by the district health authority to the people of Bolton? What machinery exists to ensure that those commitments, if made, will be honoured?
    It is important to know how the directors of the trust will be appointed and paid and where they will come from. Will their remuneration and position depend on making the hospital profitable or looking after the health of everyone in Bolton, whether young children or long-stay elderly patients?
    Those questions must be asked because they go to the fundamental conception of the health service provided in Bolton. Will the remuneration of directors depend on the profitability of the hospital or the hospital's service to the people of Bolton? It is important that, in a free and democratic society, we have adequate consultation so that people's views can be taken into account. The citizens of Bolton should have as much say in the future of their hospitals as any official or board of directors.
    Ultimately, the most vulnerable people are the elderly, many of whom had no chance to contribute to private insurance schemes. Most of them contributed during all their working lives to the national health service. They expected—not unjustly—that at the hour of their greatest need the state would provide the facilities to look after them when they could not look after themselves and have no relations who could look after them. Those ideas are, unfortunately, changing, but that is all the more reason for requiring discussion and consultation and explanations before arbitrarily deciding to close a ward or hospital facility. Above all, we depend on the dedication of our nursing staff and doctors.
    It is worrying that many consultants and nurses say that they should not talk to Members of Parliament because their jobs could be in jeopardy. My district health authority never refuses to give me information—provided I phrase the question correctly and, in effect, know the answer before I ask it. There must be much more consultation. I am arguing not along political lines but for

    1289
    the best future of the people of Bolton. To that extent, my speech may be highly political, but all hon. Members owe their constituents the best and most caring health service possible, and that requires open consultation with the community and its elected representatives.
    2.50 pm
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Mr. Tim Yeo): I am glad to have the opportunity to respond to the hon. Member for Bolton, South-East (Mr. Young) and to congratulate him on bringing before the House the proposal to change the use of ward H1 from continuing care for the elderly to gynaecology services at Bolton general hospital. I know that the hon. Gentleman is interested in securing the welfare of all his constituents and is concerned about the frail elderly. I agree that they are among the most vulnerable members of society. I am also aware that the hon. Gentleman has had a personal involvement with Bolton general hospital in recent months.
    I have listened to him with interest and recognise that he has much local knowledge. He shares with the chairman of Bolton health authority, Tom Taylor, a concern that Bolton gets the best available care from the national health service. The health authority is striving to improve the health care of all Bolton residents.
    The proposal at issue is part of a process completely to reshape hospital services in Bolton. At the heart of the process is a massive investment by the Government in the local acute hospital that will take it into the next century in the best possible shape.
    The broad strategy in Bolton is based on spending £45 million on a regeneration of Bolton general hospital and on concentrating long-stay continuing care for the elderly at Hulton hospital, which is also in Bolton. The genesis of the proposals goes back to November 1988 when the North Western regional health authority asked every district health authority in the region to carry out a strategic planning exercise covering the following 10 years. That exercise was known as Mereworth and Bolton's document was accepted by the regional health authority. As a consequence, the major development at Bolton general hospital costing some £45 million was approved.
    For elderly services, the strategy had two aims: first, to provide some 120 beds for continuing care; and, secondly, to locate these in a single hospital. That would benefit elderly patients because they would not be competing for acute services on the same site, and the services could be managed more effectively. There seems to be a broad consensus in support of that overall strategy, which includes the local community health council. Hulton hospital has been chosen to accommodate these elderly patients. It is against that background of broad agreement that we are debating the important step of implementing the strategy.
    As I have explained, the health authority aims for 120 continuing care beds. There are presently 146 such beds—72 at Bolton general hospital and 74 at Hulton hospital. Figures from the health authority's consultation document suggest that, for some time, many of these beds have been empty, suggesting, of course, that there are more beds than patients who need them. The proposal to
    1290
    change the use of H1 ward would reduce the number of continuing care beds at Bolton general hospital by 24, leaving a total of 48 beds on that site.
    With the 74 beds available at Hutton hospital, the overall total of continuing care beds within Bolton health authority would be 122, which is broadly in line with the long-term target. I understand that continuing care patients already at Bolton general would not be moved but that new admissions would be made to Hulton hospital. I understand that plans are now in hand to upgrade the facilities for continuing care patients at Hulton.
    I hope that that makes the background clear. I assure the hon. Gentleman that money has been allocated both this year and next year for upgrading at Hulton. As he said, there is to be a meeting tomorrow at which the longer term allocations are likely to be discussed.
    The hon. Member made some remarks about the consultation on the changes. The process of consultation is fundamental to the Government's health strategy, and extensive consultation has taken place elsewhere on the establishment of national health service trusts and also when larger district health authorities are created to improve the ways in which the health needs of patients are assessed and met. Similarly, the guidance issued by the Department of Health makes it clear that the consultation must be a real process. Adequate time must be provided and there must be a wide opportunity for local interests and users to express their views.
    Consultation is therefore an integral part of the management process. Many people could speak with knowledge about the situation in Bolton. As the hon. Member has demonstrated today, the House is also one of the arenas in which local issues can be aired. The process of making the health service more responsive to the needs of its consumers is central to the Government's reforms.
    Setting up national health service trusts to run hospital services allows health authorities to concentrate on obtaining the best possible services for the residents of their area. I recommend that the hon. Gentleman encourages local people to support the health authority's expression of interest in becoming a fourth wave NHS trust. The trusts remain within the NHS; they are not commercial operations, although they must be efficient and businesslike, in the interests of the patients whom they serve.
    There is a well-established process for scrutinising applications for trust status, and the health authority retains a statutory duty to provide for all the health needs of the population. The departmental guidance is clear. Consumers and community health councils, which act as consumers' representatives, must be consulted about any controversial plans. I share the hon. Member's concern that consultation on the change of use of ward H1 took place after the patients were transferred. That is outside the spirit of the consultation process. I shall write to the chairman of the health authority stressing how imperative it is that every effort is made to secure local agreement for the changes.
    There has been an element of misinterpretation. A good deal of discussion took place following the publication of the broad strategy document in 1989, and following that discussion there was a consensus among interested parties that the proposed strategy was right for Bolton residents. The health authority took that to mean that component changes within the overall strategy would not be subject to

    1291
    formal consultation procedures. That, I believe, was a mistake—but it has been corrected and a consultation document was issued in April.
    Since then the community health council seems to have acknowledged that the proposal to close the beds is consistent with the strategy. The consultation paper was issued to 49 individuals and representative bodies, and I understand that nine responses have been received.
    I sympathise with the sense of unfairness when a change of use takes place before the outcome of consultations is known. That is unsatisfactory. However, the process has now been completed. On the whole, decisions on levels of service should be made locally. Occupancy levels for long-stay beds for the elderly are apparently low, and it is not in the best interests of patients that such a situation should continue. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will acknowledge that the health authority has a record of careful planning.
    As I have said, the community health council is not pressing for the ward to be reopened, but its acquiescence to the proposal is contingent on the introduction of a clear plan for upgrading Hulton hospital. I understand that the health authority has such a plan, which will be considered tomorrow.
    If, after tomorrow, the CHC presents an objection to the change of use, that must be referred to the regional health authority. If the regional health authority supports the district, the matter will come to the Secretary of State for consideration.
    Mr. John MeAllion: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We are now almost in the final minute of the Session, and the Government continue to treat Scotland and Scottish Members of Parliament with contempt, refusing to make a statement to the House on the privatisation of Scottish water.
    1292
    As representatives of Scottish constituencies, we appeal to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to use the office of the Chair to protect the interests of our electors by insisting that a Minister comes to the Chamber and makes an announcement to Scottish Members about what the Government intend to do about Scottish water. Otherwise we, as ordinary Members of the House, will be forced to do whatever we can to ensure that the House does not adjourn until the Government have made a clear statement of their intentions on the privatisation of Scottish water.
    Several Hon. Members rose——
    Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Order. The occupant of the Chair is in no position to insist that a Minister comes to the House. As I have already explained to the House——
    Mr. George Galloway rose——
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: I have already explained the position to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galloway). I have received no information to the effect that any Minister intends to make any such statement, and I think that it is unlikely to happen now. Mr. Yeo.
    Mr. Dennis Canavan: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it not possible, even at this eleventh hour, for you to send for a Minister to come and make a statement, bearing in mind the contempt which the Government obviously have for Parliament and for the people of Scotland? The Government did not even receive a mandate from the people of Scotland, especially not for the proposal to privatise Scotland's water——
    It being Three o'clock, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Resolutions [3 July and 9 July], till Monday 19 October.

TRANSPORT

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 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. Norris
  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. One of the aims of our transport policy is to provide the right infrastructure so that large and small businesses can operate effectively. Specific measures by my Department which have helped small business include the deregulation of local bus services. We expect the completion of the single market in aviation, agreed last month, to extend the benefits of a liberal aviation market, such as lower fares and a choice of services, already enjoyed by consumers in the United Kingdom, to the whole of the EC. This will benefit businesses as users of air services as well as offering increased opportunities to enter EC markets as operators. The abolition of the dock labour scheme has increased competition between ports and in many of them productivity has grown considerably.

  A65 Ilkley Bypass
  Mr. Waller
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to make a further announcement about the proposed A65 Ilkley bypass.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  I hope to be in a position to make a further announcement on the development of this scheme before the end of year.

  Noise
  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what legislation, regulations or guidelines exist to limit the impact of(a) aircraft noise, (b) vehicle noise or (c) other noise pollution.

  Mr. Norris
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what plans he has to introduce regulations to control aircraft noise;

  (2) what responses he has received from Northern Ireland-based individuals or organisations in response to the consultation paper "Control of Aircraft Noise".

  Mr. Norris
  The consultation paper "Control of Aircraft Noise" was published last August. More than 550 860
  responses have been received including one from Northern Ireland. The responses are being carefully considered and an announcement of conclusions will be made in due course.

  The United Kingdom has supported international agreements to phase out of operation older, noisier subsonic civil jet aircraft certificated to "chapter 2" standards. These aircraft will be phased out between 1995 and 2002 and regulations to that effect will be introduced in due course.

  Civil Servants (Shareholdings)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 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. Norris
  Guidance for members of the Department and its executive agencies is in the departmental staff handbook. Staff are asked to consult with the Department's personnel management directorate if they are in any doubt about the propriety of holding shares.

  In the last five years eight members of staff have reported that they have shareholdings.

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

  Mr. Norris
  This information is set out in the Department's management plan for 1992–95.

  Transpennine Roads Study
  Mr. Pendry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer of 13 July,Official Report, column 413, about the transpennine roads study, when he intends to make a substantive reply to the second part of that question relating to publication of the study.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  As soon as possible.

  Marchioness-Bowbelle Collision
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will give details of the action he has taken on each of the recommendations contained in the marine accident investigation report of July 1990 into the collision between the Marchioness and the Bowbelle.

  Mr. Norris
  One of the recommendations in the Hayes report on river safety, announced by the Secretary of State for Transport on 7 July, was that the Department should publish annually an account of the progress made on the implementation of recommendations made after all major disasters. The Department accepted this recommendation.

  There were 27 recommendations in the MAIB final report on the collision between the Marchioness and the Bowebelle. Action has been completed in respect of

  861
  recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4(b), 6–14 inclusive, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, 26 and 27. Action will be completed this year in respect of recommendations 4(a), 5, 15, 17, 20 and 24. Further consideration is being given to recommendation 22. Full details have been placed in the Library of the House.

  Motorway Sound Barriers
  Sir Michael Grylls
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to provide effective modern sound barriers to reduce the noise of the new feeder roads off the M25 between the M3 and M4 junctions.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Noise barriers are proposed at a number of locations adjacent to the proposed new link roads between junctions 12 and 15 of the M25. The type of' barrier to be used has not yet been decided. A number of possible options are being considered.

  Air Accidents
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what figures his Department has relating to the number of accident reports submitted involving(a) helicopters and (b) fixed wing aircrafts in British airspace over the last 10 years for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  In the past 10 years the Department's air accidents investigation branch has submitted a total of 73 formal investigation reports to the Secretary of State. Forty-seven of those reports were investigations into accidents to fixed-wing aircraft; 26 related to helicopter accidents.

  North Devon Link Road
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will authorise 60 mph speed restriction signs to be painted on the surface of the A361 north Devon link road.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  No, but I am proposing other steps to encourage compliance with the speed limit. I will write to the hon. Member.

  Trailers
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what provisions are laid down regarding the separate registration of towing vehicles and their trailers; and what exceptions exist for nuclear weapons convoys.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Motor vehicles for civilian use are registered by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency under the Vehicles (Excise) Act 1971. This does not extend to trailers. Military vehicles are registered by the Ministry of Defence. I am not aware of any exceptions applying to military vehicles in nuclear weapons convoys.

  Cross-Thames Rail Link
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the north-south rail link across the River Thames in south-east London.

  Mr. Norris
  The report on the east London rail study phase 2, commissioned by London Transport and the 862
  London Docklands development corporation and pubblished earlier this year, identified a number of possible extensions to the rail network including some that would cross the Thames. I understand that further work is being undertaken on certain of the options identified.

  East London River Crossing
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what contribution he is seeking from the private sector for construction of the east London river crossing.

  Mr. Norris
  It is not our policy to seek contributions to the construction of strategic trunk road schemes in my Department's programme except in cases where additional traffic generated by new private development would cause us to provide facilities which are more extensive, or earlier, than otherwise needed.

  The east London river crossing was included in the national programme in 1979, to complete the extension of the north circular road to the A2 as part of a coherent network for longer distance traffic within London. No additional facilities have been included in the plans since then to deal with specific development proposals and so no contributions are currently being sought from the private sector.

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the current estimated cost of building the east London river crossing.

  Mr. Norris
  The total estimated cost at 1989 prices is about £300 million.

  London Ring Rail
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received from S. B. Tietz and Partners on proposals for the London ring rail: and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  My right hon. Friend has just received a copy of the proposals for a London ring rail from S. B. Tietz and Partners and we shall reply to them shortly.

  Jubilee Line
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the contribution to decongestion in central London that the Jubilee line extension will make.

  Mr. Norris
  In net present value terms, at mid-1991 discounted to 1991, the road and rail decongestion benefits of the Jubilee line extension would be around £230 million and £275 million respectively.

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the estimated cost of extending further the proposed Jubilee line extension to Woolwich and Thamesmead.

  Mr. Norris
  London Transport has recently estimated that it would cost around £300 million or £330 million to extend the Jubilee line to Woolwich Arsenal taking a route north of the Royal Victoria dock, or £370 million taking a route south of the Royal Victoria dock. Extending beyond Woolwich Arsenal to Thamesmead would cost an estimated £160 million more. All estimates are in mid-1990 prices.
  863
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will publish details of the cost benefit analysis carried out on the proposals to extend the Jubilee line(a) to docklands and Greenwich peninsula and (b) further to Woolwich and Thamesmead.

  Mr. Norris
  (a) The results, in present value terms, of a recent cost benefit analysis of the proposed Jubilee line extension from Green Park to Stratford, taking into account the quantifiable benefits conventionally used in the appraisal of rail transport schemes, are given in the table.

  Mid 1991 prices discounted to 1991

  £ million

  Capital costs

  -1,505

  Operating cost

  -180

  Additional revenue

  340

  Funding gap

  -1,345

  Public transport user benefits

  1,025

  Road user benefits

  230

  Net benefit

  -90

  Benefit:cost ratio

  0·95:1

  (b) No recent cost-benefit analysis has been carried out in respect of possible further extensions of the Jubilee line to Woolwich and Thamesmead. At the time of the east London rail study, published July 1989, however, it was clear that the costs of such extensions would far exceed the benefits.

  Channel Tunnel Rail Link
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether the Detling to Mailing section of British Rail's previous southerly route for the channel tunnel rail link from which safeguarding has now been withdrawn is outside the preferred corridor referred to in his answer to the right hon. Member for Tonbridge and Mailing of 9 June,Official Report, column 116.

  Mr. Freeman
  The Detling to Hailing section of the originally safeguarded route was withdrawn on 5 November 1991 by the then Secretary of State because there was no common agreement to the west of Detling between the Ove Arup preferred route and that of British Rail. The Government preferred the Ove Arup approach which involves crossing the Thames near Dartford and arriving at King's Cross via Stratford. The Government have stated that the route indicated on the maps circulated last year was on the line of that put forward by Ove Arup, but have never suggested that the precise Ove Arup alignment could or should be definitive. West of Detling tal,the Government are committed to a preferred route corridor and not a specific safeguardable line. British Rail are considering carefully the cost, environmental and engineering implications of the route and will present to Ministers later this year any proposed diversions from this base reference. Any such diversions would have to be justified and in due course, if accepted, be subject to public consultations and planning approval.

  Railway Pensions
  Mr. Alan Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will give an assurance that when employees of British Rail transfer with their jobs to a new owner on privatisation their future pension entitlements will be no less than had they stayed as employees of British Rail.

  Mr. Freeman
  An assurance on pensions is given at paragraph 87 of the White Paper "New Opportunities for the Railways", Cm 2012, which was published on 14 July.

  London Underground
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the inner London parliamentary constituencies which do not have a London Underground station; and what plans he has to remedy this.

  Mr. Norris
  Of the 30 inner London parliamentary constituencies, nine do not contain a London Underground station. These are:

  Greenwich

  Lewisham, East

  Woolwich

  Lewisham, West

  Eltham

  Dulwich

  Hackney, South and Shoreditch Streatham

  Peckham

  The location of parliamentary boundaries is not a factor taken into account by London Underground when putting together their investment programme. However, there are several schemes under consideration by LUL which would have the effect of increasing the number of parliamentary constituencies served by the underground.

  Lorry Weights
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether, under the Maastricht treaty, decisions to increase maximum lorry weights would be taken by unanimous decision or by qualified majority voting.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  The existing legal provision for decisions relating to a common transport policy normally to be taken by qualified majority voting is not affected by the Maastricht treaty.

  River Safety
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if, following the public reaction to the report of the Hayes committee on river safety and any representations made to him, he will consider publishing a Green Paper reviewing safety on rivers and waterways, other than the tidal Thames, and the ways in which safety can be improved thereon, including consideration that the statutory duty for co-ordinating the safety requirements become the specific responsibility of the relevant navigation authority.

  Mr. Norris
  As my right hon. Friend announced on 7 July, he is setting up district marine safety committees to review in each of their areas the way in which responsibilities for safety, rescue and accident prevention are currently distributed. Their remit includes safety on rivers and waterways. They will consider ways in which safety can be improved and ensure that improvements are implemented and sustained. It would not be appropriate to prescribe particular solutions at this stage; we intend that the proposals should come from the individual committees and therefore reflect the circumstances of their area.

  "Going Round in Circles"
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement concerning his Department's response to the proposals contained in the publication, "Going Round in Circles", published by the Association of London Authorities in December 1991.

  Mr. Norris
  I have just received the publication to which the hon. Member refers, and I will be considering its contents.

  Plutonium (Road Transport)
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what are the procedures for informing the local public of possible health risks associated with the accidental dispersal of radioactive plutonium in the event of a road transportation accident.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Information will be given by the local authorities on advice from the emergency services.

  Crown Estate
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he last met the Crown Estate Commissioners in order to discuss those matters over which they control rights of public access and which affect movements of commercial vehicles and public transport.

  Mr. Norris
  My right hon. Friend has had no such meetings.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will consider introducing legislation to remove ancient rights of ferry from the Crown Estate Commissioners where this affects any public ferry service.

  Mr. Norris
  No.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will seek the agreement of the Crown Estate Commissioners to consult his Department and the relevant local authorities prior to them ordering a cessation of any ferry service over which they exercise ancient rights of ferry.

  Mr. Norris
  The terms under which the Crown Estate Commissioners grant or withdraw rights to operate ferry services are commercial matters between the commissioners and the ferry operators concerned. This Department has no locus to intervene.

  Disability
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action he is taking during the Government's presidency of the Council of Ministers to promote EC legislation on making public transport accessible to disabled people; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. MacGregor
  My Department is committed to promoting and encouraging improved access to public transport for people with disabilities. We are working closely with disabled people as consumers and with the transport industries on the most effective way forward.

  The scope for EC action is limited by the subsidiarity principle, in so far as this does not apply, the Government will take forward measures to assist disabled people during the United Kingdom presidency.

  Road Maintenance
  Mr. Fry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what records his Department keeps of the cost of maintenance and repairs for individual sections of motorway and trunk road.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  My Department keeps extensive records of the cost of maintenance and repairs; these costs are being progressively entered into, and retained on, a number of computerised systems, so that information can be extracted for individual sections as required.

  Mr. Fry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what records his Department keeps of the historic maintenance requirements of different forms of motorway and trunk road construction.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  My Department keeps extensive maintenance records. These are used, inter alia, to ensure that the standards required of new construction reflect current needs and accord with minimum whole-life costs.

  It is a requirement under all major new construction and maintenance schemes for records of construction known as "as built drawings" to be recorded. Steps are under way to computerise these records.

  Rail White Paper
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received since the publication of his White Paper on British Rail.

  Mr. Freeman
  None.

  Train Failures
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what claims British Rail has against the manufacturers of the 225 trains for technical failure while in service.

  Mr. Freeman
  British Rail is ensuring that the manufacturer of the InterCity 225 trains complies with the terms of the contracts, which include warranty protections.

  MoT Tests
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what instructions he issues as to whether an MoT rejection arising from a particular vehicle component can be reissued for different reasons once the rectification work has been undertaken.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: If a vehicle fails its test on what are classed minor items—for example, horn, indicators, headlamp aim, lamps, rear reflectors, seat belts, but not anchorages, windscreen washers and wipers, emissions—and providing the vehicle is brought back repaired to the station by the end of the next working day only the failure items are retested. However, if the vehicle is failed for other reasons and is brought back repaired regardless of when it is represented the vehicle must undergo another complete MoT test. It is possible that other defects may have occurred in the interim and would subsequently merit another refusal being issued. It is also possible that a retested vehicle may fail if a repaired component still does not meet the required standard.

  A565-M57 Link Road
  Mr. Matthew Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will confirm the date of the public inquiry into Sefton borough council's proposal to build a link road between the A565 trunk road at Ince Blundell and the M57 motorway at Switch Island.

  Mr. Baldry
  I have been asked to reply.

  I will write to my hon. Friend.

PRIME MINISTER

  EC Expenditure
  Sir Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will raise at the next meeting of the European Council the level of expenditure of the EC.

  The Prime Minister
  Yes. It was agreed by the European Council at Lisbon on 26 and 27 June 1992 that when the Council met again at Edinburgh it would address the Community's finances for 1993 and subsequent years.

  Whaling
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Prime Minister, further to his answer to the hon. Member for South Shields on 13 July, what response he received when he discussed the hunting of minke whales and the International Whaling Commission with the Prime Minister of Japan; and if he will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  The Japanese Prime Minister noted the concerns that I expressed to him. Mr. Miyazawa and the Japanese Government are well aware of the considerable opposition in this country to whaling.

  Poland
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Prime Minister when the ratification process of the association agreement between the European Communities and the Republic of Poland will be completed; and if he will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  The association agreement will be concluded between the Republic of Poland, the European Community and its member states. It therefore requires ratification by the Parliaments of member states and the Polish Parliament. The European Parliament must also give its assent. I hope that these procedures can be completed quickly.

  Crown Estate
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will introduce legislation to bring the administration of the Crown estate within a Government Department and subject to Ministerial responsibility.

  The Prime Minister
  No. The Crown estate is administered by the Crown Estate Commissioners under the terms of the Crown Estate Act 1961.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Prime Minister if he is consulted on the appointment of the Crown Estate Commissioners.

  The Prime Minister
  Yes.
  868
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Prime Minister when a Government Minister last met the chairman or members of the Crown Estate Commission in order to discuss the administration of the Crown estate.

  The Prime Minister
  The Chancellor of the Exchequer met Lord Mansfield, the First Crown Estate Commissioner, to discuss the Crown estate's performance and long-term plans, on Wednesday 10 July 1991.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Prime Minister in what circumstances the Crown Estate Commission is liable to pay the uniform business rate on property and estates it administers.

  The Prime Minister
  Commercial tenants of the Crown Estate Commissioners are liable to pay the uniform business rate in the usual way. Where the Crown estate occupies buildings for its own employees, the commissioners make a contribution in lieu of business rates to the Inland Revenue Crown property unit. The level of the rate is determined by the valuation office.

  Voluntary Bodies
  Mr. Sims
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the total amount paid in grants by Government Departments to voluntary bodies during the financial year 1990–91: and if he will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  Government funding to voluntary organisations in 1990–91 amounted to £2,680 million. Of this, £2,058 million was payments to voluntary housing associations; £150 million was payments under major employment and training schemes; and £472 million went to support provision of services and a wide range ofactivities and projects by a variety of voluntary organisations. This last figure, which represents the amount paid directly by Government funding to voluntary organisations, shows that direct Government funding of the voluntary sector increased in cash terms by 26·5 per cent.—16·6 per cent. in real terms—over the level of provision in 1989–90. In the period between 1979–80 and 1990–91, the level of the Government's support for voluntary bodies rose in real terms by 149·5 per cent., an increase in cash terms of 542·25 per cent.

  The amount spent under individual departmental programmes was as follows:

  £

  Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

  179,037

  Defence

  9,688,730

  Education and Science

  5,725,346

  Sports Council

  13,454,000

  Employment Training programmes

  177,199,203

  Energy

  725,462

  Environment

  Direct grants

  15,965,568

  Urban programme

  51,300,000

  Housing corporation

  1,682,000,000

  Countryside Commission

  1,600,000

  Nature Conservancy Council

  1,469,000

  Rural Development Commission

  5,089,000

  UK 2000 project grant fund

  360,000

  Foreign and Commonwealth Office

  1,453,658

  Overseas Development Administration

  87,799,667

  Health

  Direct grants

  36,498,099

  Health Education Authority

  1,108,405

  Home Office

  869

  £

  Direct grants

  33,856,000

  Equal Opportunities Commission

  19,814

  Commission for Racial Equality

  508,887

  Northern Ireland Office

  Direct grants

  17,673,816

  Housing associations and societies

  36,872,587

  Sports Council for Northern Ireland

  495,696

  Economic Development Grants

  Action for Community Employment

  49,230,056

  Community workshops

  17,739,038

  Community volunteering schemes

  890,000

  Youth community projects

  831,479

  Young help

  1,148,681

  Scottish Office

  Direct grants

  18,909,379

  Urban programme

  35,671,000

  Housing associations

  208,000,000

  Countryside Commission for Scotland

  1,004,341

  Highlands and Islands Enterprise (formerly Highlands and Islands Development Board)

  1,197,977

  Sports Council for Scotland

  1,451,561

  Social Security

  5,717,883

  Trade and Industry

  11,604,172

  Transport

  541,000

  Welsh Office

  Direct grants

  8,767,755

  Urban programme

  3,060,000

  Joint finance/care in the community

  336,000

  Development Board for Rural Wales

  420,664

  Housing for Wales

  (Tai Cymru)—Grants to housing associations

  131,387,947

  Sports Council for Wales and Play Wales Management Committee

  1,099,155

  GRAND TOTAL

  2,680,050,063

  I am placing in the Library of the House a list of voluntary bodies funded by the Government in 1990–91 other than those funded under youth training and employment training, housing programmes and the urban programme or via non-departmental public bodies. Other recent publications about the relationship between Government and the voluntary sector already placed in the Library include "The Individual and the Community: The Role of the Voluntary Sector", and a leaflet entitled "Government and Voluntary Organisations Support and Partnership". Copies of these publications can be obtained from the voluntary services unit, Home Office, Room 1373, 50 Queen Anne's gate, London SW 1 H 9AT.

EDUCATION

  Civil Servants' Shareholdings
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education 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. Forman
  No special guidance is provided. Civil servants in the Department and its agency are expected to 870
  report shareholdings where a conflict of interest might arise. There is no record of any having done so over the past five years: the nature of most of the Department's business makes conflicts of interest inherently unlikely.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what visits she 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 she has for making further progress in deregulation matters during the United Kingdom presidency of the EC.

  Mr. Forman
  Education is not regulated at the level of the EC.

  Theatres
  Ms. Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what jurisdiction his Department has over those theatres currently controlled by colleges in the further education sector; and if he has had talks with the Further Education Funding Council to guarantee their future survival.

  Mr. Forman
  My right hon. Friend has no jurisdiction over theatres currently controlled by further education colleges hut, under the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, his consent would he required for the disposal of such an asset prior to 1 April 1993. It will be for the Further Education Funding Council, when it is formed, to decide how to treat theatres for the purposes of its funding methodology.

  Voluntary-aided Primary Schools, Rossendale
  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) if he will approve the application for capital grant in respect of an extension to St. Veronica's voluntary-aided primary school, Haslingden, Rossendale;

  (2) if he will approve the application for capital grant in respect of developments at St. Mary's voluntary-aided primary school, Haslingden, Rossendale.

  Mr. Forth
  My right hon. Friend approved a proposal to enlarge significantly the premises of St. Veronica's on 6 February 1992 together with the associated project at St. Mary's. This approval means that he will be prepared to pay maintenance contribution on governors' approved net building expenditure subject to a maximum cash limit based on 85 per cent. of the governors' share of the scheme which estimated total capital costs of £580,000.

  English
  Mr. Walden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many(a) higher education students and (b) female students were reading English in the years 1979, 1985 and 1991.

  Mr. Foreman
  The information is given in the table:

  Higher education students studying English (Great Britain)

  Male

  Female

  Total

  1979

  3,981

  7,857

  11,838

  1985

  3,513

  7,897

  11,410

  1990

  4,314

  11,773

  16,087

  Note: Subject classification changed between 1985 and 1990.

  Student Fees
  Mr. Walden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what the cost to the Exchequer of student fees was in the years 1979, 1985, and 1991.

  Mr. Foreman
  In financial year 1991–92 the cost to the Exchequer of fees for mandatory student award holders domiciled in England and Wales, and of fees paid on behalf of students from the European Community, was some £1,173,084,000. This figure excludes discretionary award holders and the holders of postgraduate awards, for whom the fee element cannot be separately identified. For financial years 1979–80 and 1985–86, only combined fee and maintenance figures are available.

  Standard Assessment Tasks
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what representations have been received against publication of SATs results and how many for publication during the past 12 months.

  Mr. Forth
  My right hon. Friend has not yet issued for consultation proposals for the publication of national curriculum assessment results at school level. It is not, therefore, possible to provide a tabulation of representations for and against publication.

  However, over the past 12 months the Department for Education has received many letters about the general issue of the publication of national curriculum assessment results at national, LEA and school level. Precise figures on the numbers for and against publication at the various different levels are not, however, available.

  School Budgets
  Mr. Lidington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will publish figures to show for each local education authority in English in the latest year for which such figures are available what was(a) the potential schools budget, (b) the amount of subsidy spent on school meals and milk and (c) (b) expressed as a percentage of (a).

  Mr. Forth
  The figures in the following table show planned expenditure for 1991–92, and were taken from local authorities' 1991–92 budget statements, published under section 42 of the Education Reform Act 1988.

  School meals expenditure 1991–92

  (a)

  (b)

  (c)

  Local education authority

  Potential schools budget (PSB)

  School meals expenditure not delegated

  School meals expenditure as a percentage of PSB

  (£ million)

  (£ million)

  Avon

  222·7

  14·0

  6·3

  Barking

  42·5

  2·1

  4·9

  Barnet

  75·4

  4·3

  5·7

  Barnsley

  50·7

  4·4

  8·7

  Bedfordshire

  150·4

  9·6

  6·4

  Berkshire

  168·3

  0·9

  0·5

  Bexley

  56·5

  2·6

  4·5

  Birmingham

  271·1

  18·8

  6·9

  Bolton

  71·0

  5·7

  8·0

  Bradford

  141·9

  8·5

  6·0

  Brent

  68·9

  4·4

  6·3

  Bromley

  64·1

  2·9

  4·5

  Buckinghamshire

  148·9

  1·4

  0·9

  Bury

  44·2

  3·4

  7·7

  Calderdale

  49·8

  3·3

  6·6

  872

  (a)

  (b)

  (c)

  Local education authority

  Potential schools budget (PSB)

  School meals expenditure not delegated

  School meals expenditure as a percentage of PSB

  (£ million)

  (£ million)

  Cambridgeshire

  158·6

  3·3

  2·1

  Cheshire

  243·6

  10·6

  4·4

  Cleveland

  164·9

  13·8

  8·4

  Cornwall

  102·1

  5·6

  5·5

  Coventry

  81·1

  4·4

  5·4

  Croydon

  81·2

  1·6

  1·9

  Cumbria

  122·6

  4·9

  4·0

  Derbyshire

  235·6

  21·6

  9·2

  Devon

  209·3

  8·2

  3·9

  oncaster

  83·6

  7·0

  8·4

  Dorset

  132·0

  0·5

  0·3

  Dudley

  72·4

  2·7

  3·7

  Durham

  157·0

  10·5

  6·7

  Ealing

  74·2

  2·7

  3·6

  East Sussex

  135·8

  9·7

  7·1

  Enfield

  71·7

  2·4

  3·4

  Essex

  372·7

  5·1

  1·4

  Gateshead

  50·8

  3·3

  6·4

  Gloucestershire

  115·4

  2·0

  1·7

  Hampshire

  367·1

  17·3

  4·7

  Haringey

  55·8

  3·9

  6·9

  Harrow

  48·7

  1·4

  2·8

  Havering

  65·3

  1·5

  2·3

  Hereford/Worcester

  156·4

  1·4

  0·9

  Hertfordshire

  246·8

  14·3

  5·8

  Hillingdon

  60·8

  0·3

  0·5

  Hounslow

  60·6

  3·6

  6·0

  Humberside

  238·2

  13·5

  5·7

  Isle of Wight

  29·8

  1·0

  3·3

  Isles of Scilly

  0·9

  0·0

  2·6

  Kent

  343·8

  3·8

  1·1

  Kingston

  33·1

  1·3

  3·9

  Kirklees

  98·5

  7·5

  7·6

  Knowsley

  46·4

  2·9

  6·3

  Lancashire

  349·2

  19·3

  5·5

  Leeds

  188·0

  13·2

  7·0

  Leicestershire

  242·9

  12·3

  5·1

  Lincolnshire

  134·4

  0·6

  0·5

  Liverpool

  141·6

  7·9

  5·6

  Manchester

  123·3

  13·0

  10·5

  Merton

  40·6

  0·6

  1·6

  Newcastle

  70·8

  4·3

  6·1

  Newham

  73·6

  3·1

  4·2

  Norfolk

  177·0

  10·5

  6·0

  North Tyneside

  53·2

  4·1

  7·7

  North Yorkshire

  168·2

  9·9

  5·9

  Northamptonshire

  155·8

  2·2

  1·4

  Northumberland

  71·1

  6·2

  8·7

  Nottinghamshire

  267·3

  18·1

  6·8

  Oldham

  65·6

  4·6

  7·1

  Oxfordshire

  131·9

  5·3

  4·0

  Redbridge

  51·6

  1·1

  2·2

  Richmond

  32·2

  0·9

  2·8

  Rochdale

  52·2

  4·2

  8·1

  Rotherham

  70·7

  4·4

  6·2

  Salford

  59·2

  3·1

  5·3

  Sandwell

  90·8

  5·8

  6·4

  Sefton

  76·7

  4·3

  5·6

  Sheffield

  118·5

  8·0

  6·8

  Shropshire

  108·6

  6·3

  5·8

  Solihull

  54·6

  3·2

  5·9

  Somerset

  108·4

  1·9

  1·8

  South Tyneside

  38·3

  3·3

  8·7

  Staffordshire

  253·5

  13·3

  5·2

  St. Helens

  49·0

  3·1

  6·3

  Stockport

  71·6

  2·3

  3·2

  Suffolk

  152·3

  1·9

  1·3

  Sunderland

  76·6

  4·8

  6·2

  Surrey

  203·5

  12·1

  5·9

  Sutton

  37·7

  1·2

  3·2

  Tameside

  56·6

  4·4

  7·8

  Trafford

  46·4

  3·2

  6·9

  Wakefield

  80·8

  7·4

  9·1

  Walsall

  77·6

  5·4

  6·9

  873

  (a)

  (b)

  (c)

  Local education authority

  Potential schools budget (PSB)

  School meals expenditure not delegated

  School meals expenditure as a percentage of PSB

  (£ million)

  (£ million)

  Waltham Forest

  61·4

  4·8

  7·8

  Warwickshire

  110·5

  5·6

  5·1

  Westminster

  40·4

  3·0

  7·4

  West Sussex

  142·2

  3·0

  2·1

  Wigan

  86·7

  4·5

  5·2

  Wiltshire

  131·8

  4·4

  3·3

  Wirral

  83·8

  4·1

  4·9

  Wolverhampton

  73·7

  4·3

  5·8

  Totals and National averages

  13,230·3

  554·2

  4·9

  Notes:

  1. The table lists each local education authority (LEA) which had a local management scheme in operation in 1991–92. Apart from Westminster, the LEAs in inner London are not included. LEAs are not required to operate a full school meals service, but they are obliged to offer free meals to pupils of families in receipt of income support. Charges may be levied in respect of meals for other pupils.

  2. The potential schools budget—column (a)—is defined as the general schools budget less expenditure on certain excepted items: capital expenditure; expenditure supported by central government grants; and expenditure on school meals, home to school transport and transitional exceptions (eg grounds maintenance).

  3. The figure for school meals expenditure in each authority—column (b)—is taken from the list of items excepted from delegation shown in each authority's section 42 budget statement for 1991–92. The figures may not be directly comparable for two reasons:

  (i) some authorities have separately identified school milk expenditure as a different excepted item, in which case the figure for milk expenditure is not included, and other authorities have included milk expenditure in the same item without disaggregating the costs, in which case milk expenditure is included; and

  (ii) the extent to which income from charges is taken into account varies considerably between authorities. For example, in some authorities gross expenditure on school meals is offset by income, in other authorities where the meals service is contracted out the income may be retained by the contractor and the gross expenditure by the authority is reduced accordingly.

  4. Figures for 1992–93 are not yet complete.

  Young Musicians
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will take steps to ensure that the Centre for Young Musicians can continue to provide tuition to musically gifted children from all parts of inner London.

  Mr. Forth
  The work of the Centre for Young Musicians is widely regarded, not least by my Department which is providing funding over the three years 1990–93 of more than £330,000. I very much welcome the support which inner London boroughs give to the Centre for Young Musicians and hope that London children will continue to benefit from the tuition offered.

  Food and Home Economics
  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on the future of the subject of food and home economics in the national curriculum.
  874
  Mr. Forth
  Aspects of home economics are covered in a number of national curriculum subjects, including technology and science. While the revision of the programmes of study and statements of attainment of the national curriculum technology order is still in progress, it would be inappropriate to comment further.

  Post-16 Students
  Mr. Kevin Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what proposals he has for the assessment of the Government's financial contributions to the provision under section 12 of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992 providing for schools to admit, from 1993, persons over compulsory school age to courses suitable to their requirements on a full or part-time basis and to charge fees for this service; and if these additional students will be accounted for in the methodology of the post-16 block of education standard spending assessment or otherwise.

  Mr. Forman
  Funding arrangements in 1993–94 will reflect LEAs' changed duties under the Further and Higher Education Act 1992. In calculating the transfer of funds from local authorities to the new further education sector, the Government will leave within local authority standard spending the resources attributable to those courses which fall within LEAs' responsibilities. The Government will announce in due course their proposals for the education elements of standard spending assessments as part of the local authority finance settlement for 1993–94.

  Performing Arts
  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what grants have been made to Oulder Hill community school, Rochdale, to fund the Business and Technician Education Council course in performing arts.

  Mr. Forman
  The Government are committed to increasing take-up of vocational qualifications in schools. In 1992–93, my Department allocated Rochdale LEA funds to support expenditure of £13,400 to help schools and sixth form colleges to introduce new vocational qualifications under the grants for education support and training—GEST—programme. Figures on the grants made to individual schools under this element of the GEST programme are not available centrally.

  Discretionary Awards
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) how many students eligible for local authority discretionary awards under sections 1(6) and 2 of the Education Act 1962 were offered places on further education courses at educational institutions in 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991;

  (2) how many students received local authority discretionary awards under sections 1(6) and 2 of the Education Act 1962 on further education courses in 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991.

  Mr. Forman
  Section 1(6) of the Act covers higher education only.

  Under section 2 of the Education Act 1962, LEAs have a discretionary power to bestow awards on persons over compulsory school age attending any course of full-time or part-time further education. LEAs must meet the cost for these awards from their own resources.
  875
  The numbers of further education students receiving discretionary awards under section 2 of the Education Act 1962 are as follows:

  Thousands

  1988–89

  1989–90

  11990–91

  130·9

  130·5

  128·5

  1 (Provisional).

  Data for 1991–92 are not yet available.

  Expansion Funds
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether grant-maintained school and Church schools will he eligible for the expansion funds going to oversubscribed popular schools in 1993–94 on the same basis as local authority-maintained schools.

  Mr. Forth
  Yes.

  Student Support
  Mr. Don Foster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans his Department has to conduct investigations into levels of higher education student support, the relationship between income and estimated expenditure and the levels of student hardship and debt; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forman
  By this autumn, we shall have increased the level of full-year student support by nearly 40 per cent. since 1989–90. We shall commission surveys of students' income and expenditure as and when appropriate.

  Special Educational Needs
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list the number of(a) special needs students who have been statemented and attend (i) special day schools, (ii) special needs residential schools and (iii) mainstream schools each year since 1981, (b) statemented pupils for each year since 1981, (c) those waiting to be statemented for each year since 1981 and (d) the number of appeals.

  Mr. Forth
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Mature Students
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make provision for mandatory awards to be made by local authorities to mature students admitted directly for higher degrees without first doing first degrees; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forman
  No.

  National Curriculum
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what arrangements he intends to make for national curriculum assessments in 1993, in the light of recent consultations; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Patten
  In the light of consultation and of the advice of the School Examinations and Assessment Council under its chairman. Lord Griffiths, I shall be making later this month orders to govern the assessment 876
  under the national curriculum in 1993 of seven-year-olds in the core subjects—English, mathematics and science—and technology, history and geography, and of 14-year-olds in the core subjects and technology. I shall place copies of the orders and accompanying circulars in the Library.

  Next year's assessments of seven-year-olds will build on the experience of this year's successful tests. They will consist of:
  mandatory tests in the core subjects of English, mathematics and science, focusing on the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic;
  teachers' assessments of pupils' attainments in technology, and for the first time in history and geography, supported by non-mandatory tests;
  strengthened arrangements to ensure consistency of assessment standards within and between schools.
  I have decided to give teachers greater flexibility over the timing of the tests of seven-year-olds in the core subjects which, in 1993, will be able to be delivered from the mid-point of the spring term to four weeks before the end of the summer term. This means that:
  teachers will have longer to deliver the programmes of study if they so choose; and
  those children whose seventh birthday falls in the summer term can be tested later, if teachers wish.
  Next year's assessment of 14-year-olds will he the first under statutory arrangements. They will apply to all maintained secondary schools, city technology colleges and such independent schools as choose to participate. The key features will be:
  short, written papers in science, mathematics. English and technology, taken simultaneously by all pupils under examination conditions;
  a practical test of pupils' manufacturing skills in technology;
  teachers' assessments of each pupil's classroom work to provide a detailed diagnosis of strengths and weaknesses which will inform GCSE option choices and future teaching;
  provision for subject score consisting of test results, in attainment targets covered by tests, and teacher assessments in other attainment targets;
  a rigorous audit by independent examining bodies of each school's test marking and teacher assessments before results are reported to parents or published.
  In response to concerns that test dates for 14-year-olds in 1993 should not clash with those for high entry GCSEs, and that testing should not be concentrated within a single week, I have decided that the tests in 1993 will be spread over the two weeks beginning 7 and 14 June. A detailed timetable setting out which tests will be on which days will be distributed to schools early in September.

  These measures are a further step in the Government's programme to ensure that pupils' attainments are assessed according to rigorous standards. They will provide parents and teachers with valuable information on each pupil's strengths and weaknesses, and will be a valuable tool in raising further standards in our schools.

  Surplus Places
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) if he will estimate the cost of keeping surplus places in primary and secondary schools in each academic year since 1987–88 in 1991–92 prices;

  (2) if he will estimate the number of surplus places in primary and secondary schools in each academic year since 1987–88.
  877
  Mr. Forth
  [holding answer 9 July 1992]: The table records the estimated number of surplus places over the last four calendar—not academic—years.

  Year

  Primary

  Secondary

  1987

  900,000

  770,000

  1988

  860,000

  890,000

  1989

  830,000

  950,000

  1990

  780,000

  1,000,000

  These figures derive from an assessment of school capacity carried out in 1981 which has been adjusted annually to reflect accommodation brought into and taken out of use. We have recently completed an initial survey of school capacity. On the basis of this survey we estimate that in 1991 there were up to 1·5 million surplus places in England—approximately 800,000 in the primary sector and 700,000 in the secondary sector. Further work needs to be done to establish the reliability of these figures for each LEA.

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

  Public Bodies
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department which non-departmental public bodies are sponsored by his Department; which of these are audited by the National Audit Office; which firms of private accountants audits each of the others; by what method of tendering contracts to such firms are awarded; and for what duration.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Non-departmental public bodies which are sponsored by the LCD are listed in the HMSO publication "Public Bodies 1991 "—ISBN No. 011 4300 64X. Normal National Audit Office arrangements apply for all the LCD's non-departmental public bodies except in the following cases where the statutory provisions governing the body allow for external auditors to be appointed: the Legal Aid Board, which has appointed Messrs. Chantrey Vellacott for an initial period of two years following a competitive tender; the Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board, which is audited by Messrs. Finnie & Co., who were chosen in preference to one other firm and where the contract between the board and Finnies is for no specific duration; and the Advisory Committee on Legal Education and Conduct, where the appointment of auditors is currently the subject of competitive tendering.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary. Lord Chancellor's 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. John M. Taylor
  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.

  Disability Living Allowance
  Mrs. Helen Jackson
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, pursuant to the answer of the Secretary of State for Social Security of 13 July, about the appeal of the constituent of the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hillsborough, Ref. YR691179C, against a disability living allowance decision, if he will make a statement on the delay in arranging a hearing.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The Secretary of State's submission in the appeal Ref. YR691179C—Commissioner's ref. CA/016/92—of the hon. Member's constituent was received in the office of the Social Security Commissioner on 20 February 1992. Following the normal procedure, a copy of that submission was sent on 21 February 1992 to the constituent's authorised representative. His written observations were requested and are still awaited.

  The constituent lodged a separate appeal—Commissioner's ref. CA/310/92—against the same decision in a different regional office using a different representative. The two appeals are being dealt with together to ensure that they are resolved at the same time.

  Distraint
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellors Department if he will review the basis of distraint by bailiffs on goods and chattels of debtors and further limit the range of such articles which can be distrained upon.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The goods and chattels which are exempt from levy and seizure following a judgment of a county court or the High Court were revised by section 15 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 which came into effect on 1 July 1991. This exemption also applies to distress for rent. I have no plans to amend those exemptions further.

  I understand however that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment is consulting local authority associations and other interested bodies about introducing restrictions which mirror these in cases of non-payment of the community charge and rates.

  Legal Aid
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what guidance is available to criminal legal aid; and whether the same guidance is followed by the area offices of the Legal Aid Board when dealing with cases coming to them on review from refusals by the courts.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The Justices Clerks Society issued guidance to its members in 1990 and 1991. The Lord Chancellor's Department issued a circular in April 1992 which included advice and guidance for use when considering applications for criminal legal aid. The Legal Aid Board is aware of the guidance which has been made available. However, it remains for the court, or the legal aid area committee in the case of a review, to decide whether legal aid should be granted in any particular case in accordance with the criteria set down in the Legal Aid Act 1988.

  Magistrates, Sunderland
  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will list the names of those responsible for choosing magistrates for the borough of Sunderland and their lengths of service in each case.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The members of the advisory committee responsible for recommending candidates for the magistracy for the Sunderland petty sessional division and their dates of appointment are as follows:

  Chairman:

  G. P. Suffield Esq. JP—Appointed 1982

  Members:

  Mrs. C. K. Wood JP—Appointed 1982

  A. P. Greenshields Esq. JP—Appointed 1982

  J. Hall Esq. JP—Appointed 1988

  Dodds Esq. JP—Appointed 1991

  J. Jones Esq. JP—Appointed 1991

  Mrs. S. K. Whiteman JP—Appointed 1988

  Mrs. C. P. M. Clarke JP—Appointed 1991

  J. J. Gardiner Esq. MBE—Appointed 1991

  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will list magistrates in the borough of Sunderland by the wards in which they live.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The question cannot be answered without disproportionate cost. When seeking suitable candidates for appointment the Lord Chancellor expects all advisory committees to achieve a bench which is representative of the community it serves. To this end, he expects them to take into account geographical as well as other factors.

  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will give the political balance of magistrates for the borough of Sunderland.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The political balance of magistrates for the Sunderland petty sessional division is as follows:

  Numbers

  Conservative

  65

  Labour

  48

  Liberal Democrat

  17

  Independent

  2

  132

  Legal Proceedings
  Dr. Goodson-Wickes
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department when he proposes to implement provision allowing no-win-no-fee arrangements for legal proceedings.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The Lord Chancellor and I are now considering the matters which should be included in an order to be made under the provisions of section 58 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. We hope to issue a draft order for consultation in the autumn.

  Community Charge
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what steps he has taken to satisfy himself that the returns which make up the community charge enforcement statement are an accurate report of the number of people jailed for non-payment of community charge; and if he will make a statement.
  880
  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The information about community charge enforcement proceedings in the magistrates' courts which is collected by the Lord Chancellor's Department includes the number of warrants issued each quarter committing non-payers to prison. These statistics are based on returns by justices' clerks. They are not routinely checked for accuracy although queries are followed up with the justices clerk concerned on an individual basis. The information collected does not purport to show the number of non-payers received into prison since in some cases payment is made following issue of a warrant.

  Magistrates, Walthamstow
  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will list the number of magistrates at the Walthamstow magistrates court resident in each electoral ward of the London borough of Waltham Forest and the number resident outside the borough.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The question cannot be answered without disproportionate cost.

  When seeking suitable candidates for appointment the Lord Chancellor expects all advisory committees to achieve a bench which is representative of the community it serves. To this end, he expects them to take into account geographical as well as other factors.

  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will list the names of the members of the committee responsible for the selection of magistrates for the Walthamstow magistrates court.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The members of the advisory committee responsible for recommending candidates for the magistracy for north-east London are as follows:

  Chairman:

  E. J. Huxtable Esq. OBE JP

  Members:

  M. P. V. Leigh Esq JP

  Mrs. J. C. Barnett JP

  R. C. Jeffries Esq JP

  A. S. Dowley Esq JP

  R. Bryant Esq JP

  Dr. J. P. Barker JP

  His Honour Judge Owen Stable QC

  Mrs. M. Froud JP

  Mrs. D. M. Everitt JP

  Miss M. D. Churchill JP

  Miss C. M. Mather JP

  Mrs. D. J. Carradice JP

  Top Salaries Review Body
  Mr. Head
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, what decisions the Government have made about the Top Salaries Review Body recommendations concerning the regrouping of senior circuit judges and others in group 5.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The Government have accepted the TRSB's recommendations for regrouping. Some of the posts in the existing group 5 will be moved to a new group 5, at the same level as official referees; others will be reclassified in group 6 with a salary lead, although existing incumbents will be paid the new group 5 rate. As announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 10 July 1992,Official Report, column 288, the Government have not accepted the other recommendations affecting the judiciary.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster 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. Waldegrave
  Deregulation is primarily the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. However, the aims of the citizens charter are relevant to deregulation. During the United Kingdom presidency, our European partners will have an opportunity to learn how the charter is helping to raise standards of public service in this country. In particular, on 3 and 4 December there will be a major conference in London on service for the citizen.

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

  Mr. Jackson
  I regret that it has not been possible to provide an answer before the summer recess. I shall therefore write to my hon. Friend and place a copy of the letter in the Library.

  Treaties
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make it his policy to include in his plans for developing the citizens charter a right for citizens to be informed of the effect of the more important treaties.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  I regret that it has not been possible to provide an answer before the summer recess. I shall therefore write to the hon. Member and place a copy of the letter in the Library.

  Researchers
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what consideration he is giving to taking steps to help British researchers, who have recently completed PhDs, to stay in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Jackson
  The Government provide substantial funding to maintain a healthy science base in this country and to ensure continuing opportunities for our scientists. We are consulting on our longer-term strategy for science and technology, including the career structures available to scientists.

  Framework Research Programme
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what new ground rules he is proposing for the £4 billion framework research programme.

  Mr. Jackson
  I regret that it has not been possible to provide an answer before the summer recess. I shall therefore write to the hon. Member and place a copy of the letter in the Library.

  Benevolent Fund
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) of 15 June,Official Report, column 359, if he will list the total amount transferred to the Duchy of Lancaster benevolent fund in each year since 1981–82; and what proportion transferred in each year resulted from the value of intestate estates.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  Amounts transferred to the Duchy of Lancaster benevolent fund in each year since 1981–82 were:

  £

  1981–82

  NIL

  1982–83

  150,000

  1983–84

  150,000

  1984–85

  150,000

  1985–86

  200,000

  1986–87

  250,000

  1987–88

  400,000

  1988–89

  494,701

  1989–90

  335,981

  1990–91

  531,715

  Amounts paid to the duchy of Lancaster by the duchy solicitor, which are represented by devolutions in the duchy's accounts, include accrued interest and unclaimed assets of dissolved companies. The greatest single element is represented by intestate estates.

  From these sums deductions are made to cover the duchy's palatinate and special costs. The balance is then paid over to the benevolent fund. It is not possible to calculate the proportion attributable to intestate estates which is transferred to the fund.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Dioxin
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether his Department intends to analyse garden soil in the area surrounding the Coalite plant in Derbyshire; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  The results of analyses of soil samples taken by the Department on farms near to the Coalite plant have been published. In addition, the results of a soil survey conducted by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution in the Bolsover area are expected to be published in due course. These analyses will give a comprehensive picture of dioxing levels in soils in the area and therefore it is not necessary to analyse garden soils.

  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether his Department intends to carry out analyses of the garden vegetables in the areas surrounding the Coalite plant in Derbyshire; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to my reply to him on 15 July 1992. The Department has no plans to analyse garden vegetables.

  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if he will release the full analyses done on the soil samples from the farms near the Coalite plant in Derbyshire, including the concentrations of individual dioxin and furan congeners;
  883
  (2) if he will release the full analyses done on milk and animal tissues taken from farms near the Coalite plant in Derbyshire, including the concentrations of individual dioxin and furan congeners.

  Mr. Soames
  Yes. The data are voluminous and I will arrange for copies to be placed in the Library of the House when these have been compiled into a suitable form.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give the results of the dioxin analyses of herbage samples from Woodhouse farm, Bolsover including toxic and dioxin furan isomers, as well as the total toxic equivalents; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  Further samples are being obtained and the full results published along with other data derived from the research work carried out on the farm.

  Feedstuffs
  Mr. Whittingdale
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will report on progress on the review of animal feeding stuffs regulations being carried out by the expert group on animal feeding stuffs.

  Mr. Gummer
  The expert group on animal feedingstuffs started its review of animal feedingstuffs legislation in February 1991. I am pleased to be able to say that it has completed this task and that the report is published today together with the Government's response. Copies of both are being placed in the Library of the House.

  EC Policies
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what reforms he will propose to the trade and agricultural policies of the European Community in order to conform with the objectives established in proposed articles 130u(1) and 130v of the treaty of Rome.

  Mr. Curry
  Suggestions for changes to existing policies should follow ratification of the treaty on European union by all member states. However, the Government, in determining their approach to European Community proposals, already take account of the implications for developing countries.

  Moorings, Kingswear
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now confirm the approval in principle given by his Department on 13 February to the Dart harbour and navigation authority and subsequently submitted by it on form FHG2 with updated tender prices and site investigation and design supervision fees for the upgrading of the commercial fleet moorings at Kingswear, south Devon.

  Mr. Curry
  Officials from this Department wrote to the consulting engineers co-ordinating the grant application for the Dart harbour and navigation authority on 10 July, seeking further information on the terms of the proposed leasing agreement and on the anticipated level of fisheries use. Once these queries have been resolved, a final decision on the grant application will be made.

  Rabies
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proposals have been agreed or are due to be agreed with regard to rabies controls on pet animals being imported into the United Kingdom other than those which are commercially traded; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The Commission is understood to he considering a proposal for rabies controls on pet animals. The Commission and the Council have agreed that any arrangements for pet animals must provide at least the same level of protection as have been agreed for commercially traded cats and dogs.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the current status of the agreement reached on rabies control; and if he will outline the steps to be taken before it can be implemented.

  Mr. Gummer
  The directive covering commercial trade in rabies-susceptible animals was adopted formally at the Council of Ministers on 13 July. Detailed implementing rules need to be decided by standing veterinary committee procedure before the necessary amendments to national regulations can be made.

  Organic Food
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food what analysis has been carried out as to the effect of the introduction of the United Kingdom register of organic food standards on the sale of(a) organic fruit and vegetables and (b) organic bread; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  The United Kingdom register of organic food standards was established in 1987. Since then, UKROFS has been defining organic standards and establishing mechanisms for enforcement. A proper record of the sales of organic produce is only now possible because UKROFS has created standards that define organic produce. UKROFS standards provides an assurance to consumers as to the reliability of the organic produce that is being purchased. This can only be good for the sales of organic produce, such as organic fruit and vegetables and organic bread.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on his reasons for deciding that trading standards officers should not be involved in the monitoring, certification and enforcement of organic food standards.

  Mr. Gummer
  Trading standards officers are involved in the enforcement of organic food standards at retail level. Monitoring and certification at production level is the task of the United Kingdom register of organic food standards together with the various private sector organic bodies. A trading standards officer is a member of the board of UKROFS.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received from the producers of organic food stuffs about the introduction of the United Kingdom register of organic food standards; and if he will make a statement.
  885
  Mr. Gummer
  The United Kingdom register of organic food standards was established in 1987. Its board includes members of the major organic sector bodies in the United Kingdom as well as consumer, trading standards, food processing and retail interests. I have received no recent representations from producers regarding the introduction of UK ROFS standards.

  Bovine Tissues
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information he has concerning experiments with bovine tissues from which the infectious agent has not been capable of experimental transfer to test animals: which tissues are used; which test animals were challenged and how many; what were the ages of these animals; and what was the length of the experiment.

  Mr. Soames
  Transmission studies of a variety of tissues from confirmed BSE cases are in progress. The information in respect of terminated experiments in which no signs of a scrapie-like disease have been observed are as follows:

  Mice challenged by feeding at 4–6 weeks of age

  Tissue

  Number of mice

  Duration of experiment (days)

  C57B11

  CRH1

  RIII

  Udder and milk

  19

  571

  (689)

  —

  Supramammary LN

  10

  667

  —

  —

  Placenta (A)

  18

  673

  (699)

  —

  Placenta (B)

  24

  —

  —

  754

  Spleen (A)

  20

  690

  —

  —

  Spleen (B)

  24

  —

  —

  841

  Carcase and mesenteric LN

  18

  680

  (683)

  —

  Brain and CSF

  8

  —

  (678)

  —

  1 C57B1, CRH and RIII are different strains of laboratory mice

  LN = Lymph node.

  Mice challenged parenterally at 4–8 weeks of age

  Tissue

  Number of mice

  Duration of experiment (days)

  Muscle semitendinosus

  24

  870

  Muscle diaphragma

  24

  888

  Placenta

  24

  774

  Buffy coat (of blood)

  24

  916

  Semen

  24

  925

  Bone marrow

  24

  793

  Spleen

  235

  918

  More than 50 other tissues are currently being tested by parenteral challenge of susceptible mice, but none of these experiments has yet reached its end point.

  Farm Woodland Scheme
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether farmers are entitled to a free visit when applying for a grant under the farm woodland scheme; whether approval from the Forestry Commission is necessary before grants under this scheme are paid out, and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gummer
  General advice about woodland establishment and management, and detailed advice on the grant aid available for these activities, is available to farmers free of charge from ADAS in England and Wales and from the Scottish agricultural colleges in Scotland. Entry into the farm woodland premium scheme, which 886
  offers annual payments to farmers to offset income forgone when trees are planted on agricultural land, is conditional upon the proposed planting having been approved by the forestry authority for establishment grants under the woodland grant scheme.

  Whales
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food if he will make it his policy to raise the issue of the protection of whales through international forums other than the International Whaling Commission.

  Mr. Gummer
  It is the policy of this Government to work for effective measures for the conservation and protection of whales and other cetaceans through the International Whaling Commission and other relevant international forums.

  Small Cetaceans
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, pursuant to his answer of 24 June,Official Report, column 241, whether the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development discussed the International Whaling Commission's report on small cetaceans.

  Mr. Gummer
  The report on significant direct and incidental catches of small cetaceans by the scientific committee of the International Whaling Commission was submitted by the IWC to the UNCED secretariat in July 1991. The report was not discussed at the UNCED conference. However, papers before the conference recognised the work of the International Whaling Commission in conserving and managing whale stocks, its studies on other cetaceans and the role of other relevant organisations—for example, those established under the Bonn convention.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Finance Bill
  Mr. William Powell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what extra costs were incurred by his Department as a result of the Standing Committee considering the Finance Bill sitting after the House adjourned on 16 June, 23 June and 30 June.

  Mr. Dorrell
  It is not possible to give a precise figure for the extra costs involved to Her Majesty's Treasury as a result of the Finance Bill Standing Committee sitting after the House adjourned on 16, 23 and 30 June. However, the total overtime and allowances entitlement for staffing costs would be in the region of £1,000 if they were claimed.

  Inland Revenue Investigations
  Mr. Luff
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to review the powers of the Inland Revenue when conducting investigations into the tax affairs of private individuals and small businesses; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Dorrell
  I have no plans to review the powers used by inspectors of taxes in their normal investigation work. I would, however, refer my hon. Friend to my remarks during Standing Committee B's consideration of the Finance Bill, at columns 431–32.

  Treaty of Rome
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what degree of convergence of economic performance among the member states of the European Community Her Majesty's Government plan to seek under the terms of the proposed amendment to article 2 of the treaty of Rome.

  Mr. Nelson
  The United Kingdom believes that all member states should take the necessary steps to achieve sound public finances, price stability and flexible labour markets. These are the necessary conditions for non-inflationary growth and the reduction of unemployment.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the power granted to the Council to enforce its recommendations for broad guidelines of the economic policy of member states as defined by the proposed article 103(2) of the treaty of Rome.

  Mr. Nelson
  Under article 103, the Council may formulate a draft for the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the member states and the Community. The Council's action towards member states deemed not to be complying with the guidelines is, however, limited to non-binding recommendations.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how the requirement that the economic policies of member states be regarded as a matter of common concern in the proposed article 103(1) of the treaty of Rome will affect the management of the Government's economic policy.

  Mr. Nelson
  Article 103 develops existing procedures for multilateral surveillance of member states' economic policies. It provides for economic policy guidelines to be recommended by the Council, but these guidelines will not be binding upon member states. The Government do not expect the management of the United Kingdom's economic policy will be affected as they are already committed to sound fiscal and monetary policies and to achieving permanently low inflation.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what arc the criteria for convergence of economic performance among the member states of the European Community as required by the proposed amendment to article 2 of the treaty of Rome.

  Mr. Nelson
  The criteria are set down in article 109j of the Maastricht treaty. They include a high degree of price stability, convergence of long-term interest rates, no "excessive" budget deficit and membership of the narrow band of the exchange rate mechanism.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what measures the Government propose to take in order to achieve(a) the high level of social protection, and (b) the high level of employment required by the proposed amendment to article 2 of the treaty of Rome.

  Mr. Nelson
  The Government's policies are directed to the achievement of sustained non-inflationary growth. This is the best means of promoting employment growth and social protection.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans the Government have to alter its policies of indirect taxation as part of the harmonisation of legislation in this area under the proposed article 99 of the treaty of Rome.
  888
  Sir John Cope
  The Government have no plans to alter their policies on indirect taxation in the context of the provisions of article 99 of the treaty of Rome. This article, as the legal base for fiscal matters, provides for unanimity in decision making, and is not materially altered by the draft Maastricht treaty.

  Pension Plans
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he is taking to bring deposit-based insurance and pension plans within the scope of the Financial Services Act 1986.

  Mr. Nelson
  I have no plans to bring deposit-based personal pension plans within the Financial Services Act 1986. Personal pension plans constructed as long-term insurance contracts already fall within the definition of investments under the Financial Services Act.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 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. Dorrell
  My ministerial colleagues have met their EC counterparts and European Commissioners on a number of occasions since 18 April. The importance of minimising the burdens on business of Community legislation is well understood by this Government. During the United Kingdom presidency, the Government will continue to press the case for minimising burdens on business.

  Economic and Monetary Union
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what studies have been undertaken as to the effect of economic and monetary union.

  Mr. Nelson
  Studies include the European Commission report "One market, one money: An evaluation of the potential benefits and costs of forming an economic and monetary union", which is available in the Library. An account of the agreement at Maastricht was published in the Treasury bulletin for winter 1991–92, which is also available in the Library.

  Benefits
  Mr. Quentin Davies
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the gain to public funds if(a) all social security benefits and welfare payments and (b) all social security benefits and welfare payments other than child benefit were made inclusive in the taxable income of recipients.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The estimated direct revenue yield in 1992–93 from making all social security benefits and welfare payments liable to tax is about £2 billion. Excluding child benefit and one-parent benefit would reduce the yield to about £1 billion.

  Joint Nature Conservation Committee
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the main recommendations and conclusions of the Treasury's staff review of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir John Cope
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) on 13 July 1992,Official Report, column 418.

  VAT
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, under the Maastricht treaty, decisions to establish uniform rates of value added tax and uniform VAT exemptions would be taken by unanimous decision or by qualified majority voting.

  Mr. Lamont
  European Community decisions relating to the rates and structure of VAT are covered by the provisions of article 99 of the treaty of Rome, and as such are subject to a unanimous decision by member states.

  This position is not affected by the draft Maastricht treaty.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list all grants and subsidies received by farmers upon which VAT is chargeable; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir John Cope
  [holding answer 10 July 1992]Some grants to farmers can be regarded as consideration for a supply of services and hence taxable because the recipient undertakes to refrain from doing something such as producing milk. Farmers receive grants and subsidies from a number of Government Departments, but no central list is maintained by any one Department and such information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Capital Expenditure
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has anything to add to the statement made by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 7 May,Official Report, column 168, in respect of capital expenditure by local borough and district councils which has not been authorised in some manner by Her Majesty's Government.

  Mr. Portillo
  No.

  Civil Servants
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many civil servants in grades 7 and principal and above were employed at 1 October 1981 and 1 October 1991.

  Mr. Nelson
  The information readily available relates to 1 January 1981 and 1 April 1991 and is published in "Civil Service Statistics", copies of which are available in the House of Commons Library.

  With the introduction of unified grading between 1984 and 1986 principal grade and equivalents were replaced by grade 7, senior principal by grade 6. Data comparable to unified grades are not available for years before 1986.

  Iraqi Funds
  Mr. Cyril D. Townsend
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what is the total value of Iraqi funds blocked in the United Kingdom;

  (2) what steps he is taking so that the claims of creditors who carried out legitimate trade with Iraq prior to the invasion of Kuwait can be met from Iraqi funds frozen in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Nelson
  I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Antrim, East (Mr. Beggs) on 13 July,Official Report, column 422.

  EC Budget Control
  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the total cost of fraudulent practices involving EC finances in the Community as a whole and in the United Kingdom; and what action he is taking to ensure that the budgetary control committee's efforts in the European Parliament are made worth while.

  Sir John Cope
  Because of the nature of fraud, it is impossible to estimate the total cost of fraud against the European Community budget. However, in its annual report on the fight against fraud in 1991, the Commission has provided the following figures of irregularities notified to the Commission for the European Commission as a whole and for the United Kingdom:

  Own resources notifications: 2nd half 1990 to 1st half 1991

  Mecu

  £ million1

  Total

  59·4

  41·4

  of which United Kingdom

  13·1

  9·1

  European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund, guarantee section notifications: 1991

  Mecu

  £ million1

  Total

  67·2

  46·8

  of which United Kingdom

  5·1

  3·6

  Structural funds notifications: 1 November 1990- to 31 December 1991

  Mecu

  £ million1

  Total

  1·5

  1·0

  of which United Kingdom

  0·2

  0·15

  1 Converted at the central rate in the ERM of £1 = 1·435 ecu.

  In part, these figures reflect the success of detection and efficiency of notification.

  I shall meet the European Parliament's budgetary control committee in the autumn. This will be an opportunity to discuss fully the Parliament's concern to make sure that the Community makes every effort to combat irregularity including fraud. The Government are determined to ensure that further progress is made to reduce the scope for irregularity including fraud and will carefully consider any suggestions which the European Parliament may have.

  Computer Organisation (Transfer)
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the transfer of Chessington computer centre and the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency to the Minister for the Civil Service will take place.
  891
  Mr. Lamont
  The transfer of responsibility for the Chessington computer centre will take place today. A transfer of functions order in respect of the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency is being laid today and the transfer will take place on 6 August. A supplementary estimate to reflect these changes will be presented in due course.

  Death Benefits
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if provision has been made for the payment of improved death gratuities and dependants' benefits to beneficiaries under the European Parliament (United Kingdom representatives) pension scheme.

  Mr. Portillo
  The European Parliament (United Kingdom representatives) pension scheme—EP (UKR) PS—follows the parliamentary contributory pension fund—PCPF—in its provisions. The Parliamentary Pensions (Amendment) Regulations 1991 made changes to the death gratuities and dependants' benefits payable with effect from 2 April 1991 under the PCPF in respect of members who died on or after 6 April 1988. An order amending the provisions of the EP (UKR) PS will be made as soon as possible. Payment will, however, be made in the meantime to those who will be eligible to benefit from the new provisions.

  Parliamentary approval will be sought later this year in an order under the European Parliament (Pay and Pensions) Act 1979. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £50,000 will be met from repayable advances from the Contingencies Fund. Once the order has been approved, the Contingencies Fund will be repaid upon approval of the Contingencies Fund repayment vote in 1993–94.

  Government Holdings
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he proposes to examine options for the sale or redemption in 1992–93 of part of the Government's holding of privatised companies' debt or loan stock.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The Government are considering options for the redemption or sale of part of their holding in privatised companies' debt and loan stock. No decisions have been taken about the timing of the debt or loan stock which will be realised, although it is likely that about £1 billion will be involved. We have begun to appoint advisers to examine the options.

  Expenses incurred in connection with the redemption or sale of part of the Government's holding will be met from receipts. Parliamentary approval for this new service will be sought in a winter supplementary estimate for Her Majesty's Treasury's sale of shares in British Telecommunications plc vote—class XVIII, vote 19. Pending that approval, expenses will be met from advances from the Contingencies Fund.

  Once the realisation exercise is complete, and the final costs are known, a supplementary estimate will be presented to provide substantive provision for expenses and compensating provision for appropriations-in-aid. The balance of the receipts will be paid into the Consolidated Fund.

  Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if any amendments are proposed to the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 contains a provision under which, if certain conditions are satisfied, assets transferred from one company to another as part of a company reconstruction or amalgamation are deemed to have been disposed of for an amount that gives rise to neither a gain nor a loss. This provision enables the rationalisation and reorganisation of businesses to take place without the immediate tax charge that would ordinarily arise when assets are transferred from one company to another.

  When the original legislation was consolidated in the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992, there was an error in a cross-reference involving the measures relating to transfers of life assurance business. If not corrected, this would exclude a transfer of insurance business to or from the United Kingdom branch of an overseas life assurance company from the relief conferred by the original legislation.

  No transfers of insurance business have been affected by the legislation in the consolidated act so far, and the Chancellor proposes to introduce legislation in next year's Finance Bill to correct the error in the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992. The legislation will apply to transfers of insurance business which take place after today.

  Civil Servants' Shareholdings
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 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. Nelson
  I regret that it has not been possible to provide an answer before the summer recess. I shall therefore write to the hon. Member and place a copy of the letter in the Library.

  Building Societies
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Income Tax (Building Societies) Regulations 1986 on composite tax rate for building societies raised additional taxation on(a) cash flow or (b) accruals.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The regulations changed the way in which building societies accounted for composite rate tax. They included provision to ensure that accrued interest taken into account under the old system did not come into account again, when paid, under the new system. The Inland Revenue estimates that tax due in 1986–87, the first year of payment under the new rules, plus instalments of transitional tax due later, was about £100 million less than would have been due in that year had the old system
  893
  continued. This difference is a little greater than the figure of £76 million given to my hon. Friend in response to an earlier question—Official Report, 15 July 1992, column 40 the Inland Revenue has corrected some errors in entering

  Accounting periods ending

  Number of societies

  Amount of tax that would have been due in 1986–87 if old system had continued

  Amount of tax due in 1986–87 under new system plus instalments of transitional tax not due till later

  Increase or decrease in tax payable under new system

  £ million

  £ million

  £ million

  as percentage of old

  April 6 to 30 August (end of first complete quarter)

  6

  8

  14

  +6

  +75

  September to November

  7

  340

  409

  +69

  +20

  December to 5 April

  131

  2,596

  2,421

  -175

  -7

  Total

  144

  2,944

  2,844

  -100

  -3

  of which instalments due after 1986–87

  35

  Mortgage Lenders
  Mr. Boateng
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will outline the present system for regulating the activities of centralised mortgage lenders; and whether he will specify the total amount of mortgage lending undertaken by such bodies in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Nelson
  Because they do not carry on a deposit-taking business, centralised mortgage lenders are not subject to regulation under the Banking Act 1987 or the Building Societies Act 1986. However, the Consumer Credit Act 1974—for which responsibility lies with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade—and the subordinate legislation made under it provide a system of licensing and other control of traders concerned with the provision of credit. It is likely that centralised mortgage lenders will require consumer credit licences and be subject to the controls on licensing administered by the Director General of Fair Trading.

  Table L9.4 in the June 1992 edition of "Financial Statistics" gives details of loans for house purchase by "miscellaneous financial institutions", the bulk of which is believed to be accounted for by centralised mortgage lenders. At end-1991, the stock of loans for house purchase by miscellaneous financial institutions totalled £25·9 billion.

  Crown Estate Commissioners
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many fishing ports are owned or managed by the Crown Estate Commissioners.

  Mr. Lamont
  None. Where the commissioners own land required for a port, it may be leased to the operators of the individual ports.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many miles of the coastline of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland are owned or managed by the Crown Estate Commissioners.

  Mr. Lamont
  I regret that it has not been possible to provide an answer before the summer recess. I shall therefore write to the hon. Member and place a copy of the letter in the Library.
  894
  the data underlying that earlier reply. The full information for societies grouped by reference to their accounting date is shown in the table:

  Ministerial Staff
  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many staff were employed in all ministers' private offices in May 1979; and how many are employed today.

  Mr. Nelson
  I regret that it has not been possible to provide an answer before the summer recess. I shall therefore write to the hon. Member and place a copy of the letter in the Library.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Tilbury Ferry
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Attorney-General if he will institute proceedings against the Crown Estate Commissioners for failure to provide a ferry service between Tilbury and Gravesend.

  The Attorney-General
  No.

  Social Security Tribunals
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Attorney-General what representations he has received from the Independent Tribunal Service regarding the payment of fees to members of social security appeal tribunals; and how he has responded to those representations.

  The Attorney-General
  I have received no such representations.

  South African Security Personnel
  Mr. Robert Hughes
  To ask the Attorney-General what consideration has been given to launching prosecutions arising out of the activities of Captain Pamela du Randt and Mr. Leon Flores under the Prevention of Terrorism Acts.

  The Attorney-General
  This matter has not been the subject of consideration by the Crown prosecution service. The investigation of alleged criminal offences is a matter for the police who are responsible for the initial decision whether to charge. In appropriate cases the police may consult the CPS.

HEALTH

  London Health Services Inquiry
  Mr. Carrington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what progress Professor Sir Bernard Tomlinson is making in his inquiry into London's health services.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  The Tomlinson inquiry is making good progress and is on course to report in the early autumn. To ensure that our decisions on its recommendations are acted upon decisively and rapidly, I will, in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education, establish a special unit to implement our decisions and to help manage the process of change. The special unit will be part of the National Health Service Management Executive. I will give further details when the Tomlinson inquiry reports.

  Maternity Services
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many women have elected for(a) hospital birth and (b) home birth for each year since 1990; and if she will provide an estimate of the number of birth complications at each location.

  Mr. Sackville
  The figures relating to place of confinement for births in 1990 and 1991 are shown in the table.

  Information is collected centrally on the method of delivery, including caesarian sections and instrumental deliveries, but this is not available in terms of the location of the delivery.

  Maternities 1990–91 England—Place of confinement

  1990

  1991

  Hospital

  654,594

  647,710

  Home

  6,953

  7,439

  Elsewhere1

  503

  554

  Total

  662,050

  655,703

  1 Elsewhere includes:

  All psychiatric institutions.

  Homes for unmarried mothers.

  Remand Homes

  Reception Centres.

  Private Houses (other than the mother's usual residence).

  Source:OPCS Birth Statistics Table produced by SD2B June 1992.

  Hospital medical

  CHS

  Total

  Number

  Whole-lime equivalent

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Northern

  708

  632·0

  95

  45·1

  803

  677·1

  Yorkshire

  892

  684·1

  80

  46·9

  972

  731·0

  Trent

  800

  670·8

  107

  59·5

  907

  730·3

  East Anglia

  314

  278·9

  26

  20·5

  340

  299·4

  North West Thames

  869

  729·7

  178

  82·3

  1,047

  812·0

  North East Thames

  1,011

  814·0

  187

  90·4

  1,198

  904·4

  South East Thames

  897

  741·3

  145

  77·1

  1,042

  818·4

  South West Thames

  528

  436·4

  87

  54·0

  615

  490·4

  Wessex

  372

  325·7

  37

  24·3

  409

  350·0

  Oxford

  456

  378·4

  30

  17·7

  486

  396·1

  South Western

  396

  351·6

  15

  10·5

  411

  362·1

  West Midlands

  1,150

  962·9

  173

  87·8

  1,323

  1,050·7

  Mersey

  522

  430·7

  85

  43·6

  607

  474·3

  North Western

  1,228

  1007·1

  241

  116·0

  1,469

  1,123·1

  London Post-Grad Teaching Hospitals

  295

  209·2

  0

  0·0

  295

  209·2

  Wales

  728

  603·8

  44

  33·6

  772

  637·4

  Paediatric Pathologists
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the health regions of England which currently have paediatric pathologists in post; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not held centrally. Information on doctors' specialties is held with varying degrees of disaggregation in the Department of Health's medical manpower census. Doctors with responsibilities in paediatric pathology are often recorded either as paediatricians or pathologists and the regional count of paediatric pathologists is therefore incomplete. A recent ad hoc inquiry relating to perinatal pathology found that every region had at least one perinatal or paediatric pathologist in post.

  Abortion
  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the numbers of national health service abortions under 13 weeks since the last menstrual period, and the numbers of these operations involving admission and discharge on the same date, performed on women resident in each regional health authority and in each district health authority area in England and Wales in the latest available year.

  Mr. Sackville
  The information requested has been placed in the Library.

  Overseas-qualified Doctors
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will publish an estimate of the number of overseas-qualified doctors currently working in the United Kingdom according to each standard United Kingdom region.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The table gives the number and whole-time equivalent figures for hospital and community health service medical staff who qualified overseas, by region, in England and Wales, as at 30 September 1990, the latest date for which figures are available.

  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.
  897

  Hospital medical

  CHS

  Total

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Number

  Whole-time equivalent

  Special Hospitals

  21

  21·0

  0

  0·0

  21

  21·0

  Total

  11,187

  9,277·8

  1,530

  809·1

  12,717

  10,086·9

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health 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. Sackville
  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.

  Chronic Illness
  Mr. Batiste
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list all chronic illnesses which are readily indentifiable and require life-long medication.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The definition of which illnesses are chronic and which require lifelong medication are matters of clinical judgment, depending in part on the individual patient's condition.

  There are a small number of conditions for which lifelong medication is recognised as essential and for which there is exemption from prescription charges. The limited list of these specific medical conditions was drawn up in 1968 with representatives of the profession and updated in 1983.

  The conditions are as follows:

  a permanent fistula which requires continuous surgical dressing or an appliance;

  Diabetes mellitus;

  Myxoedema;

  Hypoparathyroidism;

  Diabetes insipidus or other form of hypopituitarism;

  Addison's disease or other form of hypoadrenalism;

  Myasthenia gravis

  Epilepsy for which one requires continuous anti-convulsive therapy;

  a continuing physical disability which prevents one from leaving home without the help of another person.

  Continence Services
  Sir John Hannam
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will make a statement on the progress being made by the task force established to oversee implementation of the agenda for action on continence services;

  (2) what action her Department is taking to collect models of good practice for the delivery of continence services and supplies; and how these are being disseminated to the relevant authorities;

  (3) if she will make a statement on whether her Department will be carrying out a public awareness initiative of incontinence;

  (4) what progress her Department has made on the improvement in training and education of all people providing continence services as recommended in the agenda for action on continence services;
  898
  (5) how provision for incontinence services is being addressed by local authorities and health authorities under the new community care and health arrangements; and what advice her Department is giving to those authorities on the need for joint planning in this field.

  Mr. Yeo
  The task force is taking forward the recommendations on cost effectiveness, GP, nurse and other professional training, and publicity. Research is being commissioned on the effectiveness of different service models, with a view to helping health authorities adopt best practices. The Department is making a one year grant of £35,000 towards setting up a resource centre to he known as the Continence Foundation. In the spring of next year, the Royal College of Physicians plans to hold a conference on continence services with the Department's support. The results will be published and practical service needs emphasised. A public awareness campaign is planned for 1993–94 to encourage people to come forward for advice and assessment. Discussions on professional training continue with the professional bodies responsible for curricula and training delivery including the English National Board, on nursing. Material is being considered for distribution to GPs and GP trainers later in the year. The National Health Service Management Executive continues to keep local NHS services under review.

  Health Authority Appointments, Doncaster
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of chairmen and non-executive directors of health authorities and trusts in Doncaster neither live nor work within the Doncaster metropolitan borough council; and if she will make it her policy to take account of residential qualifications in making future appointments.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not held centrally. Chairmen and non-executives are normally expected to live or work in the area served by the health authority or trust.

  Legionnaire's Disease
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what inquiries and written reports from relevant agencies are required following an outbreak of legionnaire's disease in a hospital.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  A case of legionnaire's disease in a hospital would be investigated by the hospital's control of infection doctor, and his colleagues, who may seek advice from external sources, including the local consultant in communicable disease control, if he considers this necessary. In the event of an outbreak an infection control action group would be established, the local consultant in communicable disease control would be involved, and the group would prepare a report for the health authority and/or local authority. In addition the Public Health (Infectious Diseases) Regulations 1988 impose a duty on the local authority proper officer, who in many cases is the
  899
  consultant in communicable disease control, to immediately inform the Chief Medical Officer of any serious outbreak of any disease. A voluntary system of reporting of cases or outbreaks of communicable disease to the PHLS communicable disease surveillance centre also exists in England and Wales.

  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what are the numbers of hospital-acquired cases of infection from legionnaire's disease nationally in 1990 and 1991; and in which hospitals they occurred.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  A total of 187 cases of legionnaire's disease were reported in England and Wales to the national surveillance scheme for legionnaire's disease at the PHLS communicable disease surveillance centre in 1990. Three of these cases were associated with hospitals and four other cases may possibly have been associated with a hospital stay.

  In 1991 there were 111 cases—provisional—of legionnaire's disease in residents of England and Wales. Three of these cases were associated with a hospital and a further 10 cases may possibly have been associated with a hospital stay.

  Cases are reported under a voluntary national surveillance scheme and identification of individual hospitals would jeopardise national infectious desease control.

  Geriatric Patients
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidelines her Department has issued to health authorities about moving geriatric patients without relatives outside their home district for continuing care.

  Mr. Yeo
  The guidance on discharge procedures, HC(89)5, a copy of which is available in the Library, makes it clear that patients and, with their agreement, carers and relatives, are fully consulted at all stages on the arrangements made for their future care needs. This is also one of the nine national standards set out in the patients charter. A thorough assessment of the health and social care needs of each patient should be carried out, prior to discharge, to ensure that any services required are provided in the most appropriate way.

  Disability
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will discuss with regional health authorities the training of informal care providers in the prevention and treatment of pressure sores and incontinence for the physically disabled;

  (2) what plans she has to help local health authorities to set realistic objectives and targets for services for physically disabled people;

  (3) what plans she has to encourage the funding of rehabilitation programmes under the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990;

  (4) what plans she has to discuss establishing new methods of measuring the performance of services for the disabled.

  Mr. Yeo
  Rehabilitation spans the responsibilities of health authorities, social services departments and a number of other agencies including the employment 900
  services. Health authorities fund rehabilitation services out of their general allocations and existing guidance sets out the range of services we would typically expect to see.

  The professions involved have done much to promote rehabilitation in recent years, and we are considering what further action is needed to develop services to meet the needs of people with disability or chronic illness and to identify and disseminate good practice including methods of measuring the performance of services, the setting of realistic but challenging targets and the provision of training.

  Health authorities are responsible for purchasing services to meet the health care needs of their populations. The assessment of needs for rehabilitation services is a complex matter. Special co-ordination is needed in the case of young people leaving full-time education and seeking to live as independently as possible. The Department will shortly make available to health authorities an epidemiologically-based assessment of the needs of young adults with physical disabilities to assist in deciding what services to purchase.

  We will encourage the development of good practice in the prevention and management of complications which often impede rehabilitation. We reaffirm the view expressed in our consultative document on the Health of the Nation, Cm 1523, that an annual reduction of at least 5 to 10 per cent. in the incidence of pressure sores is a reasonable target for health authorities and will initiate steps to identify and disseminate the best ways of achieving this. In July 1991 we published the agenda for action on continence services, which commended to health authorities the elements of an effective local service. We shall be taking further steps to keep key professions well informed and adequately trained on good practice, and to identify the prevention and treatment services which are most effective, taking account of the role of informal care providers.

  We will also be taking action to encourage the development of clinical protocols, standards of good practice, targets and performance indicators for services used by the people with impaired hearing or vision.

  We are providing £ 1 million to improve rehabilitation services following brain injury, and we are also funding a major research study of the 12 sites around the country receiving these funds to evaluate their services.

  There is insufficient knowledge about appropriate performance targets to make rehabilitation one of the key areas in our White Paper on the health of the nation but the Department will work with relevant experts to ensure that rehabilitation can become a national key area in due course. In the meantime we will pursue with regional health authorities where developments have progressed sufficiently the possibility of its adoption as a key area in those regions.

  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to discuss the dissemination to the physically disabled of the services available to them under the national health service.

  Mr. Yeo
  From 1 April 1992, the patients charter requires regional health authorities to set up general information services for the public. This will empower the patient to make more informed choices about health care, with improved access to information about the range of treatments available, greater knowledge of their condition and detailed information on waiting times.
  901
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to improve respite care for the physically disabled.

  Mr. Yeo
  We are looking to health and local authorities to develop respite care services as part of the implementation of the White Paper, "Caring for People". We recognise the contribution which such services can make to providing practical support for carers.

  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she intends to implement sections 1, 2 and 3 of the Disabled Persons (Services, Consultation and Representation) Act 1986.

  Mr. Yeo
  The requirements of these sections are now, to a very large extent, reflected in our new and wide-ranging reforms of community care, which demonstrate our commitment to high quality care and which are responsive to the needs and wishes of service users and carers. The need to implement these sections of the Act will be reviewed in the light of several years' experience of the community care arrangements.

  £ million

  1991–92

  1990–91

  1989–90

  Regional health authority

  Revenue

  Capital

  Revenue

  Capital

  Revenue

  Capital

  Northern

  3·377

  1·885

  2·541

  1·648

  1·677

  1·350

  Yorkshire

  4·145

  1·079

  2·992

  4·748

  2·106

  1·849

  Trent

  3·352

  2·157

  2·768

  2·229

  1·434

  2·786

  East Anglian

  1·735

  1·889

  1·345

  0·706

  0·300

  0·440

  North West Thames

  3·277

  2·351

  2·382

  3·527

  0·022

  —

  North East Thames

  4·249

  3·677

  2·895

  2·789

  —

  —

  South East Thames

  3·148

  2·128

  2·364

  2·848

  1·414

  0·822

  South West Thames

  2·543

  0·638

  1·496

  0·242

  —

  —

  Wessex

  2·125

  2·431

  1·786

  0·549

  0·448

  0·050

  Oxford

  2·418

  1·461

  1·819

  2·766

  0·970

  0·470

  South Western

  2·245

  1·183

  1·566

  2·810

  0·005

  —

  West Midlands

  5·100

  4·998

  3·606

  4·600

  0·865

  0·050

  Mersey

  2·219

  0·076

  2·206

  1·924

  1·178

  1·363

  North Western SHAs

  4·358

  4·719

  2·835

  3·414

  1·045

  0·060

  National Heart and Lung

  0·165

  0·475

  0·211

  0·011

  —

  —

  Hammersmith

  0·165

  0·181

  0·094

  0·171

  —

  0·110

  Hospitals for Sick Children

  0·165

  —

  0·186

  0·461

  0·025

  —

  Total1

  44·786

  231·286

  33·092

  35·433

  11·489

  9·350

  1 Expenditure incurred by the Department of Health centrally is not included in the totals.

  2 Excludes £10·616 million made available to 30 NHS trusts via external financing limits.

  Dentistry
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will now issue guidance on the criteria to he used by family health service authorities in measuring cross-infection rates in dental surgeries.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  We have no plans to do so.

  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on her plans to recruit salaried dentists in the event of large numbers of dentists leaving the national health service.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Health service guidance contained in HSG(92)27, a copy of which is in the Library, was issued to family health services authorities in June 1992 and advises on the action to take if they wish to employ a salaried dentist. It is for the FHSA to decide, in the light of the circumstances in its locality, whether it should seek to employ a salaried dentist. Any application made to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for approval of

  Resource Management
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what expenditure was incurred on developing resource management in England by each health authority in each year since 1988–89; and what financial benefits have been identified and evaluated to date.

  Mr. Sackville
  The sums made available by the Department to regional and special health authorities to develop resource management in the years 1989–90 to 1991–92 are shown in the table. Regional and district health authorities and individual hospitals have provided some additional funding for individual projects. In 1988–89, the Department contributed £2·3 million to projects in six acute resource management pilot sites.

  The resource management programme aims to secure improvements in patient care through better management of resources at hospital level, and is not concerned solely with financial benefits. Assessment of benefits is an integral part of resource management projects in individual hospitals, but there has been no comprehensive national survey of those assessments.

  such employment will be dealt with speedily. There is no reason to believe that large numbers of dentists intend to leave the national health service.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health on what date the new schedule of dental fees which she announced on 25 June was sent to the Government's printers with instructions to print it; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Tuesday 23 June 1992; this being the date on which, pursuant to regulation 19(3) of the National Health Service (General Dental Services) Regulations 1992, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State amended the statement of dental remuneration.

  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will give an estimate of the anticipated delay in treating national health service patients requiring orthodontic treatment costing in excess of £200, as a result of the new regulations requiring prior approval to be
  903
  sought from the Dental Practice Board for patients (a) under 18 years of age, (b) 18 to 25 years of age and (c) 25 years of age and older.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Wakefield (Mr. Hinchliffe) on 13 July at columns 517–18. The age of the patient is irrelevant to this process.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will negotiate a new system of dental remuneration.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Cleethorpes (M r. Brown) on 9 July at column 337.

  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many orthodontic national health service patients required treatment costing in excess of £200 in each year since 1987 for patients(a) under 18 years of age, (b) 18 to 25 years of age and (c) 25 years of age and older.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will consider raising the limit of £200 per patient on orthodontic treatment not requiring prior approval from the Dental Practice Board; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  We see no reason to raise the prior approval limit in respect of orthodontic treatment. The changes to regulations and the scale of fees which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced on 23 June took account of concerns raised by orthodontists, in ways which will significantly reduce the effects on orthodontists of lowering the prior approval limit. The Dental Practice Board has estimated that some 70 per cent of all orthodontic treatment will be able to proceed without the need for prior approval.

  Ms. Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many staff have been employed by the Dental Practice Board in each year since 1987; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The information requested is as follows:

  Year ending 31 March

  Staff 1

  1986–87

  1,631

  1987–88

  1,497

  1988–89

  1,369

  1989–90

  1,268

  1990–91

  1,220

  1991–92

  1,126

  1 Full-time equivalent of permanent and temporary staff including allowance for overtime employed on average during the year.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will instruct the Staffordshire family health services authority to employ a salaried dentist as a matter of urgency.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  It is for family health services authorities to decide whether they should apply for authority to appoint a salaried dentist.

  Departmental Objectives
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will set out the objectives of each division and branch of her Department.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department of Health's objectives for 1992–93 and beyond are set out in a statement of aims, goals and priorities, publication of which was announced by my right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State, in his reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling (Mr. Mitchell) on 10 March at column 434. Each part of the Department has its own more detailed objectives flowing from the statement.

  GP Fund Holding
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance she has issued on the scope of community health services to be covered by general practitioner fund holding from April; and whether health visitors, district nursing, occupational therapy, speech therapy, physiotherapy or community psychiatric nursing services are to be included in general practitioner fund holding financed services.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Guidance is to be issued soon. Occupational therapy, speech therapy and physiotherapy are already included in the fund holding scheme. Health visiting, district nursing, community psychiatric nursing as well as community mental handicap nursing are to he added from April 1993.

  Mental Illness Hospitals
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the specialist mental illness hospitals planned for closure by 1997, by district health authority concerned, together with the total number of beds currently in each and the number of beds currently occupied by patients.

  Mr. Yeo
  It is planned that the following mental illness hospitals should close by 1997:

  Hospital

  District health authority

  Number of beds

  St. Mary's Morpeth

  Gateshead

  389

  Clifton

  York

  97

  De La Pole

  East Yorkshire

  390

  Scalbor Park

  Airedale

  140

  Highroyds

  Leeds

  36

  Stanley Royd

  Wakefield

  359

  Pastures

  South Derbyshire

  326

  Carlton Hayes

  Leicestershire

  394

  Mapperley

  Nottingham

  259

  Middlewood

  Sheffield

  298

  Whittingham

  Preston

  400

  Barnsley Hall

  Bromsgrove and Redditch

  42

  St. Mary's

  Hereford

  30

  St. Matthews

  South East Staffs

  180

  Central

  South Warwicks

  215

  Ruberry Hill

  South Birmingham

  200

  Hollymoor

  Solihull

  100

  St. Crispin's

  Northants

  294

  Littlemoor

  Oxfordshire

  270

  Old Manor

  Salisbury

  216

  Coney Hill

  Gloucester

  304

  Tone Vale

  Somerset

  355

  St. Lawrence

  Cornwall

  373

  Horton

  Riverside

  620

  Friern

  Hampslead

  350

  Hellingly

  Eastbourne

  119

  St. Augustine's

  Canterbury and Thanet

  282

  905

  Hospital

  District health authority

  Number of beds

  Tooting Bee

  West Lambeth

  600

  Maidstone (Psychiatric wing)

  Maidstone

  390

  The number of beds in each hospital currently occupied by patients is not held centrally.

  Clinical Standards Advisory Group
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the membership of her Clinical Standards Advisory Group; and what is the scope of its work on hospital-acquired infection.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The Clinical Standards Advisory Group is as follows:

  Sir Gordon Higginson (Chairman)

  Professor June Clark

  Professor Rhys Davies

  Sir Terence English

  Miss Pam Hibbs

  Miss Jennifer Hunt

  Mrs. Rosemary Jenkins

  Miss Elizabeth McLean

  Professor John Murray

  Professor John Richmond

  Professor Michael Rosen

  Mr. Derek Seel

  Professor Andrew Sims

  Dr. Nuala Sterling

  Professor Victor Tindall

  Dr. Colin Waine

  Professor Sir Dillwyn Williams

  The group has been giving preliminary consideration to the possibility of a study on hospital-acquired infections. We look forward to receiving in the near future the group's specific suggestions on the scope of any such study.

  Computers
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment has been made of the value for money of the expenditure on computers by health authorities in England over the last five years; and what action has been taken by the chief executive to ensure such purchases of systems and hardware are adequately evaluated.

  Mr. Sackville
  The implementation of computer systems is a local responsibility. Local managers take investment decisions in line with their business requirements, and in doing this are expected to obtain value for money. They are expected to identify the potential benefits of any investment before decisions are taken and to assess whether those benefits are actually realised.

  The National Health Service Management Executive is responsible for providing leadership and advice and establishing a strategic framework for computer developments. In particular the executive has been developing national standards within which local managers can evaluate commercial systems. The aim is to publish revised guidance on procurement, investment appraisal and benefits realisation later this year. Further support is being provided through a national training strategy for managers which will develop the skills required to choose, implement and manage information systems.

  Regional Health Authority Members
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the present remuneration and expiry of term of office of each member of each regional health authority.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  All regional health authority non-executive members receive remuneration of £5,000 per annum. The names and terms of office of non-executive members of regional health authorities are as follows:

  Regional health authority/ Name of member

  Term of appointment

  Northern

  Mr. A. G. Brown

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor M. D. Rawlins

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. P. H. Reay

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. R. C. Spoor

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Yorkshire

  Mr. J. A. Ferguson

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Professor S. B. Brown

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Cllr. W. Kilgallon

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. J. A. Barden

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. M. A. J. Morgan

  27 May 1991 to 31 October 1993

  Trent

  Mr. M. Dassau

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Dr. K. J. R. Edwards

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. P. B. Wildgoose

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. G. R. H. demons

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. D. Bertram

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  East Anglian

  Mrs. J. L. Hopwood

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor D. K. Peters

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. J. B. Mowson

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. L. Rice

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. S. E. Sida-Lockett

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  North West Thames

  Mr. D. Bucks

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. J. B. Hanham

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. M. G. Storey

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. E. J. Davies

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor S. Sutherland

  1 May 1992 to 31 October 1994

  North East Thames

  Maj. Gen. R. P. W. Wall

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Mr. P. Holwell

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Baroness Gardner of Parkes

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Dr. J. F. Moorhead

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  South East Thames

  Mr. A. J. L. Barnes

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. I. D. Gainsford

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor P. M. Higgins

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. R. F. Holland

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. W. Mitchell

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  South West Thames

  Dr. G. S. Spathis

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. J. R. Harris

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. G. J. Howe

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. J. K. Pearman

  1 January 1992 to 31 December 1994

  Mrs. M. McNaughton

  1 January 1992 to 31 December 1994

  Wessex

  Mrs. J. Perons

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor J. M. Higgins

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. R. C. Donnelly

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. A. S. D. Service

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. P. A. Waring

  1 April 1992 to 31 October 1994

  Oxford

  Mr. P. D. M. Gell

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor H. Harris

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. C. J. N. Ward

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. V. Rubenstein

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. W. A. Rooke

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  907

  Regional health authority/ Name of member

  Term of appointment

  South Western

  Mr. D. F. Strachan

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Sir John Kingman

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Mr. C. Spence

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Mr. L. M. Urquhart

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  Dame Margaret Fry

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1992

  West Midlands

  Cllr. B. Stoten

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor Sir Michael Thompson

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. E. M. Worley

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. T. D. Morris

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. S. M. Beesley

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mersey

  Mrs. R. H. Hawley

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor A. M. Breckenridge

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. J. F. Kane

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. N. L. Banner

  18 March 1991 to 31 October 1993

  Mr. B. Jenkins

  1 November 1991 to 31 October 1993

  North Western

  Mr. E. Parker

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Professor R. D. H. Boyd

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Mrs. J. A. Hytner

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Dr. A. K. Banerjee

  26 July 1990 to 31 October 1993

  Wheelchairs and Artificial Limbs
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to discuss the timely provision of wheelchairs and artificial limbs.

  Mr. Yeo
  The purchase of appropriate services for the provision of wheelchairs and artificial limbs is a matter for district health authorities. The quality of service is monitored by regional health authorities and the NHS Management Executive keeps it under review.

  Sexual Health
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what performance indicators she now requires from the annual reports of directors of public health in national health service districts on activities promoting sexual health.

  Mr. Sackville
  In July 1991 regional health authorities were asked to undertake a comprehensive review of their family planning services. Regions were asked to report by the end of June 1992 on the criteria they have set purchasing authorities for securing more effective family planning services and the specific targets that will be set for district health authorities and family health services authorities for 1993–94. Criteria and targets will depend on the priorities set as a result of assessment of local needs. Careful consideration will be given to the reports from regions and, in the light of these, to the future development of family planning service provision.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what visits she has made to her EC counterparts in each member state to discuss deregulation matters since 18 April; what agreements came out of such meetings; and what plans she has for making further progress in deregulation matters during the United Kingdom presidency of the EC.
  908
  Dr. Mawhinney
  We have had no such meetings. We expect to meet a number of the Health Ministers of other member states during the presidency to discuss matters on the agenda of the Health Ministers Council.

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

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department's staff rules place a duty on every member of staff who comes into contact with a matter concerning a business organisation in which he or she has an interest, including shareholdings, to disclose that interest to his or her senior manager and to ask that some other official deal with the matter. Staff rules are given to and apply to all civil servants working in the Department, including its agencies. Individuals and their managers are expected to consult the Department's establishment officer about the desirability of acquiring or retaining shares where this might give rise to a potential conflict of interest. The Department's establishment officer has been consulted on such matters on two occasions since the Department separated from the former Department of Health and Social Security.

  Wheelchair Access
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will hold discussions about providing access for people in wheelchairs to national health service buildings which they need to enter.

  Mr. Yeo
  Health authorities should ensure compliance with the patients charter standard that buildings can be used by people in wheelchairs. The Department has issued guidance to health authorities on the design of premises to take account of the special needs of physically disabled people.

  Hospital Accounts
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make it his policy to collect information on the number of firms refusing to supply, or delaying supplies, to health authorities or trusts because of delays in settling accounts.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  No.

  Medical Practitioners
  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the expected costs of compensation for individual medical practitioners whose legal status is not recognised by the current United Kingdom system of accreditation, as a result of EC directives 75/362 and 75/363 and of the Frankovitch case in the European Court of Justice.
  909
  Dr. Mawhinney
  It is not possible to make such an estimate.

  Hospital Trusts
  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will set out her reserve powers to override the decisions of hospital trust management.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The powers of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to make directions to national health service trusts are laid down in the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990, schedule 2, paragraph 6.(1) and 6.(2). These powers will not be used routinely, and only under the most exceptional circumstances will there be any intervention in trusts' affairs.

  Dog Bites
  Lady Olga Maitland
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people have been treated for dog bites in national health service hospitals in the last year for which figures are available.

  Mr. Sackville
  There were 1,134 hospital admissions for dog bites in 1989–90. Information about dog bites treated in accident and emergency departments is not collected centrally.

  Census
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will consider bringing forward the publication of the 1991 census data for Staffordshire to make it available for submissions by local authorities in the county to the Local Government Commission.

  Mr. Sackville
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Swindon (Mr. Coombs) on 14 July. All county monitors will be published by October, and corresponding small area statistics will be available this year.

  Heart Disease
  Mr. Parry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the waiting period for examinations for heart complaints(a) on Merseyside and (b) in Liverpool at the most recent date; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not collected centrally. The hon. Member may wish to contact Sir Donald Wilson, chairman of Mersey regional health authority, for details.

  Mr. Parry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many deaths have occurred(a) in Liverpool and (b) on Merseyside in each of the past five years from heart disease; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  The information requested is shown in the table.

  Deaths in Liverpool and Merseyside from heart disease (ICD 390–429), 1987 to 1991

  Year

  Liverpool

  Merseyside

  1987

  2,120

  5,913

  1988

  1,975

  5,778

  1989

  2,010

  5,949

  1990

  1,844

  5,542

  1991

  1,838

  5,588

  Residential Homes
  Ms. Coffey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will be giving guidance to local authorities about the legal implications that will arise after I April 1993 from residential homes having contracts with both local authorities and residents.

  Mr. Yeo
  The Department issued guidance last year to local authorities about contracting with residential homes in "Purchase of Service—Practice Guidance and Practice Material for Social Services Departments and Other Agencies", a copy of which is available in the Library.

  Baseline Statistics
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what are the baselines referred to in the "Health of the Nation" White Paper for(a) the death rates for coronary heart disease and stroke in 1990, (b) the death rate for CHD for those aged 65 to 74 years in 1990, (c) the death rate for stroke for those aged 65 to 74 years in 1990, (d) the death rate for breast cancer in those invited for screening in 1990, (e) the incidence of invasive cervical cancer in 1986, (f) the death rate for lung cancer under the age of 75 years in 1990, (g) the suicide rate in 1990, (h) the suicide rate of the severely mentally ill in 1990, (i) the incidence of gonorrhoea in 1990, (j) the rate of conceptions amongst under 16-year-olds in 1990, (k) the death rate for accidents among children under 15 years in 1990, (l) the death rate from accidents among children aged 15 to 24 years in 1990 and (m) the death rate from accidents among people over 65 years in 1990, for each national health service region and each health district.

  Mr. Sackville
  Information relating to coronary heart disease, stroke, breast cancer, cervical cancer, lung cancer. suicide and road traffic accidents is available in the public health common data set for 1991, published by the Department of Health. Copies are available in the Library.

  Information at regional and district level about the severely mentally ill, incidence of gonorrhoea, under-16 conceptions and all accidents is currently not available in the form requested. The Department will be working with regional health authorities to develop baseline data for these areas.

  Tuberculosis
  Ms. Harman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will make a statement on the number of people contracting tuberculosis(a) in each of the last five years and (b) in each of the last six months;

  (2) what evidence her Department has of any causal link between poverty, poor housing and tuberculosis;

  (3) if she will make a statement about the incidence of tuberculosis in the United Kingdom;

  (4) what plans she has to reduce the incidence of tuberculosis.

  Mr. Sackville
  For notifications of tuberculosis in England and Wales for the last five years I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. Carlile) on 7 July at column 150. The breakdown for the first six months of 1992 is:
  911

  Number

  January

  508

  February

  453

  March

  460

  April

  574

  May

  462

  June

  494

  Notifications of TB fell progressively from 1948 to 1987, since when the numbers have levelled out. Rates are higher in inner cities, to which several factors contribute. Discussions are proceeding between the Department and the national health service on how TB can be reduced in those areas.

  The national schools' BCG immunisation programme is to continue at least until 1995–96, when the results will be known of a Public Health Laboratory Service survey of tuberculosis in the general population. Immunisation will continue to be offered also to other high-risk groups as set out in the HMSO publication "Immunisation Against Infectious Diseases". A copy of the 1992 edition will be placed in the Library as soon as it is available.

  Royal London Hospital
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will request the board of the Royal London hospital trust to inform her how and in what manner its plans for reduction of staff and services will(a) affect the level of services provided by the hospital to future in and out-patients resident in the borough of Newham, (b) the operation of Newham district hospital and the support available to it and (c) medical education; and if she will publish their reply.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The provision of hospital and community health services for the residents of the borough of Newham is a matter for Newham health authority. The hon. Member may wish to contact the chairman of Newham health authority, Mrs. R. Walters, for further information.

  Weight Loss
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if her Department will carry out an investigation into the prescription of fenfluramine hydrochlorides, and in particular, duromine, as an aid to weight loss.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  We have no plans to do so.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will investigate the use of prescribed drugs for the prime purpose of weight loss.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  No. Guidelines on the prescribing of these drugs are contained in the British National Formulary which is sent to all doctors.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she has any plans to issue guidance to doctors in private practice on the question of prescribed drugs being made available for the prime purpose of weight loss.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  No. The British National Formulary already contains guidance on this point.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to review NHS contracts so as to 912
  restrict the involvement of doctors in the commercial activities of slimming clinics, in particular their power to prescribe drugs in such circumstances.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  None.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information she has on the number of qualified NHS doctors who are involved in the commercial activities of organisations calling themselves slimming clinics.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not held centrally.

  Community Care
  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has(a) to evaluate local authorities' community care plans, (b) to provide local authorities with her Department's comments on their plans and (c) to intervene should a local authority be found to have failed to follow guidelines in consulting other agencies in the preparation of its community care plans; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Yeo
  Local authorities' final draft community care plans were evaluated during the course of the April round of regional health authorities/social services inspectorate monitoring, and comments were made to authorities on their overall progress towards implementation. The Social Services Inspectorate is undertaking a further analysis of the final plans and, where serious gaps in the planning process have been identified SSI is notifying the authorities concerned and seeking remedial action.

  Ms. Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many local authorities met the deadline of 1 April for submitting their community care plans to her Department.

  Mr. Yeo
  Only a very small number of authorities failed to meet the deadline for publication of community care plans. Of these, one has not yet published its plan but all the others did so soon after 1 April.

  Southmead Health Care Trust
  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will make a statement on the level of staffing of junior doctors at Southmead health care trust, Bristol and the current number of hours they are required to work;

  (2) if she will take action to ensure that full houseman cover is available at Southmead health care trust.

  Mr. Sackville
  The appropriate level of medical staffing is a matter for the trust to determine, having regard to the ceilings set in "Achieving a Balance" and the advice given in "The New Deal on Junior Doctors' Hours".

  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the proposed closure of the paediatric renal unit at Southmead health care trust, Bristol.

  Mr. Sackville
  I understand that in the light of representations which have been made about the proposed closure of the unit, the Southmead health services trust has decided to re-examine the decision to close it. A further review of the options for the future of the unit will now be carried out and it will stay open, at least until the review is complete.
  913
  Ms. Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will call for a full report from the Southmead health care trust, Bristol on representations made to the trust management by doctors on emergency medical cover in the hospital.

  Mr. Sackville
  I understand that the chief executive of the Southmead trust has asked the acting director of operations to undertake an immediate inquiry into the allegations about patient deaths. I am confident that the trust board will take whatever further action is necessary.

  Mr. Mike Shannon
  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what were the issues considered when deciding the redundancy pay of Mr. Mike Shannon, former chief executive of Warrington district general hospital; and what was the payment paid to him.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not held centrally. The hon. Member may wish to contact Mr. D. Hannah, the chairman of Warrington health authority, for details.

  Nurses (Grading)
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she is taking to promote a fast track approach to dealing with the outstanding number of nurse clinical grading review appeals.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Nursing and Midwifery Staffs Negotiating Council has recently reached agreement on streamlining the appeals process including a facility for referring appeals direct from the employing authority to national level. The National Health Service Management Executive's director of personnel wrote to regional general managers and chief executives of NHS trusts on 31 March 1992 urging them to adopt the new procedures.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Radioactivity Monitoring
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what seashore monitoring for radioactivity is carried out by his environment department.

  Mr. Atkins
  The environment service of the Department of Environment for Northern Ireland monitors the gamma dose rate in the air over intertidal sediments around the coastline of the Province. The results are consistent with normal background levels of radioactivity.

  The environment service also arranges for analyses of sea water, seaweed, fish, nephrops and winkles on a quarterly basis. These results are published annually and indicate that the radioactivity is of negligible radiological significance to the Northern Ireland public.

  Ferry Links
  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps he is taking to improve ferry links between Scotland and Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Atkins
  In recent years, there has been considerable investment in infrastructural improvements to the ports of 914
  Belfast and Lame supported by grants from the European regional development fund. This has enabled a continuing improvement to the ferry services operating between Scotland and Northern Ireland.

  Rural Housing
  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps he is taking to improve rural housing in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Atkins
  This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, but the chief executive has advised me that following extensive consultations the Housing Executive completed a review of its rural policy and in June 1991 published a revised policy statement titled "The Way Ahead". This sets out a strategy for improving rural housing in the short, medium and long term. The executive, as part of its short-term strategy, has already designated 67 rural priority areas in which grants are actively targeted and where an enhanced grants package is available for the provision of mains water, sewerage and electricity services. Allied to this, the demolition criterion has been relaxed and the provision of amenity blocks introduced which will allow a greater number of properties to qualify for grant aid. The scope of the improvement grant scheme has also been widened to include a replacement option where this is shown to be more feasible on technical grounds than improvement.

  Labour Statistics
  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people are employed in(a) the shipbuilding industry and (b) the tourist industry in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Atkins
  At present, there are approximately 2,100 workers employed in the shipbuilding industry in Northern Ireland. The information requested on the tourism industry is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the current level of unemployment in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Atkins
  At 14 May 1992, the latest date for which figures are available, there were 103,796 unemployed claimants in Northern Ireland, representing 14·2 per cent. of the work force.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland 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. Atkins
  The Government continue to place a high priority on helping small businesses in Northern Ireland, through improvements to the business climate, deregulation and specific programmes of support and assistance. Direct comparisons between 1990–91 and 1991–92 are not possible as the Northern Ireland industrial development agencies concentrated on implementing the Government's
  915
  new economic development strategy for Northern Ireland in 1991–92. This focuses on assisting companies to develop their growth potential and competitiveness. Measures operated in 1991–92 by the Department of Economic Development through the Industrial Development Board and the Local Enterprise Development Unit, to assist small business include:

  Activity

  Performance

  Sectoral activity

  Examination of competitive performance begun in 20 sectors (new programme) 6 sectoral task forces established (new programme)

  Strategic development planning scheme

  21 companies assisted (new programme)

  Growth opportunities

  40 companies assisted (new programme)

  Marketing, quality, research and development, product development support

  805 companies supported

  Exhibitions, trade missions

  396 companies participated

  Moneyrea
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the total electorate of Moneyrea ward in each of the past 10 years.

  Mr. Hanley
  The parliamentary electorates taken from the electoral register published on 15 February each year are as follows:

  Electoral Register

  Electorate

  1982

  1,796

  1983

  1,827

  1984

  1,818

  1 1985

  2,049

  1986

  2,087

  1987

  2,114

  1988

  2,110

  1989

  2,138

  1990

  2,241

  1991

  2,337

  1992

  2,336

  1The Local Government (Boundaries) Order (NI) 1984 gave effect to the recommendations of the Local Government Boundaries Commissioner altering ward boundaries.

  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the enrolment at Moneyrea primary school in each of the past 10 years; and how many children were refused places in this school in each of those 10 years.

  Mr. Hanley
  The number of pupils enrolled at Moneyrea primary school in January in each of the last 10 years was as follows:

  Year

  Number

  1983

  145

  1984

  138

  1985

  132

  1986

  134

  1987

  139

  1988

  134

  1989

  136

  1990

  133

  916

  Year

  Number

  1991

  129

  1992

  136

  I will write to the right hon. Gentleman about the number of children refused places once the school has reopened after the summer break.

  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the estimated population of Moneyrea ward in each of the past 10 years.

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

  Vehicle Inspectors
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many spot inspections, as distinct from annual inspections, were carried out by the Department of the Environment from 1 April 1991 to 31 March 1992 on vehicles belonging to private operators; and if he will publish the results of such inspections.

  Mr. Atkins
  From 1 April 1991 to 31 March 1992, the Department of the Environment carried out roadside examinations on 1,203 vehicles, including lorries, buses and private cars. As a result of these examinations, 241 minor defects were drawn to the operators'/owners' attention. Seventy-four delayed prohibitions and 18 immediate prohibitions were issued in respect of more serious defects.

  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many spot inspections, as distinct from annual inspections, were carried out by the Department of the Environment from 1 April 1991 to 31 March 1992 on vehicles belonging to Ulsterbus; and if he will publish the results of such inspections.

  Mr. Atkins
  My Department does not record the roadside examination of vehicles by the names of the operators.

  Pharmacies
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland at what locations new pharmacy retail outlets have been approved by the pharmacy practices committees of the Eastern health and social services board in each year since 1989; and in 1992 up to 30 June; and how many applications were refused for each of those periods.

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

  Aircraft Noise
  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has to introduce regulations to control aircraft noise.

  Mr. Atkins
  Aircraft noise at airports is subject to control under the provision of section 12 of the Aerodromes Act (Northern Ireland) 1971. There are no present plans to invoke these provisions.

  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will undertake a review of the machanisms for controlling aircraft noise.
  917
  Mr. Atkins
  I have plans to do so as part of a general review of current airport legislation.

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

  Mr. Mates
  I shall write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

  Civil Servants (Shares)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland 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. Mates
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Police Stations (Lay Visitors)
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the value of lay visitors to police stations in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Mates
  The lay visiting scheme was established by the Police Authority for Northern Ireland in April 1991. It is non-statutory and was set up to enable members of the community to observe, comment and report upon the welfare of persons in police custody and the operation by the police of the rules under the police and criminal evidence legislation governing the welfare of those held in custody in police stations. The scheme constitutes an important and effective element in promoting community confidence in the police and has demonstrably been a success.

  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the cost of the lay visitor system in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Mates
  I understand from the Police Authority for Northern Ireland that during the financial year 1991–92 the approximate cost of administering the lay visiting scheme was £27,000.

  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many visits were made by lay visitors to police stations in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Mates
  I understand from the Police Authority for Northern Ireland that from April 1991, when the lay visiting scheme was established, to 31 March 1992, 230 visits were made to designated police stations.

  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many lay visitors have attended police holding centres in Northern Ireland; and what is the number of lay visitors in Northern Ireland.
  918
  Mr. Mates
  The Police Authority for Northern Ireland currently has 46 lay visitors, none of whom has visited the holding centres since their terms of reference apply only to police stations designated under the police and criminal evidence legislation.

  Youth Training
  Mr. Canavan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the number of youth training trainees in Northern Ireland who left schemes without receiving any recognised qualifications for the previous five years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Atkins
  The number of youth training trainees in Northern Ireland who left schemes without receiving any recognised qualifications was 6,541 in 1990–91—66 per cent. and 7,893 in 1991–92—47 per cent. Data on recognised qualifications gained were not collected prior to April 1990.

  Higher Education
  Mr. Canavan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the total amount spent on higher education excluding student awards for the last five years in current and real terms and the percentage that is of total Government spending.

  Mr. Hanley
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Student Entitlements
  Mr. Canavan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the estimated cost of restoring student entitlement to(a) income support, (b) housing benefit and (c) unemployment benefit in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Hanley
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Water Disconnections
  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list by district office the number of water consumers disconnected from the mains water supply because of arrears in each year since 1987 and the number reconnected after arrears were paid.

  Mr. Atkins
  The table shows the number of consumers disconnected in each water service division since 1987. Figures for the number of reconnections after payment of arrears are not available.

  Division

  1987

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  Northern

  78

  76

  31

  22

  99

  Southern

  120

  139

  69

  40

  100

  Eastern

  79

  132

  125

  163

  96

  Western

  41

  61

  67

  33

  90

  Public Bodies
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which non-departmental public bodies are sponsored by his Department; which of these are audited by the National Audit Office; which firms of
  919
  private accountants audits each of the others; by what method of tendering contracts to such firms are awarded; and for what duration.

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

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Questions
  Mr. Page
  To ask the Lord President of the Council what calculation has been made of the savings that might be achieved if Ministers were to make available to the proposed data network for Parliament, standard replies, with appropriate updates, to routine inquiries made by hon. Members on behalf of their constituents.

  Mr. Newton
  No calculation has, as yet, been made of any potential savings but the Information Committee will be considering the potential advantages of a data network for Parliament and the possible uses to which it might be put. I understand that it hopes to report to the House later in the Session. Any decision to install such a network would need the agreement of the House and of the Finance and Services Committee.

  Office Cost Allowance
  Mr. Ian Bruce
  To ask the Lord President of the Council what plans he has to implement the report of the Top Salaries Review Body in respect of the office cost allowance.

  Mr. Newton
  I set out the Government's plans in a written answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Hertfordshire, South-West (Mr. Page) on Thursday 9 July,Official Report, column 284 and in the debate on Tuesday 14 July.

LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Lord President of the Council 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. Newton
  The Privy Council Office has no plans to mark this occasion.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will make a statement on the achievements of the Privy Council 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 Department monitors those achievements and the statistical results of such monitoring.

  Mr. Newton
  The functions of the Privy Council Office do not include the provision of assistance to small businesses.

EMPLOYMENT

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment 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. Michael Forsyth
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Local Office Stourbridge
  Mr. Hawksley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (I) when her Department first considered building a new jobcentre and benefits office in Coventry street, Stourbridge; when it was decided not to go ahead with the scheme; what was the estimate of the cost of the scheme; how much had been spent by her Department and the Property Services Agency in preparing the scheme; and what was the proposed date of opening of the centre;

  (2) when her Department considered building a new jobcentre and benefits office at Scotland house, Stourbridge, how much it will cost; how much area it will take up; and when it will be ready to open.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Questions on operational matters in the Employment Service executive agency are the responsibility of the agency's chief executive, to whom I have referred this question for reply.

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

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Department of Employment group personnel handbook and the Employment Service personnel handbook give the following specific and identical guidance on dealings in securities and other assets. Staff must not use or appear to use their official position for personal gain. They must not buy or sell something when, as a civil servant, they have information concerning its value which is not publicly known. They should also avoid dealing in an asset at a time when their official activities involve them in giving advice, or taking decisions which may affect its value.

  Comprehensive information is not readily available on the number of occasions on which staff have reported shareholdings to established officers.

  Departmental Objectives
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will set out the objectives of each division and branch of her Department.
  921
  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Inspectors
  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what was the ratio of field inspectors to registered premises for(a) the factory inspectorate, (b) the agricultural inspectorate, (c) the quarries inspectorate, (d) the nuclear inspectorate and (e) the mines inspectorate in (i) 1980, (ii) 1985 and (iii) 1990.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The ratios of field inspectors in the Health and Safety Executive (HSE)1 to registered premises were:

  1980

  1985

  1990

  (1 January)

  (1 April)

  (1 April)

  (a) Factories

  1:466

  1:695

  1:690

  (b) Agricultural2

  —

  1:2,116

  1:1,619

  (c and e) Mines and quarries3

  1:98

  1:117

  —

  (c) Quarries

  —

  —

  1:667

  (e) Mines

  —

  —

  1:21

  1 The register of premises maintained by HSE is thought to be seriously incomplete because of the rapid turnover in businesses and because a number fail to notify as required by the Factories Act 1961. Moreover at least 100 inspectors inspect transient sites—mainly in construction—rather than fixed premises. The ratio has to be considered in that light. Informed estimates of the total number of premises subject to HSE inspection suggest total numbers in excess of 1 million.

  2 Agricultural inspectors joined the Health and Safety Executive from Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries and Food (MAFF) in 1976. The register of workplaces was held by MAFF until after the beginning of 1980.

  3 Combined figures for mines and quarries (quarries inspectorate joined the factory and agricultural inspectorate division on 1 November 1989).

  (d) Nuclear installations inspectors in the Health and Safety Executive are all based in headquarters. The numbers of inspectors in the nuclear safety division and the number of relevant sites were as follows:

  1980

  1985

  1990

  (1 January)

  (1 April)

  (1 April)

  Inspectors

  99

  105

  160

  Sites

  28

  29

  30

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many mines inspectors are due to retire in each year between 1992 and 1996.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The numbers of mines inspectors currently employed by the Health and Safety Executive who will have reached retirement age in each calendar year between 1992 and 1996 are as follows:

  Number

  11992

  1

  1993

  3

  1994

  2

  1995

  1

  1996

  1

  1 From 1 July.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what was the ratio of qualified factory inspectors to trainees on 1 April in each year between 1987 and 1992.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The ratios of qualified factory inspectors to trainee factory inspectors at 1 April were:922

  Ratio

  1987

  6·7

  1988

  8·1

  1989

  7·1

  1990

  4·7

  1991

  3·5

  1992

  3·4

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many(a) factory inspectors, (b) agricultural inspectors, (c) quarries inspectors, (d) nuclear inspectors, (e) mines inspectors and (f) factories inspectors resigned between 1987 and 1990, inclusively; and how many years of experience had they between them, in total.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The number of inspectors who resigned from 1 January 1987 to 31 December 1990 were:

  Number

  Factory inspectors

  42

  Agricultural inspectors

  5

  Quarries inspectors

  1

  Nuclear inspectors

  3

  Mines inspectors

  0

  These inspectors had, in aggregate, 416 years of civil service employment.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what were the labour costs associated with(a) the factory inspectorate, (b) the agricultural inspectorate, (c) the specialist inspectorate, (d) the quarries inspectorate, (e) the nuclear inspectorate and (f) the mines inspectorate; and for (i) clerical and administrative staff and (ii) inspectors under each category both in actual amounts and as a percentage of the Health and Safety Executive's total labour costs in each year from 1987 to 1991.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Information is not available in the form requested. The table gives payroll budgets for the divisions of the Health and Safety Executive, in which inspectors are principally employed. Separate figures for inspector grade and other staff are not available.

  Payroll Budgets—HSE Divisions1

  £000s

  Percentage of HSE total

  1987–88

  Field operations division

  22,019

  36·2

  Mines inspectorate

  3,836

  6·3

  Nuclear safety division

  4,821

  7·9

  Technology division

  6,236

  10·3

  1988–89

  Field operations division

  24,414

  36·5

  Mines inspectorate

  3,722

  5·6

  Nuclear safety division

  5,815

  8·7

  Technology division

  6,875

  10·3

  1989–90

  Field operations division

  25,673

  35·9

  Mines inspectorate

  3,373

  4·7

  Nuclear safety division

  7,377

  10·3

  Technology division

  7,004

  9·8

  1990–91

  Field operations division

  37,308

  44·4

  Mines inspectorate

  3,085

  3·7

  923

  £000s

  Percentage of HSE total

  Nuclear safety division

  9,394

  11·2

  Technology division

  5,500

  6·5

  1991–92

  Field operations division

  41,368

  40·2

  Mines inspectorate

  3,218

  3·1

  Nuclear safety division

  10,446

  10·1

  Technology and health sciences division

  8,631

  8·4

  1 Because of reorganisations of HSE's divisional structure, figures for different years are not directly comparable.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many factories there are which are liable for visits from the factories inspectorate.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  On 31 March 1992, the latest date for which information is available centrally, 417,316 fixed premises—which include all registered factories—were registered with HSE's factory inspectorate. There are no reliable estimates of the number of unregistered factory premises. All fixed premises, whether registered or not, are liable to a visit by HSE inspectors.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment when the last new mines inspector was recruited.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The last mines inspector was recruited in November 1988.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many trainee(a) factory inspectors, (b) agricultural inspectors, (c) quarry inspectors,(d) nuclear inspectors, (e) mines inspectors and (f) factories inspectors were employed, giving the number for each year from 1987 to 1991.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Only two grades of staff in the Health and Safety Executive are designated as training grades: factory inspectors class II—for the first two years—and assistant agricultural inspectors—for the first three years. The numbers employed were:

  Trainee factory inspectors

  Assistant agricultural inspectors

  1 April 1987

  81·0

  36

  1 April 1988

  65·0

  25

  1 April 1989

  75·0

  23

  1 April 1990

  111·0

  26

  1 April 1991

  144·5

  43

  A wide range of training, both internal and external, is provided both for new recruits and for more experienced staff in the various occupational groups employed by HSE.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many premises were registered with(a) the factory inspectorate, (b) the agricultural inspectorate, (c) the quarries inspectorate, (d) the nuclear inspectorate and (e) the mines inspectorate in (i) 1980, (ii) 1985 and (iii) 1990.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The table shows the available information on the number of workplaces registered with the factory, agricultural, quarries, nuclear installations and mines inspectorate in 1980, 1985 and 1990.
  924

  Number of workplaces registered

  19801

  19851

  19901

  Factory inspectorate

  309,915

  395,860

  386,144

  Agricultural inspectorate

  —

  319,567

  239,632

  Quarries inspectorate

  29,021

  28,800

  6,000

  Nuclear inspectorate

  28

  29

  30

  Mines inspectorate

  —

  —

  729

  1 Figures for 1 January 1980 and 31 March 1985 and 1990.

  2 Combined figure for mines and quarries—quarries inspectorate joined the factory and agricultural inspectorate division on 1 November 1989.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is the current number of factory inspectors.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  On 1 July 1992, the Health and Safety Executive employed 705 factory inspectors.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many Health and Safety Executive inspectors with over(a) 10 years, (b) 15 years and (c) 20 years experience have left the Health and Safety Executive since 1 January 1987.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Since 1 January 1987, the following numbers of inspectors have resigned:

  (a) 28 with 11 to 15 years experience,

  (b) 10 with 15 to 20 years experience,

  (c) 3 with over 20 years experience.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many premises registered with the Health and Safety Executive have not been inspected since 1 January 1986.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Information about the number of fixed premises registered with the Health and Safety Executive that have not been inspected since 1 January 1986 is not readily available. I will write to the hon. Member.

  Health and Safety Executive
  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what proportion of the Health and Safety Executive's expenditure was provided directly from the Government in grant aid for the years(a) 1975–76 and (b) 1990–91.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The proportions of the Health and Safety Executive's expenditure provided by grant in aid for the years 1975–76 and 1990–91 were 98 per cent. and 75 per cent.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what specific resources have been allocated to the Health and Safety Executive to ensure that employers will comply with regulations enacting(a) the framework directive—89/391/EEC—(b) the workplace directive—89/654/EEC—(c) the manual handling of loads directive—90/269/EEC—(d) the use of personal protective equipment directive—89/655/EEC—(e) the display screen equipment directive—90/270/EEC—(f) the carcinogens directive—90/394/EEC—and (g) the biological agents directive—90/679/EEC.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  In recent years, the Government have provided the Health and Safety Commission—HSC—with the resources it has sought for the Health and Safety Executive in public expenditure survey bids. HSE's staffing is now at its highest level ever.
  925
  In the course of its inspection, advice and enforcement activities, the HSE promotes compliance with all relevant health and safety legislation. HSE's plans for implementing the large number of new EC requirements are set out in the HSC's plan of work for 1992–93 and beyond.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many(a) doctors and (b) occupational nurses were employed by the Health and Safety Executive in (a) 1979 and (b)

  Mr. McLoughlin
  On 1 April 1979, HSE employed 86·5 doctors and 91 nurses. Corresponding figures for 1991 were 56·5 and 53·5 respectively.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what plans the Government have to increase the staffing levels of the Health and Safety Executive.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  On 1 July 1992, the Health and Safety Executive's staffing was at its highest level ever, at 4,404 including 1,499 inspectors. As set out on pages 42 and 43 of the Health and Safety Commission's plan of work for 1992–93 and beyond, published in March this year and available in the Library, it is planned to increase total staffing to 4,523, including 1,592 inspectors, by 1 April 1993.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many complaints in total from employees concerning health and safety at work were dealt with by Health and Safety Executive area offices in the years 1988–89, 1989–90 and 1990–91.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The table shows the information which is available on the total number of complaints received and dealt with by the agricultural, factory and quarries inspectorates—AI, FI, QI—in the Health and Safety Executive area offices for the years 1988–89, 1989–90 and 1990–91:

  Year (1 April—31 March)

  Number of complaints

  1988–89

  1 15,217

  1989–90

  2 19,591

  1990–91

  18,625

  1 AI and FI only.

  2 Includes QI figures from 1 November 1989 when the inspectorate joined the factory and agricultural inspectorate division.

  Information is not separately available on the number of complaints received from employees about health and safety at work.

  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will publish the Health and Safety Executive report entitled report of the working group on improving the impact of the division's work; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many telephone inquiries the Health and Safety Executive public inquiry points dealt with in total in the years 1988–89, 1989–90 and 1990–91.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The number of telephone inquiries dealt with by the public inquiry points are as follows:
  926

  Number

  1988–89

  67,664

  1989–90

  92,537

  1990–91

  92,134

  Pregnant Employees
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment ( I) what plans she has to amend the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 so that an employee can claim unfair dismissal because of a pregnancy without qualifying condition;

  (2) what plans she has to seek to amend the law, to make the dismissal of pregnant women unlawful without qualifying condition, and to introduce 14 weeks' maternity leave, without qualifying condition.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Government's election manifesto undertook to give effect to the provisions of the EC directive on pregnant workers which gives the right to 14 weeks' maternity leave and protection against dismissal on grounds of pregnancy. The Government will, of course, honour their manifesto commitment. However, the directive has yet to be adopted.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what recent representations she has received regarding the employment rights of pregnant women; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Since the general election my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has received 12 letters from Members of Parliament and Members of the European Parliament about the pregnant workers directive, including one passed to this Department from the Prime Minister's office. My right hon. Friend has also received three letters from MPs about other aspects of maternity rights. In addition, my right hon. Friend has received a number of letters from trade unions and others.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what steps her Department is taking to publicise to employers and employees their obligations and rights with regard to pregnant women.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Department has published a booklet which sets out the maternity rights available to employees and the obligations of employers. The booklet is widely available at Employment Service offices. There is also a simple fact sheet on the same subject mainly intended for employers.

  Unfair Dismissal
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will amend the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 to abolish the necessity to have a qualifying period of two years' continuous employment to claim unfair dismissal, where an employee alleges that the reason for the dismissal was an attempt to enforce a statutory right.

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

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many complaints were made to industrial tribunals in each of the last five years for which
  927
  records are available for unfair dismissal because of pregnancy; how many and what percentage were settled before hearing; how many and what percentage reached a hearing; and how many and what percentage were successful.

  Year

  All cases

  Settled before hearing

  Reached full hearing

  Successful at full hearing

  Per cent.

  Per cent.

  Per cent.

  1990–91

  47

  36

  (76·6)

  11

  (23·4)

  4

  (8·5)

  1989–90

  44

  34

  (77·3)

  10

  (22·7)

  5

  (11·4)

  1988–89

  92

  60

  (65·2)

  28

  (30·4)

  12

  (13)

  1987–88

  115

  85

  (73·9)

  28

  (24·4)

  12

  (10·4)

  1986–87

  169

  126

  (74·6)

  43

  (25·4)

  25

  (14·8)

  Child Care
  Mr. Leighton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what steps she is taking to encourage the improvement of child care after school and during holidays.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Government have announced their intention to pay grants through training and enterprise councils for the establishment of after-school and school holiday child care schemes. The Department is consulting relevant organisations about implementation of this grant programme. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has had discussions with the working group which advises her on women's issues and expects to announce further details of the programme later this year.

  Qualifications (Recognition)
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment which diplomas, certificates and other formal qualifications will be subject to directives for mutual recognition under article 57 of the treaty on European union.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The treaty on European union—Maastricht—does not directly affect the principles of mutual recognition. It changes the procedure for agreement on any new directives, which might be proposed in future.

  There are already two directives which cover this area under the Single European Act which is based on articles in the treaty of Rome.

  The first general directive for mutual recognition came into force on 4 January 1991 for degree level qualifications—although as yet not all member states have implemented it.

  The second general directive has been agreed and will be in force in June 1994. It extends the system for recognition to include qualifications awarded on completion of higher education courses of one to three years and equivalents including national and Scottish vocational qualifications.

  Ratification of the European economic area agreement will extend mutual recognition to the European Free Trade Association countries.

  Training
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what steps she intends to take to ensure that the United Kingdom provides national retraining
  928
  Mr. McLoughlin
  The table sets out the information on claims to industrial tribunals of unfair dismissal on the grounds of pregnancy under section 60 of the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 in the five financial years to 31 March 1991.

  programmes and professional child care for women at the workplace, on an equal basis with other EC member countries;

  (2) what steps she intends to take to bring the level of investment in training for women in the United Kingdom to a level comparable with that in other EC countries.

  Mrs. Gillian Shephard
  We already have substantial arrangements for training for women, in particular within the employment training programme. There are flexibilities within the programme which allow women to reconcile their training with their domestic commitments and which offer support towards the cost of child care.

  Investment in training provision is further encouraged by the investors in people initiative, which rewards employers who develop all their employees, and by a new national training award for the training of women.

  I will also be introducing a grant to help set up out-of-school child care provision, which I hope will have the involvement of employers. My Department will continue to encourage employers to provide workplace child care facilities for all employees with children.

  Against this background, I have written to all training and enterprise council chairmen specifically asking them to help by devising local strategies to take forward action on women's issues. Training will have a key role in these.

  At a European level, the United Kingdom is an active member of the IRIS network of training schemes for women which promotes interchange of ideas and good practice, and through which good United Kingdom practice is widely shared with our European partners.

  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will provide tables showing the latest results from the youth training leavers survey for each TEC—training and enterprise council—area in England and Wales and each LEC—local enterprise company—area in Scotland broken down to show the number and proportion of youth training leavers who(a) had worked towards a vocational qualification or credit, (b) had gained a vocational qualification or credit, (c) had not gained a vocational qualification or credit, (d) were awaiting results and (e) had completed their training.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment on what occasions the European Commission has refused to pay grants from the social fund to the United Kingdom to assist industrial training; and what were the reasons for each refusal.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Commission has yet to make certain 1992 payments in respect of the fund's objectives 2
  929
  and 5b—areas of industrial and rural decline—and has provided no reasons for this delay. The Commission has now agreed to release all 1992 advances in respect of objectives 3 and 4—long-term unemployment and young people.

  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will provide tables showing the latest results from the youth training leavers survey for each TEC area in England and Wales and each LEC area in Scotland broken down to show the number and proportion of youth training leavers who were(a) in a full-time job with their work experience employer, (b) in a full-time job with another employer, (c) employed in their own business, (d) in a part-time job, (e) in voluntary work, (f) on a full-time course at a college or training centre, (g) on another youth training scheme. (h) doing something else or (i) unemployed.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she plans to publish(a) the monthly reports of supply and demand of youth training places in each TEC area which are required from 7 July and (b) the quarterly statistical stock takes by her Department of the youth training supply and demand position on the guarantee in each TEC area.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Information on the numbers of young people covered by the YT guarantee will be subject to the new monitoring arrangements which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment announced in the House on 7 July. Information gathered in the quarterly stock takes is in the form of estimates that are not sufficiently reliable to merit publication.

  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will list the number of young persons in the Durham constituency who have gained full-time employment after completing the youth training scheme.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  It is estimated from the latest available information that 60 per cent. of youth training trainees who completed their agreed training in the Durham training and enterprise council area during April to September 1991 were in full-time employment six months after leaving.

  Severe Hardship Payments
  Ms. Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many cases were referred to a training and enterprise council guarantee liaison officer after a young person had been on severe hardship payments for eight weeks; and of these how many young people were found a youth training place by the guarantee liaison officer, in(a) January, (b) April and (c) July.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The following information has been provided by the Benefits Agency:

  (a) January 258 referrals;

  (b) April 579 referrals;

  (c) July (information not yet available).

  The information relates to referrals to TECs in England and Wales and local enterprise companies in Scotland.

  Information on the numbers of young people who were found a YT place by a guarantee liaison officer as a result of the referral is not available.

  Travel-to-Interview Scheme
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment when she expects to announce the results of the review of the travel-to-interview scheme; if she will introduce provision for assistance for multiple job search expenses within the daily travelling distance; what changes to the eligibility rules and total resources allocated to the scheme are being considered; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin:
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Neil Mulberry
  Mr. Jessel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is the date on which she will provide redundancy payment to Mr. Neil Mulberry.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I have written to my hon. Friend, giving full details of this case.

  Noise at Work Regulations 1989
  Mr. Henderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what estimate has been made of the cost to employers of complying with the Noise at Work Regulations 1989 in 1990 and 1991.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The Health and Safety Commission published a consultative document in 1987 on the draft Noise at Work Regulations. This included an assessment of the costs and benefits of the proposed regulations, which estimated their total cost to be between £240 million to £320 million, spread over a working lifetime. The main costs were likely to arise from the requirement for noise assessments—£20 million—personal protection programmes for those exposed to noise above 85 dB(A)—£127 million—and those for noise reduction measures for exposures above 90dB(A)—£85 million to £175 million.

  Social Fund
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what representations she intends to make over delays in processing European social fund payments for voluntary sector projects.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Following vigorous representations by the Department, the European Commission has now agreed to release all ESF moneys due to the United Kingdom in respect of first advances for projects operating in 1992 under objectives 3 and 4 of the fund—long-term unemployment and young people. Representations continue over the Commission's inexcusable and unexplained delay in releasing 1992 advances in respect of certain programmes under objectives 5 and 2b—areas of industrial and rural decline.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is the proposed budget of the European social fund.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The European Commission has proposed that the total European social fund budget for 1993 should be some £4,185 million—at the current exchange rate.

  Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1988
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what amendments have been made to SI 1991 No. 2431 on the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1988, in regard to item II in schedule 2, following the fifth report of the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, 1991–92, HC 14-v.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Employment Service
  Mr. Merchant
  To ask the Secretary of Stale for Employment what were the main achievements of the Employment Service as a next steps agency in 1991–92; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  I am delighted to announce that the Employment Service met or exceeded the great majority of its performance targets in 1991–92. It helped 1·332 million unemployed people back into work; and exceeded its targets for paying benefit accurately and on time. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has received the ES annual report and accounts for 1991–92 from the chief executive.

  As a next steps agency, the ES operates under a published framework document agreed with my right hon. Friend. The start of the review of the current ES framework document, due for completion by the end of March 1993, was delayed by the general election. My right hon. Friend has, therefore. extended the life of the current ES framework document by six months. At the same time, she has extended the contract of employment of the current ES chief executive, Mr. Mike Fogden, by six months, to March 1993. My right hon. Friend has also agreed a number of technical amendments to the current ES framework document, which take effect immediately.

  I have arranged for copies of the ES annual report and accounts for 1991–92 and the full textual changes to the ES framework document to be placed in the Library.

DEFENCE

  Radioactive Materials
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 6 July,Official Report, column 45, if he will list each of the sites that exceed the threshold for exemptions from the Radioactive Substances Act 1960.

  Mr. Aitken
  My Department is reviewing holdings of radioactive substances which exceed statutory exemption limits. The review is expected to be complete by the end of this year. It would be premature to provide the list the hon. Gentleman requests until that time.

  Polaris
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what studies have been carried out into methods of disposal of Polaris missiles;

  (2) by what means Polaris missiles will be disposed of.

  Mr. Aitken
  Disposal of Polaris missiles will be undertaken as the force is phased out and progressively replaced by Trident. Various methods for the disposal of the missiles are currently under consideration.

  Trident
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to fit global positioning system units on British Trident missiles.

  Mr. Aitken
  None. However, global positioning system units will be fitted to each of the four Vanguard class Trident missile submarines, and will act as a check system for the submarines' primary inertial navigation system.

  HMS Vanguard
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will define the terms "in-service date" and "formally operational" as used by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the difference between the in-service date of HMS Vanguard and the date upon which it will be fully operational.

  Mr. Aitken
  The in-service date is defined normally as the date by which the equipment will contribute to the operational capability of the service concerned. For Royal Navy vessels other than strategic ballistic nuclear submarines, the in-service date represents the date of acceptance from the contractor of the first of class; such vessels become formally operational after a series of trials. For Vanguard class submarines, trials will precede the in-service date, at which point they are expected to become fully operational.

  Weapons (Soviet Union)
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what consideration he has given to the purchase and subsequent dismantling of weapons of the former Soviet Union in order to prevent these weapons from being sold on the open market.

  Mr. Aitken
  This option has been rejected. It would not deal with the problem of the huge size of the military industries of the former Soviet Union, and could act as an incentive to further arms production.

  Porton Down
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what consideration he has given to the establishment of an ethics committee to oversee scientific procedures on animals at the chemical and biological defence establishment, Porton Down.

  Mr. Aitken
  All scientific procedures carried out on animals at this establishment are undertaken within the provisions of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. This imposes strict controls on the use of living animals in research and requires each programme of work to be justified in advance. The Act also established an Animals Procedures Committee which advises the Home Secretary on such matters as the legitimate requirements of science and industry and the protection of animals against avoidable suffering and unnecessary use in scientific procedures. I see no need to establish an ethics committee.

  Nuclear Weapons
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what would be the defence implications of United Kingdom participation in a multilateral, verifiable fissile materials cut-off.
  933
  Mr. Aitken
  Unlike the nuclear super powers, the United Kingdom does not have large stocks of surplus fissile material upon which to draw. United Kingdom production will continue to be kept at the minimum level necessary to satisfy our nuclear deterent and naval reactor needs.

  Civil Servants' Shareholdings
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 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. Aitken
  The rules of conduct governing share ownership are set out in departmental standing instructions available to both industrial and non-industrial staff. These make it clear that there is to be no conflict of interest between private and official interests.

  My Department's next steps agencies are subject to these same rules.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what visits he has made too 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. Aitken
  My right hon. and learned Friend has made no such visits. However, as the Minister with responsibility for deregulation matters within the MOD, I can confirm that this Department will play its full part in taking forward the Government's commitment to deregulation and competition.

  Type 23 Frigates
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when it is expected the Royal Navy will take delivery of the Ferranti data link stimulator for the type 23 frigate.

  Mr. Aitken
  The data link stimulator is scheduled to he delivered to the type 23 shore integration facility early in 1993.

  Minesweepers
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what have been the consequences for the training of reservists of the withdrawal from service of two Royal Navy River class minesweepers.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  There have been no consequences for the training of reservists as such following the withdrawal from service of two River class minesweepers, although some reservists now have to travel to other units for their sea training.
  934
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many River class minesweepers are in service with the Royal Navy; and where they are based.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  There are a total of 12 River class minesweepers. Two—HMS Ribble and HMS Helmsdale—are maintained in reserve at Portsmouth. HMS Blackwater is deployed operationally as part of the fishery protection squadron and is based at Rosyth. The nine remaining vessels are used by the RNR and are based as follows:

  HMS Waverney

  South Wales

  HMS Helford

  Ulster

  HMS Orwell

  Tyne

  HMS Carron

  Severn

  HMS Humber

  Mersey

  HMS Spey

  Forth

  HMS Dovey

  Clyde

  HMS Itchen

  Solent

  HMS Arun

  Sussex

  Army Recruitment
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the total cost of the present recruitment campaign for the Army running in national cinemas.

  Mr. Aitken
  The cost is £255,000.

  Army Redundancies
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the estimate of the costs of the present programme of redundancies in the Army.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The cost to the Army in 1992–93 of the first tranche of redundancies is in the order of £210 million. As I said in my answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham (Mr. Merchant) on 8 July 1992,Official Report, column 185, details of the criteria of phase 2 of the redundancy programme will be announced shortly but it is likely that it will affect some 6,500 personnel. Final decisions on the size and make-up of this tranche, and of any further measures, have not yet been made.

  Nuclear Storage Bases
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the purpose of the convoy which arrived at Coulport nuclear storage base on 10 July.

  Mr. Aitken
  It is not our practice to comment on operational matters.

  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what obligations the EC directive 89/618/Euratom places upon the United Kingdom Government in relation to the transportation of convoys to nuclear storage bases; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Aitken
  The United Kingdom Health and Safety Commission has issued a Consultative Document—CD37—setting out its proposals for the adoption of EC directive 89/618/Euratom within United Kingdom regulations. The Ministry of Defence will of course comply with the proposed United Kingdom regulations in the form in which they are finally implemented.

  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what obligations and procedures exist to provide advance notice to(a) the public and (b) relevant local authorities of convoys destined for nuclear storage bases;
  935
  (2) what discussions took place with the appropriate local authori concerning the convoy which went through their districts on the way to the Coulport nuclear weapons storage base on 10 July.

  Mr. Aitken
  Any arrangements for liaison in connection with military convoys depend on the nature of the cargo being carried.

  Gurkhas
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether it remains his policy to reduce the brigade of Gurkhas to around 2,500 men after the withdrawal from Hong Kong in 1997.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Yes.

  Menwith Hill
  Mrs. Mahon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 10 July,Official Report, column 364, what communications are leased exclusively for defence purposes; and what are the indirect links between Menwith Hill station and Hunterstones tower.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Various communications links are leased exclusively for defence purposes, but I am unable to comment further on their precise nature for reasons of national security.

  Chemical and Biological Weapons
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) under what defence agreement information from the defence microbiology division at the chemical and biological defence establishment, Porton Down, is passed to the United States Department of Defence;

  (2) how many personnel from the United States Department of Defence are stationed either permanently or temporarily at the chemical and biological defence establishment at Porton Down; and for what purpose;

  (3) what quantity of VX nerve gas is currently stocked by his Department;

  (4) in what years CS gas was produced at his Department's establishment at Nancekuke, Cornwall; and in what quantities it was manufactured each year;

  (5) pursuant to his answer of 26 June, Official Report, column 359, what other uses have been made of shellfish toxins by his Department; and whether his Department has collaborated with the United States Department of Defence in the studies and tests involving shellfish toxins;

  (6) how many times personnel from the United States Department of Defence have visited the chemical and biological defence establishment, Porton Down, in each year since 1979; and what was the purpose of these visits;

  (7) in which years his Department's scientists carried out studies and tests on quantities of VX nerve gas prepared by the United States of America; what was the purpose of these tests and studies; and how many British service personnel have been subjected to tests involving VX nerve gas;

  (8) what use the chemical and biological defence establishment Porton Down, has made of the protein saxitoxin;

  (9) how many tests have been carried out since 1967 involving the incapacitating agent BZ and British service
  936
  personnel; when these tests were carried out; whether all the personnel were volunteers; and whether BZ is currently stocked by any of his Department's establishments;

  (10) what information about its research into CR gas the United Kingdom has passed onto the United States of America; under which defence agreement this information was exchanged; and when the information was transferred.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  These matters are for the chemical and biological defence establishment under its framework document. I have therefore asked the chief executive to reply direct to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what tests and studies his Department has conducted on the chemical agents picloram and cacodylic acid; when these tests and studies were carried out; whether they were carried out on humans; and whether the results of these tests and studies have been passed on to the United States Department of Defence.

  Mr. Aitken
  The substances picloram and cacodylic acid are herbicides. No work has been carried out on these materials by my Department.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the Ministry of Defence scientists first conducted research into CR gas; and in which Ministry of Defence establishment these scientists were working.

  Mr. Aitken
  This is a matter for the chemical and biological defence establishment under its framework document. I have therefore asked the chief executive of CBDE to write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's policy on the use of CR gas(a) within the United Kingdom and (b) outside the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The MOD's policy for the use of CR gas is in accordance with the draft text of the chemical weapons convention currently being negotiated in Geneva.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when Britain and the United States exchanged technical and scientific information on(a) binary nerve gas technology and (b) VX nerve gas; and under which defence agreements these exchanges took place.

  Mr. Aitken
  I refer the hon. Member to my reply of 21 May 1992,Official Report, column 255–56, concerning international agreements on chemical and biological defence.

  Under the agreements relating to research information has been exchanged on a continuing basis on the potential hazard from chemical and biological agents including VX nerve gas and possible binary gases with the aim of ensuring that the protective measures for the United Kingdom armed forces are as effective as possible.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 29 June,Official Report, column 411, at which establishment in Australia the environmental testing of the S10 respirator took place in the 1980s; and whether any other British equipment related to chemical and biological warfare has been tested in Australia or New Zealand since 1962.
  937
  Mr. Aitken
  Environmental testing of the S10 respirator was carried out by the Australian materials research laboratory.

  I understand that the Australian Government carried out tests of United Kingdom agent monitoring equipment in the mid-1980s in support of Australian defence requirements.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many research projects at the chemical and biological defence establishment at Porton Down have been funded by the United States Department of Defence since 1979; and what is the total worth of these projects.

  Mr. Aitken
  This is a matter for the chemical and biological defence establishment under its framework document. I have therefore asked the chief executive of CBDE to write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much CR gas is stocked by his Department; and how much stock has been purchased from external sources or produced internally by his Department.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  It would not be in the national interest to disclose the size of our stockpile or its source.

  Dr. Liam Fox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what key performance targets have been set for 1992–93 for the chief executive of the chemical and biological defence establishment.

  Mr. Aitken
  The chief executive of the chemical and biological defence establishment at Porton Down is responsible for research to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces are provided with effective protective measures against the threat that chemical and biological weapons may be used against them. He has been set the following challenging key performance targets for 1992–93:

  Improved Delivery of the Programme

  1. In 1992–93 to achieve, within agreed timescales, 85 per cent. of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment programme milestones required by the service chiefs of staff and other customers.

  2. In 1992–93 to achieve 80 per cent. of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment programme milestones required by service chiefs of staff and other customers to agreed cost and to seek progressive improvements in performance in future years.

  3. To sustain the CB research programme and the capability of CBDE to respond effectively to operational emergencies by maintaining scientific and technical staff to at least 66 per cent. of the total planned manpower.

  More Efficient Use of Resources

  4. To increase the overall efficiency of CBDE by more than 2·5 per cent. over the financial year 1992–93 with emphasis on improving output efficiency.

  5. To establish a database by 31 March 1993 to enable the percentage of indirect to direct costs to be determined more accurately with a view to improving value for money for MoD by reducing the percentage of indirect costs in subsequent years.

  6. To complete the programme of efficiency reviews of the remainder of the support services by 31 March 1993 and initiate market testing, where appropriate, and to implement the recommendations which would lead to greater efficiency.

  Development of Management Systems

  To extend the improved resource allocation and cost attribution system by inclusion of major and minor works and maintenance costs by March 1993.
  938
  Quality and the Customer

  8. To improve the means of assessing the quality of the scientific and technical outputs by March 1993 and to apply this to the outputs for MoD and other key customers by March 1994.

  Members of Parliament (Consultation)
  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, further to his reply to the hon. Member for South Antrim on 14 July, what facilities are extended to the relevant hon. Member when consultation is decided upon.

  Mr. Aitken
  My noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence will write to the hon. Member.

  Crown Estate Commissioners
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much property is leased by his Department that is owned or managed by the Crown Estate Commissioners; and how much was paid in rent, leases or fees to the Crown Estate Commissioners for such property for each of the last five years.

  Mr. Aitken
  My noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence will write to the hon. Member.

  Bullying
  Mr. Ashton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the reason Private Patrick Callaghan and Private Bryson Dart of the I Battalion Worcester and Sherwood Foresters have been kept in custody in Cyprus; for how long they have been kept in custody; when they can be expected to face an inquiry after their allegation of bullying; what promises were made to them and their families that there would be no retribution following their allegations; and why they are not allowed to carry on with their normal duties while awaiting the investigation.

  Mr. Aitken
  I will write to the hon. Gentleman.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what action he will take following Private Anthony Evans's case to ensure ethnic minorities in the British Army are not subjected to bullying or racism in the future.

  Mr. Aitken
  It has been made clear throughout the services that bullying and racism will not be tolerated. Measures have been introduced to eradicate this form of unacceptable behaviour.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what compensation Private Anthony Evans, formerly of the Royal Regiment of Wales, will receive for the loss of his Army career and the mental and physical injury he suffered during his service in the Army.

  Mr. Aitken
  The Army Board is awaiting comments from Anthony Evans's solicitors on the findings of the board of inquiry held to consider his allegations. Once those comments have been received the Army Board will consider the question of compensation.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the extent of bullying and racism in the British Army; and what steps have been taken to eradicate them.
  939
  Mr. Aitken
  The Army takes a serious view of all forms of bullying and racism; all service personnel are aware that behaviour of this kind will not be tolerated. Any allegations or complaints of ill-treatment are investigated. Depending on the strength of the evidence, disciplinary action will be taken against the perpetrators.

  A range of measures to combat bullying and racism have been introduced, including the banning of initiation ceremonies. These measures include the establishment of additional posts in the training organisation to allow officers and NCOs to devote more time to their supervisory role. Posts have also been established for the Women's Royal Voluntary Service to help combat bullying.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what disciplinary action will be taken against Army personnel involved in Private Anthony Evans's case; and when it will be made public.

  Mr. Aitken
  Disciplinary action was taken in 1991 by the commanding officer against those held to be responsible. The disciplinary action taken is a private matter between those individuals concerned and their commanding officer.

  Defence Structure
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what changes are planned to the defence structure of the United Kingdom in order to support the European union as a cohesive force in international affairs in accordance with article J1(4) of the treaty on European union.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  We plan no such changes. The Maastricht agreements make clear that the Western European Union will"elaborate and implement decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications"—(article J.4.2.),

  and that the union's common foreign and security policy
  "shall respect the obligations of certain Member States under the North Atlantic Treaty and be compatible with the common security and defence policy established within that framework"—(article J.4.4.).

  Troops (Sunderland Polling Station)
  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence why troops were posted at Dykelands road polling station in the Sunderland, North constituency on 9 April.

  Mr. Aitken
  The Dykelands road polling station is situated within a Territorial Army centre occupied by 251 Field Ambulance (V). For security reasons it was necessary to position TA soldiers at the entrance in order to search the bags of those entering and to escort them to the room which was being used as a polling booth. Both male and female soldiers carried out these duties and they were unarmed.

  Antares
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Commander in Chief Fleet has completed his consideration of any further disciplinary action following the court martial arising from the sinking of the Antares; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  No. The Commander in Chief Fleet is considering the matter.

  Ethnic Minorities
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what instruction non-commissioned officers and soldiers have in the provisions of the Race Relations Act 1976.

  Mr. Aitken
  During basic training, soldiers receive instruction on a wide range of interpersonal skills, which includes the avoidance of all forms of discrimination and stresses their unacceptability in the armed forces.

  Nuclear Proliferation
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the policy underlying the omission of mention of United Kingdom obligations under article VI of the nuclear proliferation treaty in the preparation of paragraphs 135–137, on nuclear proliferation, on page 22 of the "Statement on the Defence Estimates 1992", Cm 1981.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The United Kingdom's obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty are a matter of public record.

  Nuclear Warheads (Expenditure)
  Mr. Liew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence under which top level budget holder, as set out in figure 13 of the "Statement on the Defence Estimates 1992", Cm 1981, is the expenditure included on(a) nuclear warhead testing and (b) nuclear warhead design and development.

  Mr. Aitken
  I will write to the hon. Member shortly.

  Toxic Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, further to paragraphs 342–348 on defence and the environment, in the "Statement on the Defence Estimates 1992", Cm 1981, if he will set out the present programmes managed by his Department for the minimisation and disposal of toxic and radioactive wastes and details of future plans developed by his Department to deal with these wastes, respectively.

  Mr. Aitken
  I will write to the hon. Member shortly.

ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE

  Members (Identification)
  Mr. David Atkinson
  To ask the Chairman of the Administration Committee what arrangements have been made to help police officers at the entrance to the Palace of Westminster and its outbuildings to recognise and identify recently elected hon. Members; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  While the Administration Committee has general oversight of arrangements for access to that part of the Palace under the control of the House, day to day responsibility rests with the Serjeant at Arms. I shall ask him to write to the hon. Member.

  Executive Agencies' Answers
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Chairman of the Administration Committee what plans he has to change the arrangements for publishing answers to hon. Members' questions received from the next steps agencies.

  Mr. Michael J. Martin
  At its meeting on 8 July the Committee resolved that, from the first sitting day after the summer recess, letters sent to Members by agency chief executives in response to parliamentary questions should be printed among the written answers in the daily Official Report, beneath a standard form of reply given by the Minister with responsibility. The Cabinet Office has been advised of this decision and is understood to be considering its implications.

NATIONAL HERITAGE

  Sport
  Mr. Waller
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when he expects to make a further announcement about the business sponsorship incentive scheme for sport.

  Mr. Mellor
  The scheme is due to be launched in September this year. All those likely to have an interest will be sent detailed guidance on the scheme and the application procedure.

  Sports and Arts
  Ms. Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will list the pursuits his Department has classified as(a) sports and (b) arts within the remit of his Department.

  Mr. Mellor
  My Department makes no such classifications. We are concerned with the promotion of all sport and active recreation and with the encouragement of artistic activities generally which bring pleasure to many.

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

  Mr. Mellor
  Divisions and branches within my Department pursue objectives in support of my responsibilities, which cover the arts, the Government art collection, broadcasting, film, tourism, heritage and sport. The spread of responsibilities between divisions is as follows:

  Arts Division

  Arts Council. Crafts Council. Business sponsorship of the arts. Local authority arts funding issues and arts taxation. EC and Council of Europe cultural policy.

  Museums and Galleries Division

  National and local museums and galleries in England.

  Libraries and Information Division

  Libraries and information services. British Library, public libraries in England.

  British Library St. Pancras Project

  Management of British Library's St. Pancras Project.

  Works of Art Unit

  The mobile heritage; export licensing of antiques.

  Broadcasting Policy Division

  Broadcasting constitutional matters, review of BBC charter, Broadcasting Act 1990, radio, satellite and cable policy.
  942
  Media Division

  International and financial aspects of broadcasting policy programme standards, television licensing, press freedom and regulation, films policy, including British Screen Finance, European Co-operation Fund, Audio Visual Eureka, film certification, United Kingdom Film Commission and MEDIA programme.

  Sports and Recreation Division

  Sport and recreation policy; sponsorship of Sports Council and Football Licensing Authority; safety in sports grounds; local authority and private funding of sport; children's play; international matters including Manchester Olympic bid.

  Heritage Division

  Financial aspects of heritage policy. Sponsorship of English Heritage, the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England and other heritage bodies. Policy on the conservation and use of historic buildings and monuments. European and International Liaison on the built heritage.

  Royal Estate Division

  Contracting out work in the Royal Parks. Establishment of Royal Parks Agency. Regents Park Zoo. Sponsorship of the Royal Armouries, Historic Royal Palaces Agency, Royal Fine Arts Commission and Royal Household Works Programme. Ceremonials.

  Royal Parks Division

  Management of the Royal Parks.

  Tourism Division

  Development of tourism's contribution to economic and employment growth, ensures the Tourist Boards cost effectively fulfil their objectives, and represents the industry's concerns to Whitehall, outside organisations and the European Communities.

  Finance Division

  Financial Management; accounting systems; Estimates; Public Expenditure Survey forecasts; additional responsibility for National Lottery Bill.

  Implementation and Review Division

  Implementation of the new Department; project management; information technology; provision of internal services; review/co-ordination of Department-wide matters.

  Personnel Division

  Personnel management; equal opportunities; welfare; pay; superannuation; conditions of service.

  Historic. Rural Palaces Agency

  An Executive Agency set up 1 October 1989. Responsible for managing the Historic Royal Palaces open to the public.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage 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. Mellor
  I have made no such visits since 18 April. However, I can confirm that this Department will play its full part in taking forward Her Majesty's Government's commitment to deregulation.

  Barcelona Olympics
  Mr. Liew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what ministerial and other representation Her Majesty's Government will have at the Barcelona Olympics.

  Mr. Mellor
  I shall be attending the Olympic games in Barcelona as will my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister,
  943
  my right and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Inner Cities and my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for National Heritage. Her Majesty's ambassador in Spain will also be attending.

  European Arts Festival
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many copies of the guide to the European arts festival have been printed; what are the actual costs of its preparation, printing and distribution, respectively; and what steps were taken by Her Majesty's Government to encourage or assist in promoting the events listed therein.

  Mr. Mellor
  More than I million copies of the festival programme have been printed and are being distributed throughout the country. Design and other preparatory costs were £14,000; printing, £98,000; and distribution, £41,000.

  My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, ministerial colleagues and I were present at the launch of the festival on 1 July. We look forward to attending a number of events during the festival. We will take every opportunity to draw attention to this rich and varied programme that should appeal to everyone. I have written to all Members of both Houses enclosing a copy of the programme.

  My Department continues to work closely with the festival director in promoting the festival overall. The promotion of individual events rests mainly with the local organisers, with the full support of the festival team.

  Civil Servants (Shareholdings)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage 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 since April 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. Mellor
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, Office of Public Service and Science on 7 July,Official Report, column 101. My Department has not issued any further guidance to staff; nor have any shareholdings been reported to our establishment officer.

  Historic Royal Palaces
  Sir John Hannam
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what targets he has set for the Historic Royal Palaces agency.

  Mr. Key
  The following targets have been set for the Historic Royal Palaces agency for the financial year 1992–93:

  Target

  Financial Targets:

  Commercial surplus

  £ 3·8 million

  Call on taxpayer

  £10·0 million

  944

  Target

  Visitor Rating Targets:1

  Value for money

  0·7 to 1

  Enjoyment

  1·3 to 1·7

  Helpful and friendly staff

  1·3 to 1·7

  Efficiency Target:

  2 per cent, saving on running costs

  Conservation Target:

  Complete surveys and draw up programme of works for:

  Contents by March 1993

  Buildings by November 1993

  Citizen's Charter:

  To implement its provisions within the Agency

  Contracting Out:

  To complete the studies agreed by Ministers last December

  1 Visitor ratings are assessed from market research interviews with 900 visitors, undertaken by independent consultants each summer. 2·0 is Extremely Good; 1·5 is Very Good; 1·0 is Quite Good; 0 is OK;—1·0 is Quite Poor;—2·0 is Very Poor.

  Tourism Council
  Mr. Waller
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what was the outcome of the Tourism Council meeting in Luxembourg on 4 June.

  Mr. Key
  I represented the United Kingdom. Ministers agreed on a decision for a Community action plan to assist tourism for a three-year period, commencing on 1 January next year. Ministers also noted two factual Commission documents which outline Community policies and measures affecting tourism and the Community resources available for tourism.

  Crown Jewels
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on the ownership of the Crown jewels.

  Mr. Mellor
  The Crown jewels are owned by the sovereign in right of the Crown.

  Welsh Television
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations he has had concerning renegotiation of the television franchise for Wales and the west; what consultations he has had with the chairman of the Independent Broadcasting Authority on the future status of undertakings made in the course of successful franchise applications; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Mellor
  None. These are matters for the Independent Television Commission.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations he has had concerning the maintenance of a Welsh identity in the commercial television franchise for Wales after 1 January 1993(a) in the Welsh language and (b) in the English language.

  Mr. Mellor
  We have received no such representations in either Welsh or English.

  Football (Safety)
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what consultations he has had with the Football Licensing Authority concerning amendments to the model safety certificates for(a) premier and first division, (b) second and third division English League clubs and (c) Scottish Football League clubs.

  Mr. Mellor
  None.

  Maastricht Treaty
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage on what grounds Her Majesty's Government agreed to the proposed article 128 of the treaty of Rome under the Maastricht treaty.

  Mr. Mellor
  The Community has increasingly become involved in cultural activity. Article 128 of the Maastricht treaty establishes this for the first time on a clear legal basis. The text underlines the importance of respect for national and regional cultural diversity and the fact that Community action will support and supplement action by the member states. At United Kingdom insistence, action can be taken only on the basis of unanimity.

  Imperial War Museum
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what progress he is making in completing the redevelopment plans at the imperial war museum, Lambeth road; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Mellor
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: I commend the success of the first development phase at the museum, which was completed in 1989. I have received the imperial war museum's 1992 corporate plan which indicates the programme and objectives for the next stage of development at the Lambeth road building, and this will be assessed against all other spending priorities on museums and galleries. It is hoped that an announcement on the Government's spending plans will be made in November this year.

  DTI Inspections
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage (1) if he will list any advisers retained by his Department since 1987 who have been criticised in published reports by DTI inspectors;

  (2) if he will list any public appointments by his Department since 1987 which have involved people from organisations criticised in published reports by DTI inspectors.

  Mr. Mellor
  The information is not held centrally in the form requested. My Department takes all the relevant factors into account when considering such appointments.

  Public Bodies
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage which non-departmental public bodies are sponsored by his Department; which of these are audited by the National Audit Office; which firms of private accountants audits each of the others; by what method of tendering contracts to such firms are awarded; and for what duration.
  946
  Mr. Mellor
  [holding answer 10 July 1992]: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the table, which lists the executive non-departmental public bodies directly funded by the Department of National Heritage and gives details of their audit certification arrangements. The method of selecting auditors, including competitive tendering, varies between institutions. Reviews of appointments may be held annually or at other periods up to five years.

  Executive non-departmental bodies audited by the National Audit Office:

  Arts Council of Great Britain

  Board of Trustees for the Royal Armouries

  British Library

  British Museum

  British Tourist Authority

  Broadcasting Standards Council

  English Tourist Board

  Imperial War Museum

  Museums and Galleries Commission

  National Gallery

  National Heritage Memorial Fund

  National Maritime Museum

  National Museum of Science and Industry

  National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside

  National Portrait Gallery

  Natural History Museum

  Registrar of Public Lending Right

  Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts

  Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England)

  Sports Council

  Tate Gallery

  Victoria and Albert Museum

  Wallace Collection

  Executive non-departmental bodies audited by private firms

  Body

  Auditor

  British Film Institute

  Stoy Hayward

  Broadcasting Complaints Commission

  BDO Binder Hamlyn

  Crafts Council

  Stoy Hayward

  Football Licensing Authority

  To be appointed imminently

  Greater Manchester Museum of Science and Industry

  BDO Binder Hamlyn

  Historical Buildings and Monuments Commission for England (English Heritage)

  Price Waterhouse

  Museum of London

  KPMG Peat Marwick McClintock

  National Film and Television School

  Stoy Hayward

  Redundant Churches Fund

  DM Vaughan & Co.

  Sir John Soane's Museum

  Pannel Kerr and Foster

  South Bank Theatre Board

  Pannel Kerr and Foster

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Disposable Income
  Ms. Corston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the average disposable income of households, and of adults and children, within households, at 1989 prices, for each year from 1979 to 1989, inclusive, for the poorest and for the richest 20 per cent. of households, before and after equivalisation, based on the data collected for the households-below-average-income analysis.

  Mr. Burt
  The information can be provided only at disproportionate cost. The information that is available is in the table. HBAI presents figures in a, standard format: only for years 1979, 1981, 1987 and 1988–89—that is, 1988 combined with 1989—before and after housing costs;
  947
  equivalised for household size and composition; using the median as the average measure for subdivisions of the income distribution; and at April 1992 prices. This is in line with the recommendations made in the stocktaking report produced last year after consultation with independient external analysts.

  It is not our practice to produce unequivalised information.

  Average equivalised income at April 1992 prices
  Before housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Bottom 20 per cent.

  96

  94

  100

  100

  Top 20 per cent.

  289

  298

  376

  402

  After housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Bottom 20 per cent.

  81

  78

  80

  81

  Top 20 per cent.

  253

  262

  329

  355

  Ms. Corston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the mean net disposable income, at 1989 prices, of the poorest 10 per cent. and 20 per cent. of United Kingdom households combined for each year 1979 to 1989, inclusive, before and after equivalisation and before and after taking housing costs into account, when ranked respectively(a) without adding the full value of free and subsidised school meals (b) adding that value and(c) adding that value and also the value in kind of services and other goods specifying the services involved.

  Mr. Burt
  The information can be provided only at disproportionate cost. The information that is available is in the table. HBAI presents figures in a standard format: only for years 1979, 1981, 1987 and 1988–89—that is, 1988 combined with 1989—before and after housing costs; equivalised for household size and composition; using the median as the average measure for subdivisions of the income distribution; and at April 1992 prices. This is in line with the recommendations made in the stocktaking report produced last year after consultation with independent external analysts.

  It is not our practice to produce unequivalised information, nor to present mean averages for sub-divisions of the income distribution.

  Average equivalised income at April 1992 prices
  (a) income excluding free school meals
  Before housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Bottom 20 per cent.

  95

  93

  99

  100

  Bottom 10 per cent.

  83

  82

  87

  85

  After housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Bottom 20 per cent.

  80

  77

  78

  80

  Bottom 10 per cent.

  68

  65

  67

  65

  (b) income including free school meals
  Before housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Bottom 20 per cent.

  96

  94

  100

  100

  Bottom 10 per cent.

  84

  83

  88

  86

  After housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Bottom 20 per cent.

  81

  78

  80

  81

  Bottom 10 per cent.

  70

  67

  67

  66

  (c) other incomes in kind included in the HBAI income measure are:

  free meals and food provided by employers

  free coal and coke

  luncheon vouchers

  free school milk

  free welfare milk

  These are included in the figures provided at (a) and (b) above.
  Ms. Corston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was for each type of household in the family expenditure survey, the average disposable income at 1989 prices, including the value of free and subsidised school meals, of the poorest 10 per cent. and poorest 20 per cent. of households, after taking account of housing costs, for each year 1979 to 1989, inclusive, for each of the principal regions of the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Burt
  The information can be provided only at disproportionate cost. The information that is available is in the table. HBAI: presents figures in a standard format: only for years 1979, 1981, 1987 and 1988–89—that is, 1988 combined with 1989—before and after housing costs; equivalised for household size and composition; using the median as the average measure for subdivisions of the income distribution; and at April 1992 prices. This is in line with the recommendations made in the stocktaking report produced last year after consultation with independent external analysts.

  Due to the small sample sizes figures for the bottom 10 per cent., split by family type cannot be reliably estimated—HBAI presents detailed breakdowns only for the bottom 20 per cent. For similar reasons, regional breakdowns of HBAI are not produced.

  Average equivalised income at April 1992 prices for the bottom 20 per cent, by household family type

  Before housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Pensioner couple

  87

  91

  99

  98

  Single pensioner

  87

  92

  95

  92

  Couple with children

  101

  90

  98

  100

  Couple without children

  125

  127

  118

  129

  Single with children

  85

  89

  93

  93

  Single without children

  109

  107

  107

  107

  After housing costs:

  1979

  1981

  1987

  1988–89

  £

  £

  £

  £

  Pensioner Couple

  73

  77

  83

  83

  Single pensioner

  78

  82

  83

  81

  Couple with children

  84

  73

  76

  78

  Couple without children

  107

  105

  94

  105

  Single with children

  69

  72

  75

  70

  Ms. Corston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list the numbers of children of different
  949
  ages in the poorest 20 per cent. and richest 80 per cent. of households, ranked according to the net disposable income of the households in which they live, before and after equivalisation, for 1979 and for 1989, on the basis of households below average income data drawn from the family expenditure survey.

  Mr. Burt
  Information for the years 1979 and 1988–89—that is, 1988 combined with 1989—before and after housing costs, and equivalised for household size and composition is in the table. It is not our practice to produce unequivalised information.

  Numbers of children of different ages in the bottom 20 per cent. of the income distribution

  (In millions)

  Before housing costs

  After housing costs

  Ages

  1979

  1988–89

  1979

  1988–89

  0–4

  0·8

  1·0

  0·8

  1·1

  5–9

  1·0

  0·9

  1·0

  0·9

  10–14

  0·9

  0·8

  0·8

  0·7

  15–18

  0·3

  0·3

  0·3

  0·3

  Total

  2·9

  3·0

  2·9

  3·0

  Numbers of children of different ages in the top 80 per cent. of the income distribution

  (In millions)

  Before housing costs

  After housing costs

  Ages

  1979

  1988–89

  1979

  1988–89

  0–4

  3·0

  3·0

  3·0

  2·9

  5–9

  3·2

  2·6

  3·3

  2·6

  10–14

  3·2

  2·7

  3·3

  2·7

  15–18

  1·4

  1·3

  1·4

  1·3

  Total

  10·9

  9·5

  10·9

  9·5

  Correspondence
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when the disability living allowance unit in Blackpool intends to reply to the letters of 15 March, 10 May and 21 June from the hon. Member for Glasgow, Shettleston regarding his constituent Mrs Mary Muir.

  Mr. Scott
  The administration of disability living allowance is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member and copies will be placed in the Library and the Public Information Office.

  Pension Age
  Mr. Bowden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how his Department publicised the consultation period for the discussion paper "Options for Equality in State Pension Age";

  (2) if he will list the organisation and individuals to whom his Department circulated the discussion paper "Options for Equality in State Pension Ages" and those who responded to the paper.

  Miss Widdecombe
  A period of public discussion was announced in the statement of my right hon. Friend on 26 June 1991 and press releases were issued in the usual way. When the discussion paper was published on 18 December 1991, publicity was by means of a written answer on 17 December to the hon. Member for Nottingham, North 950
  (Mr. Allen) column 145. Two press releases were also issued, the first on 18 December and the second on 17 June 1992. The latter was a reminder of the deadline for responses, 30 June. Both press releases inspired a large number of reports in the press, both national and local, and on radio and television.

  The paper was circulated to pension industry organisations, the Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Congress, the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Occupational Pensions Board and the Pension Ombudsman. Copies were also sent to the Social Security Select Committee and Members of Parliament. The publicity surrounding the publication of the paper resulted in inquiries from a number of interested organisations, to which copies were sent.

  To date, more than 3,700 responses have been received from both organisations and individuals.

  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will delay any decision on the equalisation of the pension age to allow time for(a) a further period of consultation with organisations affecting women in the United Kingdom on the financial consequences for women which would result from raising the pension age to 63 or 65 years and (b) a wider consideration of other aspects of the pension systems which would discriminate against women or men.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The discussion period on state pension age ended on 30 June, and over 3,700 responses have been received. We now intend to examine those responses in detail and we will also be taking the opportunity of meeting the representatives of various organisations with an interest, including those concerned with the position of women. We will be announcing the Government's proposals on this complex and important issue in due course after consideration of the views expressed.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security 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.

  Miss Widdecombe
  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 the Department specifically to assist small business include increasing, from April 1992, the qualifying threshold for small employer's relief—SER—for statutory sick pay from £15,000 to £16,000.

  Other measures aimed at business in general, which includes small business, include:
  (i) Establishing a group of employers and employers' representatives specifically to consider the impact on employers of a combined Autumn and Budget statement in December. Small businesses are recognised as an important group to be consulted and are represented on the group.
  (ii) Increasing the level below which deductions under pay-as-you-earn—PAYE—and national insurance contributions—NIC—can be paid to Inland Revenue quarterly rather than monthly to £450 for deductions made in periods

  951
  beginning after 5 April 1992. Twenty-five thousand businesses should benefit from this increase, bringing the total number of businesses who could he helped by this measure to 725,000—more than half of all employers.

  The Department has a system to monitor proposals which have an impact on business, to ensure that the needs of small businesses arc taken into account, although there are no performance indicators specifically for monitoring achievements in this area. However, we attach particular importance to action taken to help small firms and will continue to explore further ways of doing so.

  Pension Premiums
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to review any provision for the extended refund of pension premiums.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The Department, within its responsibilities for the regulation of occupational pension schemes, has no provision for the extended refund of pension premiums and therefore we have no plans to review.

  Disability Allowances
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether a person in receipt of either(a) severe disablement allowance, (b) invalidity benefit, (c) income support with the disability premium, (d) community charge benefit with the disability premium or (e) housing benefit with the disability premium, who subsequently receives disability working allowance and who is then off work sick for over 10 weeks at the time of renewal claim for disability working allowance, will lose the right to renew their claim.

  Mr. Scott
  People who qualify initially for disability working allowance—DWA—by virtue of one of these benefits can claim again using the same qualifying benefit during the six weeks before and the eight weeks after their award expires—14 weeks in all. They also have to satisfy the remunerative work test in order to qualify for DWA and cannot do so in any weeks when off work sick. To satisfy this test, they must work 16 hours or more either in the week they claim or in one of the two weeks before or they must be expected by the employer to work 16 hours or more in the week after the week in which they claim. The effect of this is that depending on when illness begins, they would have to be absent from work for the whole of a period of 17 weeks spanning the date their award falls to be renewed to lose the right of renewal using one of these benefits.

  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to amend the disability living allowance to ensure that the criteria for award of the higher mobility component do not exclude people with dementia and other progressive neurological conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  New help is available to people suffering from dementia through the new, lower rates of both components of disability living allowance. We have no plans to amend the criteria for awarding the higher rate of the mobility component of disability living allowance.

  Cold Weather Payments
  Mr. Godsiff
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many households in Birmingham, Small Heath 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.

  Mr. Godsiff
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security on what dates cold weather payments were made in Birmingham, Small Heath in response to a forecast of a qualifying period; and if he will indicate the period taken for payments to be made once the system had been triggered.

  Mr. Scott
  Such information as is available is in the Library.

  War Pensions
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer of 19 June,Official Report, column 704, on payment of war pensions in cases of post-traumatic stress, what is the reason for the different treatment of payment of arrears of war pension in relation to schizophrenia as compared with other conditions.

  Miss Widdecombe
  Until relatively recently, most cases of schizophrenia were regarded as being causally unrelated to service. When medical opinion changed it became possible to make awards of war pension. The discretionary powers of the war pension scheme were used to award arrears of pension, in appropriate cases, from February 1980, the date chosen to reflect the change in medical opinion. This date is under review following a recent High Court judgment.

  Authoritative medical opinion has always accepted that the clinical entity now known as post-traumatic stress disorder could arise as the result of service. An award of war pension would therefore normally have been made from the date of claim.

  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer of 19 June,Offical Report, column 703, on statistics relating to war pensions, what estimate was made of the cost of answering the question tabled.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The cost was estimated as being as least £1 million.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security 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. Scott
  No such meetings have taken place. We have no plans to initiate special action in this area during the presidency. We will, however, continue to resist any EC initiatives affecting the Department which would impose undue burdens on business.

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

  Mr. Scott
  All parts of the Department, including its executive agencies and the divisions and branches of its central headquarters, share the purpose and aims set out in the department report "The Government's Expenditure Plans 1992–93 to 1994–95", Cm 1914.

  The Department's purpose is to serve Ministers in the development and implementation of social security policy, pay social security benefits, arrange for the collection of national insurance contributions and carry out other services in accordance with the law.

  The underlying aims are to:
  provide a good service to customers, one which is professional, efficient, responsive and fair;
  support ministers in the development and implementation of policy, and in the preparations and passage of legislation;
  manage the Department and its agencies efficiently, providing good value for money and maintaining the highest standards of propriety in the conduct of public affairs;
  provide relevant information about social security to individuals, groups and the community at large in a clear and comprehensible form;
  ensure correct payments are made—that benefit recipients are paid their correct entitlement and the scope for fraud and abuse is minimised;
  ensure compliance with the law relating to national insurance contributions by employers, employed earners and the self-employed;
  meet the needs of all staff as regards training and career and personal development, recognising and properly rewarding them for their contribution, and encouraging them to play a full part in the Department's work.

  In addition, the objectives of the individual executive agencies are laid out in their business plans for 1992–93, copies of which are in the Library.

  Civil Servants (Shares)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security 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 fives years on which civil servants have reported shareholdings to establishment officers in his Department; what regulations apply to the staff in 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.

  National insurance widows and invalidity pensioners

  A

  B

  C

  D

  E

  Uprating date

  Rate of child benefit plus child dependency increase

  Equivalent value of column B amounts at April 1992 prices

  Gross male weekly average earnings, with amounts in column B as percentage

  Equivalent weekly earnings net of income tax and national insurance contributions, with amounts in column B as percentage

  Single person

  Married couple

  (£)

  (£)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  November 1979

  11·10

  25·57

  114·10

  9·7

  79·90

  13·9

  83·60

  13·3

  November 1980

  12·25

  24·47

  135·10

  9·1

  93·40

  13·1

  97·80

  12·5

  November 1981

  12·95

  23·11

  149·50

  8·7

  101·00

  12·8

  105·40

  12·3

  November 1982

  13·80

  23·17

  160·60

  8·6

  107·40

  12·8

  112·59

  12·3

  November 1983

  14·10

  22·58

  172·40

  8·2

  115·50

  12·2

  121·30

  11·6

  November 1984

  14·50

  22·13

  187·40

  7·7

  125·90

  11·5

  132·50

  10·9

  November 1985

  15·05

  21·78

  199·50

  7·5

  134·40

  11·2

  141·60

  10·6

  954
  Mr. Burt
  All staff in DSS and its next steps agencies are made aware of the guidance given in the civil service pay and conditions of service code relating to civil servants' shareholdings. The provisions apply to all staff equally. Staff are required to report shareholdings which may present a potential conflict of interest but no records are kept centrally of such reports.

  Children
  Mrs. Anne Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to equalise benefits for men and women with dependent children on the death of their spouse.

  Miss Widdecombe
  This is one of the issues which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will be addressing in his consideration of the equalisation of state pension age.

  Mr. Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the total number of dependent children aged under 16 years who are living in families receiving regular weekly payment of income support in April 1991 and April 1992; and how many of these dependent children were living in(a) one-parent families and (b) unemployed families.

  Mr. Burt
  The latest available figures are for May 1991. There were 2·37 million dependent children under 16 in families receiving income support, 1·49 million were in lone parent families and 0·64 million were in the families of claimants who were receiving income support on the grounds that they were unemployed.

  Source: income support statistics, annual inquiry 1991.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he will make it his policy to ensure that the value of benefits for children of war widows, other widows and invalidity pensioners, is increased in real terms in the 1993 benefit uprating.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The policy of successive Governments has been to take account of child benefit when setting the rates of benefits for children. We have no plans to alter this long-standing principle.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he will publish tables similar to those in his answer of 11 May,Official Report, columns 43–44, showing the combined value of child benefit and child dependency increases, including figures for April 1992 and showing equivalent values at April 1992 instead of 1991 prices.

  Mr. Burt
  The information is in the tables.
  955

  A

  B

  C

  D

  E

  Uprating date

  Rate of child benefit plus child dependency increase

  Equivalent value of column B amounts at April 1992 prices

  Cross male weekly average earnings, with amounts in column B as percentage

  Equivalent weekly earnings net of income tax and national insurance contributions, with amounts in column B as percentage

  Single person

  Married couple

  (£)

  (£)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  July 1986

  15·15

  21·56

  210·90

  7·2

  143·80

  10·5

  151·20

  10·0

  April 1987

  15·30

  20·86

  224·00

  6·8

  155·90

  9·8

  163·00

  9·4

  April 1988

  15·65

  20·53

  245·80

  6·4

  174·80

  9·0

  182·00

  8·6

  April 1989

  16·20

  19·67

  269·50

  6·0

  191·30

  8·5

  198·90

  8·1

  April 1990

  16·90

  18·75

  295·60

  5·7

  212·80

  7·9

  221·10

  7·6

  April 1991

  118·95

  19·76

  318·90

  5·9

  230·00

  8·2

  238·30

  8·00

  April 1991

  217·95

  18·72

  318·90

  5·6

  230·00

  7·8

  238·30

  7·5

  October 1991

  119·95

  20·50

  330·00

  6·0

  237·20

  8·4

  245·50

  8·1

  October 1991

  21820

  18·70

  330·00

  5·5

  237·20

  7·7

  245·50

  7·4

  April 1992

  120·50

  20·50

  337·50

  6·1

  235·30

  8·7

  301·30

  6·8

  April 1992

  218·65

  18·65

  337·50

  5·5

  235·30

  7·9

  301·30

  6·2

  1 Rate for the eldest or only child.

  2 Rate for each other child.

  War widows

  A

  B

  C

  D

  £

  Uprating date

  Rate of child benefit plus war widow's child's allowance

  Equivalent value of column B amounts at April 1992 prices

  Gross male weekly average earnings, with amounts in column B as percentage

  Equivalent weekly earnings of income tax and national insurance contributions, with amounts in column B as percentage

  Single person

  Married couple

  (£)

  (£)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  (£)

  (per cent.)

  November 1979

  14·00

  32·25

  114·10

  12·3

  79·90

  17·5

  83·60

  16·7

  November 1980

  15·35

  30·66

  135·10

  11·4

  93·40

  16·4

  97·80

  15·7

  November 1981

  16·10

  28·73

  149·50

  10·8

  101·00

  15·9

  105·40

  15·3

  November 1982

  17·10

  28·71

  160·60

  10·6

  107·40

  15·9

  112·50

  15·2

  November 1983

  17·45

  27·95

  172·40

  10·1

  115·50

  15·1

  121·30

  14·4

  November 1984

  17·90

  27·32

  187·40

  9·6

  125·90

  14·2

  132·50

  13·5

  November 1985

  18·55

  26·84

  199·50

  9·3

  134·40

  13·8

  141·60

  13·1

  July 1986

  18·65

  26·55

  210·90

  8·8

  143·80

  13·0

  151·20

  12·3

  April 1987

  18·85

  25·70

  224·00

  8·4

  155·90

  12·1

  163·00

  11·6

  April 1988

  19·25

  25·25

  245·80

  7·8

  174·80

  11·0

  182·00

  10·6

  April 1989

  19·85

  24·10

  269·50

  7·4

  191·30

  10·4

  198·90

  10·0

  April 1990

  20·65

  22·91

  295·60

  7·0

  212·80

  9·7

  221·10

  9·3

  April 1991

  121·90

  22·84

  318·90

  6·9

  230·00

  9·5

  238·30

  9·2

  October 1991

  2 22·90

  23·53

  330·00

  6·9

  237·20

  9·7

  245·50

  9·3

  October 1991

  322·15

  22·76

  333·00

  6·7

  237·20

  9·3

  245·50

  9·0

  April 1992

  2 23·40

  23·40

  337·50

  6·9

  235·30

  9·9

  301·30

  7·8

  April 1992

  3 22·65

  22·65

  337·50

  6·7

  235·30

  9·6

  301·30

  7·5

  1 Where the new higher rate of child benefit for the eldest qualifying child applied, the war widow's child's allowance was adjusted so that the total level of support remained the same for all children.

  2 Rate for the eldest or only child.

  3 Rate for each other child.

  Young People (Hardship Payments)
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many severe hardship claims were submitted by 16 and 17-year-olds in Scotland, Wales and each region of England in the last full year for which figures are available; and what percentage were successful.

  Scotland

  North East

  North West

  Midlands

  Wales and South West

  London North

  London South

  Success Rate

  Per cent

  1991

  July

  1,263

  1,008

  673

  687

  730

  576

  624

  80

  August

  1,320

  979

  625

  684

  609

  528

  553

  80

  September

  1,189

  932

  671

  695

  685

  579

  657

  80

  October

  1,349

  1,044

  710

  697

  687

  617

  677

  80

  November

  1,153

  936

  640

  700

  710

  542

  608

  82

  December

  927

  709

  497

  579

  512

  420

  449

  84

  1992

  January

  1,656

  1,434

  1,100

  1,158

  1,007

  823

  958

  85

  February

  1,593

  1,283

  956

  1,030

  927

  797

  882

  83

  March

  1,676

  1,231

  1,125

  1,094

  967

  875

  964

  83

  April

  1,988

  1,292

  1,082

  1,093

  1,000

  877

  888

  82

  956
  Mr. Burt
  The information is not available in the form requested. Such information as is available is in the table.
  957

  Scotland

  North East

  North West

  Midlands

  Wales and South West

  London North

  London South

  Success Rate

  Per cent

  May

  1,905

  1,222

  1,132

  1,088

  954

  824

  901

  82

  June

  2,157

  1,404

  1,265

  1,126

  1,077

  991

  974

  81

  Source: Severe hardship clamis unit statistics.

  Occupational Pensions
  Mrs. Gillan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when provisions in the Social Security Act 1990—section 11 and schedule 2—on inflation-proofing of occupational pensions will come into force; and if he will make a statement.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The implementation of limited price indexation for occupational pensions was postponed because of the financial uncertainties for schemes caused by the Barber judgment. This has still to be clarified.

  Social Fund
  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his estimate of the number of grants made and the number of loans provided, together with the number refused since the social fund was introduced.

  Mr. Scott
  The information was published on 8 July in the Secretary of State's annual report on the social fund—Cm 1992—which is available in the Library.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what increase in social fund allocations for 1992–1993 would be needed to enable monthly average expenditure to reach the levels of expenditure in March 1992.

  Mr. Scott
  Annual social fund allocations enable expenditure to be managed flexibly and effectively throughout the year. An increase of £37·6 million would be required if the initial annual allocation for 1992–93 had been based solely on expenditure levels for the single month of March 1992. For a variety of reasons, expenditure in March has traditionally been heavy. Over 10 per cent. of last year's annual expenditure was made in March 1992.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer of 8 July,Official Report, column 224, to the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells), when he received the university of York report on the social fund; when examination of the report by Ministers started and was completed; and for what reasons it was decided that such examination was necessary before publication.

  Mr. Scott
  Research reports commissioned by the Department are routinely submitted for ministerial clearance prior to publication, as required by the Department's standard research contract. We received the final draft of the report in April.

  Income Support
  Mr. Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the scale rate for supplementary benefit and income support for a couple with two children aged under 11 years for each year from 1979 to 1992 at(a) constant prices and (b) as a proportion of the median disposable income of a couple with two children.
  958
  Mr. Burt
  I will write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security on what assumption he bases the viability of income support for a husband and wife with two children at primary school.

  Mr. Burt
  I refer the hon. Member to paragraphs 2.1 to 2.5 of the memorandum on benefit levels and a minimum income, dated 18 October 1989, and submitted to the House of Commons Social Services Committee. A copy of the complete memorandum is in the Library. Income support has been uprated each year by the retail prices index less housing costs.

  Resettlement Units
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will give further details on the plans to transfer Camden and Newbury resettlement units.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The Resettlement Agency is taking forward the plans announced on 5 February 1992 at column 210 to transfer two resettlement units.

  A number of well-established housing associations and voluntary bodies have expressed an interest and will be submitting detailed proposals to the Resettlement Agency.

  These will be evaluated and a final decision will be made on 29 September 1992 and the successful organisations will be informed shortly thereafter. Negotiations with these organisations for the handover of operations on 31 March 1993 will commence immediately.

  Research
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list all the research currently in progress which is being undertaken by, or has been commissioned by, his Department; if he will indicate in each case when he expects to receive the report and whether it is his intention to publish it; and if he will make a statement.

  Miss Widdecombe
  A list of all research currently in progress, with the expected timing of the first draft report, is in the table. Reports about pieces of research are normally published, either in the Department's own research series or by the contractor.

  Project

  Anticipated timing of first draft report

  Study of invalidity benefit (IVB)

  Early 1994

  Study of statutory sick pay (SSP)

  Summer 1993

  Comparative study of financial provision for carers

  End of 1992

  Survey of the impact of family credit (FC)

  Received

  959

  Project

  Anticipated timing of first draft report

  Family credit and the self employed

  Spring 1993

  The use of Department of Social Security (DSS) administrative records to produce panel data

  End of 1992

  Comparative study of child support in the European Community

  Spring 1993

  Further econometric analysis of data from the survey of incomes in and out of work

  Summer 1992

  Impact of family credit—lone parent extension project

  Summer 1993

  "Relate" information database

  End of 1992

  Study of persons abroad legislation

  Early 1993

  Econometric analysis of the OPCS retirement survey

  Spring 1993

  Pensioners' assets

  Received

  Personal pensions survey

  Received

  The effects of benefits on housing decisions

  Early 1993

  Study of direct payments

  Early 1994

  Staff attitudes survey (DSS and agencies)

  Summer 1992

  Staff exit survey (DSS and agencies)

  Early 1993

  Modelling the potential yield of national insurance contributions

  Spring 1993

  Research to test the language and design of forms and integrated leaflets

  Autumn 1992

  Hard to place residents of resettlement units (phase II)

  Autumn 1992

  Customer opinion of resettlement units Survey of admissions to resettlement units Access to service and information needs of people with disabilities

  Received Received Autumn 1992

  Access to service and information needs of minority ethnic groups

  Summer 1992

  Information needs of informal advisers

  Received

  Benefits Agency 1992 national customer survey

  Early 1993

  Preliminary research into the information and advice needs of local offices and advice agencies

  Received

  Information needs of lone parents (consultancy work)

  Interim report received

  Investigation of alternative campaign strategies (for Child Support Agency launch publicity)

  Summer 1992

  National Insurance>
  Mrs. Gordon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what is the amount of national insurance contributions outstanding from self-employed individuals;

  (2) what is the amount of national insurance contributions outstanding from companies with more than five employees;

  (3) if he will list the staffing levels for the departments concerned with collecting outstanding national insurance contributions for each of the past five years.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The amount of unpaid national insurance contributions due for self-employed individuals is a matter for Miss Ann Chant, the chief executive of the Contributions Agency. She will write to the hon. Member and copies will be placed in the Library and the Public Information Office.

  Mrs. Gordon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the effect on employees' pension rights of non-payment of national insurance contributions by their employers.

  Miss Widdecombe
  Regulations provide that where a primary class 1 contribution payable by a secondary contributor on an employee's behalf is not paid, the contribution can nevertheless be treated as paid on the due date so as not to affect the employee's pension rights, providing certain conditions are met. It must be shown to the Secretary of State's satisfaction that the failure to pay the contribution has not been with the consent or connivance of the employee, nor attributable to any negligence on his part.

  Unemployment Benefit
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the expected saving at 1992 prices, in total and per 100,000 claimants, from the extension of the unemployment disqualification period to 13 weeks in 1986 and 26 weeks in 1988, respectively, and the cumulative saving from the two extensions; and what are his latest estimates of the actual savings.

  Mr. Burt
  I will write to the hon. Member with such information as is available as soon as possible.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he will update the estimate of the cost of reducing the unemployment disqualification period to six weeks, given in his reply to the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) on 21 January,Official Report, column 180; whether that estimate took into account the resulting savings in income support and housing benefit; what would be the net cost, taking these savings into account; on what assumption about the proportion of disqualified unemployment benefit claimants receiving income support his estimates are based; and what would be the net cost if that proportion fell to its May 1986 and November 1987 levels, respectively.

  Mr. Burt
  The estimate given in my reply to the hon. Member for Nottingham, North on 21 January remains at £35 million per annum at 1992 prices. This takes account of the resulting savings in income support and housing benefit.
  961
  The estimate is based on the assumption that 75 per cent. of those disqualified due to their misconduct or voluntarily leaving their employment without just cause receive income support.

  The net costs, assuming May 1986 and November 1987 levels of disqualification, would be £40 million and £35 million respectively.

  Appeal Tribunals
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what representations he has received from the Independent Tribunal Service regarding the payment of fees to members of social security appeal tribunals; and how he has responded to those representations.

  Mr. Scott
  The President of the Independent Tribunal Service, His Honour Judge Holden, has made representations to the department about payment of fees to members of social security appeal tribunals. Our policy on fees for tribunal members is to pay a fee where membership requires specialist skills or knowledge. This is not the case for SSAT members.

  Maxwell Pensions
  Mr. Leighton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what steps he is taking to obtain donations to the trust headed by Sir John Cuckney to compensate Maxwell pensioners; and what success he has had.

  Miss Widdecombe
  I understand from Sir John Cuckney that he and his fellow trustees will sign the trust deed on 17 July and that they have formally launched their appeal for contributions to the Maxwell pensioners trust. Pending the formal establishment of the trust, £170,000 has been paid into the holding account opened by the Department. This will be transferred to the trust's account when it is open. Donations to the trust are, of course, completely separate to any funds or assets recovered.

  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the total sum of money so far recovered by the trust fund set up within his Department, headed by Sir John Cuckney, to recover assets lost by the Maxwell pension funds; if he will give a breakdown of the various sums recovered by source and amount of income.

  Miss Widdecombe
  I refer the hon. Member to the replies to the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) on 6 July at columns 88–89 and to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr Leighton) today.

  Claimants (Relocation)
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) whether he will review the rights of benefits claimants to relocate to areas of high unemployment without forgoing entitlements;

  (2) if he will monitor the migration of benefits claimants to seaside resorts over the summer.

  Mr. Burt
  The Employment Service checks that unemployed people, including itinerants, are entitled to benefits in respect of unemployment, in accordance with social security legislation; in particular that they are available for work and actively seek it. Every effort is made to ensure that benefit is paid only where the conditions of 962
  entitlement are satisfied. The Government have no plans to restrict the movement of unemployed people: mobility of labour is essential for the efficient operation of the labour market and job creation.

  Students
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he will seek to amend legislation so as to enable students to claim benefits during the summer vacation if prevented by ill health from seeking work.

  Mr. Burt
  We have no such plans; the educational maintenance system is designed to provide for the needs of students. Vulnerable students, including those who are disabled or who are long-term sick, retain eligibility for housing benefit and income support throughout their course and may qualify for those benefits during the summer vacation if they are unable to work.

  Housing Benefit
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he will review the obligation on local authorities to meet their share of the costs of housing benefits for unemployed persons moving in from other areas, where benefits are already being paid by relevant local authorities.

  Mr. Burt
  We have no plans to review the current arrangements which allow housing benefit to meet the commercial rent liability on a property occupied as the main home, providing the level of rent is reasonable. Local authorities are reimbursed for their benefit expenditure through subsidy arrangments.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Raoul Wallenberg
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make it his policy to request the authorities of the former Soviet Union to publish their records relating to Raoul Wallenberg.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We understand that a Swedish-Russian commission has been set up to investigate the disappearance of Raoul Wallenberg: and that Russia has granted Sweden access to Soviet MFA and KGB files. We assume that the Swedish Government will publish any further details about Wallenberg's fate which are uncovered.

  European Union
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make it his policy that no notification shall be given that the United Kingdom assents to the amendment of any part of any protocol annexed to the treaty on European union unless a draft of the notification has first been approved by an Act of Parliament.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  All the protocols associated with the treaty on European union will be annexed to the treaty of Rome and would form an integral part of that treaty. The protocols—and any later amendments—therefore require ratification by member states. In the United Kingdom
  963
  ratification does not require approval by an Act of Parliament but would only occur once any necessary domestic legislation was in place.

  Maastricht
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how the position of the United Kingdom as a signatory of the North Atlantic treaty will be affected by the implementation of a common foreign security and defence policy, pursuant to article B, title I of the Maastricht treaty.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  The position of the United Kingdom as a signatory of the North Atlantic treaty will not be affected by a common foreign and security policy.

  The Maastricht treaty—article J. 4.4—makes it clear that the foreign and security policy
  "shall respect the obligations of certain member States under the North Atlantic Treaty and be compatible with the common security and defence policy established within that framework".

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government will lay before Parliament a consolidated text of the treaties establishing the European Economic Community, the ECSC and Euratom, as amended by the treaty of Maastricht.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  There will be no official Community publication of this nature until after the treaty on European union has been ratified by all 12 member states and has entered into force.

  However, in view of the interest expressed in this House and elsewhere, the Government will be producing their own consolidated text of the treaty establishing the European Economic Community as amended by the treaty on European union. This text will be laid before the House in the normal way in good time for the consideration in Committee of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill.

  The text will inevitably be informal at this stage and may differ in some minor respects from that produced by the European Community official publications office in due course.

  Fissile Materials
  Mr. Cohen
  T'o ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is Her Majesty's Government's policy towards a multilateral, verifiable fissile materials cut-off.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  Her Majesty's Government welcome the US decision on 13 July to end production of weapons grade fissile materials. It is in response to a bilateral initiative from the Russians and does not depend on United Kingdom agreement. United Kingdom production will continue to be kept at the minimum level necessary to satisfy our deterrent and naval reactor requirements.

  EC Decision-making
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has to undertake a study into the decision-making structure of the European Community with reference to economic convergence and allocation of resources.
  964
  Mr. Garel-Jones
  There are no plans to undertake any such study. Under the convergence decision of 1990, individual member states are putting forward convergence programmes for discussion within the Council of Ministers as part of the regular process of multilateral surveillance. The Maastricht treaty would carry forward that process of multilateral surveillance, but economic policy would remain, as now, a responsibility of member states.

  European Community
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs under what circumstances Her Majesty's Government are prepared to apply to the European Court of Justice for a ruling on the validity of a Commission proposal before it has been referred for deliberation by the Council of Ministers or other Community institutions.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  There is no legal basis to challenge a Commission proposal for Community legislation before the court until that proposal has been adopted as a formal act.

  Treaty of Rome
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to what extent the proposed article 8c of the treaty of Rome will require a harmonisation of diplomatic practices among member states of the Community.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Consular protection services offered by the member states of the European Community to their respective nationals do not differ greatly. Some administrative changes will be necessary to give formal effect to article 8c of the treaty of Maastricht, and procedures need to be established. The details are being worked on at the regular meetings of the EC consular affairs working group.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what estimate he has made of the effect on the personnel, work load, organisation and financing of Her Majesty's foreign service in respect of obligations imposed by the proposed article 8c of the treaty of Rome.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  An informal arrangement made in 1985 provides for the diplomatic missions of EC member states to give consular protection to the nationals of unrepresented EC states in non-Community countries. Article 8c of the Maastricht treaty is a move towards formalisation of this arrangement. We do not expect it to cause significant extra work for our posts.

  Civil Servants
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 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.
  965
  Mr. Goodlad
  The conduct of staff in the diplomatic wing of the Foreign and Commonwealth office is governed by diplomatic service and home service regulations. The latter also apply to staff at Wilton park, the diplomatic wing's next steps agency. They require staff to disclose in writing to the Department's administration full details of any personal business interests which might conflict with the Department's interests or general principles of conduct. The diplomatic wing does not maintain a central record of staff who have reported shareholdings. The conduct of staff in the aid wing is governed by the code and guide. In addition staff rules are issued individually to all members of staff in the ODA headquarters and its next steps agency, the Natural Resources Institute. The rules require individual officers to consult the principal establishment officer about the desirability of acquiring and retaining any shareholding which might raise a question of possible conflict with the interests of the Department. No such conflicts of interest are recorded in the last five years.

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

  Mr. Goodlad
  All the individual departments of the diplomatic and aid wings of the Foreign and Commonwealth office, and all our posts abroad—more than 200—set objectives annually. These objectives are framed in the light of the overall objectives for both wings, which are set out in the annual departmental report on the Government's expenditure plans. The report also contains more detailed objectives on the various FCO functions. A copy of the report is available in the Library of the House.

  European Union (Public Information)
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will state his policy in respect of the proposals in each substantive clause of the European Union (Public Information) Bill.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  The Government have made information on the Maastricht treaty readily available to the public. The treaty was published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office on 7 May. Before publication, copies were supplied to Parliament in large numbers, and to the public on demand from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Memoranda were produced by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Her Majesty's Treasury outlining the content of the treaty. These are also available from Her Majesty's Stationery office. The Government are considering whether to issue additional information about the treaty and its benefits.

  Shipbuilding
  Ms. Quin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) if he will make a statement on the Government's attitude to the Commission's proposal for a Council directive providing for changes to the seventh Council directive on aid to shipbuilding of 2 December 1990 SEC 92 (991)—final;

  (2) if he has given consideration to designating as an agenda B point at the Council meeting scheduled for 20 July the Commission's proposal for a Council directive
  966
  providing for changes to the seventh Council directive on aid to shipbuilding of 2 December 1990, SEC (92) 991—final;

  (3) what evaluation his Department has made of the effect of the United Kingdom and EC shipbuilding industries of the Commission proposal for a Council directive providing for changes to the seventh Council directive on aid to shipbuilding of 2 December 1990, SEC (92) 991—final;

  (4)what account he has taken of the European Parliament's view on current EC proposals to aid shipyards in east Germany; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  The Government support the Commission proposal which will help alleviate the severe economic difficulties facing eastern Germany. The proposal contains safeguards which should ensure that the United Kingdom and other EC shipbuilding industries are not adversely affected. The European Parliament opinion on the Commission proposal will be discussed at a meeting of the Committee of Permanent Representatives today. The dossier would then normally go to a Council meeting for final adoption.

  British Diplomatic Spouses Association
  Mr. George Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what is the employment status of the chairman of the British Diplomatic Spouses Association; and if he will publish the job description as agreed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and specify the duties that are laid down towards the trustees of the association;

  (2) what is his policy on charging organisations to which public employees are seconded, including ones which are wholly funded by Government, the full staff costs of the seconded employees; and what policy is followed in respect of the British Diplomatic Spouses Association;

  (3) for what reasons his Department advertised the job of family welfare officer in its medical and welfare unit as carrying ex officio membership of the executive committee of the British Diplomatic Spouses Association;

  (4) what is the value of support given by his Department to the British Diplomatic Spouses Association in (a)contributions to salaries, (b)staff secondments, (c)office and other facilities and (d)other support.

  Mr. Goodlad
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Serbia
  Mr. Gunnell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps are being taken to ensure that the sanctions on Serbia do not affect supplies of food and medicines.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  United Nations Security Council resolution 757 specifically exempts from the sanctions regime foodstuffs and supplies intended strictly for medical purposes. Exports of both categories have to be notified to the sanctions committee. To date approximately 70 per cent. of all applications received by the committee have been for foodstuffs and medicines and all have been passed without objection.

  South African Security Personnel
  Mr. Robert Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what protests Her Majesty's Government have made to the South African Government on the activities of South African security personnel Captain Pamela du Randt and Mr. Leon Flores.

  Mr. Robert Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what protests Her Majesty's Government have made to the South African Government about the activities of South African security personnel Captain Pamela du Randt and Mr Leon Flores.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The South African Government were informed of the suspected activities of these individuals in this country and we received the full co-operation of the SAG in our pursuit of this matter.

  Departmental Staff
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 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. Goodlad
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office expects to employ an average of 10,085·5 staff in 1992–93 at an estimated total personnel cost of £369·877 million. In 1970–71, 12,421 staff were employed; a comparable figure for total personnel costs for that year is not available. Actual salary costs for 1970–71 were £52·592 million and £186·6 million in 1992–93.

  Subsidiarity
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) 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;

  (2) what representations have been made by British embassies in the member states of the EC about the removal of unnecessary regulations affecting United Kingdom interests at a national and Community level in the last year;

  (3) whether, during the United Kingdom presidency of the EC, he will arrange for a European Council of Ministers meeting to consider how the European Commission's deregulation efforts can be improved.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  The Lisbon European Council noted the importance of the principle of subsidiarity and invited the Commission and the Council to undertake urgent work on procedural and practical steps to implement the principle. It also called for a re-examination of existing legislation in order to adapt it where necessary to the principle of subsidiarity. We intend to take this work forward during the United Kingdom presidency. There will be an initial discussion in the Foreign Affairs Council on 20 July. The Government intend to ensure that the principle of subsidiarity is respected in all its aspects, including its presumption against over-regulation.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

  Kurdistan
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what measures have been taken to ensure the safety and security of non-governmental officers in Iraqi Kurdistan.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The safety of NGO officers is of great concern to us. They are working in Iraq under the inter-agency programme of the United Nations and we have raised with the UN the importance of arrangements for their safety. In addition, coalition forces are stationed in Turkey.

  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what attempts have been made to ensure that humanitarian aid administered in Iraqi Kurdistan is reaching the targeted groups; if he will give assurance that current levels of assistance will he maintained; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  We monitor progress with the United Nations and British non-governmental organisations to ensure the inter-agency programme of humanitarian relief is properly targeted. We continue to respond to requests for support and are keeping the situation under close review.

  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what funds have been budgeted to directly support British based non-governmental organisations operating in Iraqi Kurdistan from I April 1992 to 31 March 1993; and what funding has been set aside to support the activities of British based non-governmental organisations indirectly through support for the United Nations in the area in the same period.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  We shall continue to consider on their merits requests from British non-governmental organisations to fund specific projects in northern Iraq, while taking account of other priority calls on available resources. We do not earmark for non-governmental organisations any specific part of our contribution to the United Nations programme.

  International Decade of National Disaster Reduction
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what contribution the United Kingdom is making to the International Decade of National Disaster Reduction and the discussions he has held with colleagues in the United Nations on this.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  In the last financial year the Government spent nearly £600,000 for disaster preparedness projects under the International Decade of Natural Disaster Reduction. Commitments since April this year total over £250,000 so far. This is in addition to our continuing support for the Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering IDNDR committee. We are working closely with that committee, with other interested groups in Britain and through our embassies and high commissions overseas to see what more we can do. We are also in close contact with the United Nations IDNDR Secretariat in Geneva and with the disaster mitigation branch of the United Nations department of humanitarian affairs.
  969
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has received from the Royal Society as a result of his request to it to consider scientic options and proposals for the International Decade of National Disaster Reduction.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  We continue to work very closely with the Royal Society on the British contribution to the International Decade of Natural Disaster Reduction, primarily through the joint Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering IDNDR committee. With that committee, we mounted a one-day IDNDR forum at the Royal Society on 27 March this year, bringing together key players from Britain and the United Nations to discuss disaster reduction. A report of the workshop is being produced and should be available soon.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Civil Service Shareholdings
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 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. Kenneth Clarke
  The Home Office staff handbook includes specific advice on shareholdings by staff, covering the issues of potential conflict of interest and the provisions of the Companies Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985 and the Financial Securities Act 1986. Further advice on the general principles of conduct and the need to avoid any conflicts between official duty and private interests is also included in the handbook. The handbook is issued to all non-industrial staff, and its provisions apply equally to staff in Home Office agencies. No cases have been recorded in the past five years of staff reporting shareholdings to personnel management units in the Home Office.

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

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  Objectives are set for each division and branch of the Home Office, but because of the breadth and diversity of the Department's activities, listing them would involve disproportionate cost. The principle objections for Home Office divisions are contained within the "Home Office" Annual Report 1992—Cm 1909,—12 copies of which are in the Library.

  Primates
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will prohibit the use in British laboratories of primates that have been caught in the wild.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  No. Where the use of primates in research is justified under the Animals (Scientific 970
  Procedures) Act 1986, there may be no alternative to the use of wild-caught primates if purpose-bred animals are not available. Inspectors do, however, encourage the use of propose-bred primates where such animals are available.

  Immigration Controls
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the implications of article 8a of the Maastricht treaty for Britain's current immigration controls.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I refer my hon. Friend to the explanatory memorandum on the European Commission communication on abolition of border controls—6497/92—which was submitted to the EC scrutiny committees on 19 June and in which the Government's position on this matter is fully set out.

  Camp Hill Prison
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether medication at Her Majesty's prison Camp Hill is being administered by the qualified hospital officers, and taken by prisoners in the sight of hospital officers.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Health care staff supervise the taking of medication during the day. At night some prisoners are entrusted to take their medication unsupervised; in other cases supervision is undertaken by discipline staff. These arrangements are under review.

  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the monthly cost of medication at Her Majesty's prison Camp Hill.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The cost of drugs and dressings dispensed in the four weeks ended 26 June 1992 was £2,049·91.

  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisoners were on medication at Her Majesty's prison Camp Hill for the last date for which figures are available.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  On 29 June 1992, 92 prisoners received some form of medication.

  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisoners were in the hospital at Her Majesty's prison Camp Hill on the last day for which figures are available.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The health care centre at this establishment no longer provides facilities for in-patient care. Patients in need of such care are transferred to the prison hospital at HM prison Parkhurst.

  Security Companies
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take action to make it a criminal offence for convicted criminals(a) to own or be directors of, (b) to be employed by or (c) to seek employment by a security company.

  Mr. Jack
  No.

  Maastricht Treaty
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the implications of article 8a of the Maastricht treaty referring to freedom of residence.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Article 8 confers on nationals of European Community countries the new status of citizen of the union. Article 8a provides that such citizens shall have the right to move and reside freely in the Community. This right will, however, be subject to the limitations and conditions set out in existing EC directives and regulations, under which, for example, residence may be refused on grounds of public policy.

  Electoral Law
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to bring forward proposals to amend the electoral law, consequent to the Maastricht treaty.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Detailed arrangements for the provisions contained in the treaty to extend the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in European Parliamentary and local government elections to EC nationals in their country of residence have to be adopted unanimously by the Council of Ministers by 31 December 1993 and 31 December 1994 respectively. Until those arrangements have been agreed, we have no proposals for amending electoral law.

  Police and Criminal Evidence
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will establish an inquiry into the ways in which the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 is operated by the police services in England and Wales.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The Royal Commission on criminal justice is already considering this issue.

  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will establish an inquiry into the ways in which the Police arid Criminal Evidence Act 1984 is operated by the West Midlands police service.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  No.

  Gambian Nationals
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many nationals of The Gambia have been(a) admitted to the United Kingdom as visitors in each year from 1988 and (b) how many have been refused entrance at the point of entry.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The information requested is not available; citizens of The Gambia are not separately identified in the immigration statistics.

  Bailiffs
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislative proposals to make it illegal to operate as(a) a security business and (b) a bailiff's business unless registered as a plc.
  972
  Mr. Jack
  We have no plans to do so.

  Cruel Tethering
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions there have been under the Protection Against Cruel Tethering Act 1988.

  Mr. Jack
  Section 1 of the Protection against Cruel Tethering Act 1988 amended the Protection of Animals Act 1911. It is not possible from the information held centrally to identify separately such offences under the Protection of Animals Act 1911. However, our statistics show that in 1989 and 1990 there were 1,050 and 1,167 prosecutions, respectively, under the Protection of Animals Act 1911, as amended.

  Immigration
  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what provision is being made by the Government to bring into force EC Council directives 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 90/366/EEC which require member states to bring into force laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the directives not later than 30 June; and whether, under those directives, the third country national family members in the ascending or descending line seeking to enter or remain in the United Kingdom with the EC national family member will be permitted to take employment.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The directives are being implemented administratively. It is planned to lay an order under section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972 before Parliament later this year to incorporate into United Kingdom law all the EC regulations and directives dealing with rights of free movement and residence, including the three referred to in the question. Directive 90/366, on the right of residence of vocational students, entitles the EC national to be joined by his or her spouse and children under 21. The other two directives, on the right of residence of retired persons and of persons not covered by other EC measures, make provision for spouses, children under 21 and other dependent relatives in the ascending and descending line. Under the directives the spouse and dependent children of the main beneficiary are, irrespective of nationality, entitled to take employment or self-employment. Non-EC national dependent relatives in the ascending line who wish to take employment or self-employment have to meet the relevant requirements of the immigration rules.

  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what provisions are made for the grant of indefinite leave to remain to the third country national spouses of EC nationals exercising treaty rights in the United Kingdom in the event that the EC national does not apply for indefinite leave to remain or there is marriage breakdown.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Indefinite leave is normally granted to a non-EC spouse only if the EC national has acquired it or if the spouse qualifies for it in his or her own right under the immigration rules. A non-EC national cannot qualify for indefinite leave under the immigration rules on the basis of a marriage which has been dissolved. However, where such a person has been living in the United Kingdom for a substantial period as the spouse of
  973
  an EC national, any application to remain following a divorce would be considered in the light of any compassionate circumstances.

  Electoral Procedures
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek to amend relevant legislation so as to bring the availability of marked registers after parliamentary elections into line with local and European elections.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The marked copies of the electoral register used at parliamentary elections are retained by the Clerk of the Crown and are available for inspection for one year after the election. The marked registers used at European parliamentary elections are retained by the returning officer for the constituency and are also available for inspection for one year. For local government elections, the marked registers are held by the proper officer of the relevant council, and can be inspected for a period of six months following the election. In all cases copies of the marked registers may also be purchased. In consultation with the political parties and the local authority associations we are conducting a review of electoral law in the light of experience at the recent general election, and this will be one of the issues considered.

  Disabled People's Parking Spaces
  Mr. Thurnham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions were undertaken in 1991 against able-bodied motorists misusing spaces reserved for disabled people.

  Mr. Jack
  The information requested is not available.

  Crime (Unidentified Vehicle Keepers)
  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received on the use in the furtherance of crime of vehicles used by a group of individuals in circumstances where the identity of the individual keeper is concealed; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  We have found no record of recent representations on this subject. The targeting of offences involving the use of such vehicles is an operational matter and is therefore the responsibility of chief officers of police.

  Wolds Prison
  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what contingency plans have been made to deal with circumstances resulting in the loss of control by Group 4 of the Wolds prison.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  For security reasons it is not our practice to publish contingency plans for any prison.

  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether circular instructions and standing orders issued by the Prison Department are applied to the Wolds prison.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  No. Group 4 Remand Services Limited is required to deliver standards of performance which are specified in the contract for the management of 974
  Wolds prison. Within that framework the company has freedom to decide on the best procedures for achieving the desired results.

  Prison Mothers
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in what circumstances mothers in prison are separated from their babies six hours after birth.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The circumstances in which a mother in prison would be separated from her baby within hours of the birth are the same as in the community. Immediate separation would take place where the local social service department had obtained a care order because the child was considered to be at risk.

  EC Visas
  Sir Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made on the mutual recognition of visas within the EC.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Mutual recognition of short-stay visas is provided for in the draft external frontiers convention, signature of which remains stalled because of an objection by the Spanish Government to the convention's application to Gibraltar.

  Prisoners, Northern Ireland
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the transfer of Northern Irish prisoners in English prisons to complete their sentence in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  As I stated in my reply to a question by the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh (Mr. Mallon) on 12 June 1992,Official Report, columns 330–31, my right hon. and learned Friend is considering a report of the interdepartmental review on the transfer of sentenced prisoners with colleagues in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

  Prisoners (Remission)
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the reasons why persons imprisoned for non-payment of community charge are not entitled to remission.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  To qualify for remission a person has to be serving a term of imprisonment which under section 104(1) of the Criminal Justice act 1967 does not include "a committal in default to payment of any sum of money". Nor is the royal prerogative of mercy used to grant special remission in respect of civil cases.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what grounds criminals in prison are given remission; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Remission of sentence is governed by the prison rules 1964. In general terms remission is granted on the grounds of a prisoner's industry and good conduct. The royal prerogative of mercy may also be used to grant special remission on exceptional grounds, including the recognition of assistance given to the authorities or for urgent compassionate reasons.

  Speeding
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police authority forces now possess the technology to identify speeding motorists using photographic techniques.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I understand that a recent survey by the Association of Chief Police Officers traffic committee indicated that 18 forces in England and Wales were actively considering acquiring speed cameras or traffic light cameras or both and that a further three police forces expected to be equipped with speed cameras from 1 July. Nineteen forces already operate in-car video systems which can be used to identify speeding offences.

  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the average cost of the equipment necessary to gather evidence of speeding using speed camera technology.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to his question on 14 July,Official Report, column 531.

  Polling Stations (Access)
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will review the criteria for grants in respect of access to polling stations by disabled people;

  (2) what steps he proposes to take to promote improved access to polling stations for disabled people.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Councils have a statutory obligation to place polling stations only in buildings which are accessible to disabled people, wherever this is practicable. We have provided guidance for acting returning officers to remind them of their obligations, and shall continue to do so. Where it is not possible to use a building affording easy access, we will provide grants towards half the cost of a temporary ramp, provided the local authority will meet the other half. We consider it reasonable to expect the local authority to contribute to the cost since the ramps may also be used at local elections and for other local activities. We will consider as part of our post-election review of electoral practice whether more needs to be done to help disabled people to exercise their right to vote.

  Fire Services
  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what correspondence his Department has had with the Northumberland fire authority about the level of provision within the county's fire service; and what indication has been given in the correspondence as to whether(a) day manning, (b) other systems involving full-time personnel or (c) wholly retained status would be regarded as acceptable for the stations concerned.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  My officials have received correspondence from the chief fire officer of the Northumberland fire and rescue service drawing attention to financial issues affecting the service's budget and to plans for addressing identified over-provision in the service. My right hon. and learned Friend has recently approved the fire authority's proposal to replace the whole time crew at Alnwick fire station by a retained crew with the result that both 976
  firefighting appliances based at Alnwick are now crewed by retained firefighters. The chief fire officer has made clear the fire authority's intention to seek the approval of my right hon. and learned Friend, under section 19 of the Fire Services Act 1947, to the removal from the services establishment of the whole-time crews at Berwick and Hexham fire stations, subject to their replacement by retained crews. My right hon. and learned Friend would not approve such an application unless he was satisfied that the authority would be able to maintain the nationally recommended minimum standards of fire cover.

  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many fire service personnel of sub-officer grade and below have been(a) made redundant or (b) given early retirement other than on health grounds in the most recent period for which figures are available.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The available figures, from annual establishment returns submitted to the Home Office by fire authorities each year, relate to discharges for other than medical reasons and dismissals after disciplinary proceedings. The establishment returns for fire authorities in England and Wales for the year to 31 December 1991 show that 36 whole-time fire fighters of the rank of sub-officer and below, and 118 retained or volunteer fire fighters, were discharged for other than medical reasons, and that seven whole-time fire fighters of the rank of sub-officer and below, and three retained or volunteer fire fighters, were dismissed following disciplinary proceedings.

  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, following Northumberland county council's refusal to accept that he is entitled to withhold permission for the closure of the Holy Island fire brigade, and following the Local Government Commissioner's finding that this constituted maladministration, he will arrange for a special inspection of the brigade's arrangements for fire cover on Holy Island.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The Northumberland fire and rescue service was inspected by Her Majesty's inspector of fire services between 17 and 21 February 1992. In the course of the inspection, Her Majesty's inspector examined the fire cover arrangements on Holy Island. My right hon. and learned Friend does not propose to commission any further inspection of the fire cover arrangements on HolyIsland.He hopes to reach a decision shortly on the Northumberland fire authorities application for approval to the removal from its establishment scheme of the volunteer fire-fighting crew on Holy Island.

  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what provisions exist in national conditions of service governing the terms of redundancy for firemen; what requests for advice he has received from fire authorities about redundancy terms; and what advice he has given;

  (2) what provisions exist in national conditions of service relating to the pension entitlements of firemen who accept early retirement on other than health grounds, or are made redundant.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  National conditions of service for fire-fighters are a matter for the National Joint Council for Local Authorities' Fire Brigades and not for the Home Office. I understand that the council's scheme of conditions of service contains no provisions governing the
  977
  terms of redundancy for fire-fighters. My officials have received a request from the chief fire officer of the Northumberland fire and rescue service for advice on the pensions implications of any redundancies, and are to discuss this with the chief fire officer at a meeting on 5 August. The pension entitlements of whole-time firefighters are governed by the Firemen's Pension Scheme Order 1992. Rule Al4 of the scheme provides for the early retirement on efficiency grounds of a fire-fighter aged 50 or over who has completed 25 years' pensionable service.

  Telephone Tapping
  Mrs. Mahon
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 8 July,Official Report, column 199, if he will list the organisations which carry out telephone interceptions which have been authorised by warrant.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I have nothing to add to my reply of 8 July.

  Urban Areas (Crime)
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) who draws up the list of urban areas and housing estates regarded as at risk of serious disorder;

  (2) if he will provide additional resources to find measures to tackle youth crime in the 16 urban areas or estates regarded as likely to be at risk of serious disorder.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  There is no central list of areas regarded as at risk of serious disorder though local police forces naturally monitor areas of particular tension. The Government already provides funding for many initiatives aimed at tackling youth crime. In particular, the safer cities programme tackles crime in the inner cities through projects in 20 areas with high crime rates and other social problems.

  British Diplomatic Spouses Association
  Mr. George Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the British Diplomatic Spouses Association is a registered charity.

  Mr. Jack
  The British Diplomatic Spouses Association is registered with the Charity Commission as a charity.

  Commercial Premises
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek to amend legislation so as to make occupation of commercial premises without the owner's permission a criminal offence.

  Mr. Jack
  The Government are committed to strengthening the law against squatting and we issued a consultation paper examining possible options. The responses have raised a number of issues which are receiving careful consideration. Our aim is to ensure that any new measures are fair, easy to administer and effective.

  Police Evidence
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to receive reports from the relevant police forces into the safety of the evidence used to convict Sam Kulasingham and Prem Sivalingham; and if he will make a statement.
  978
  Mr. Jack
  The inquiry by the Essex police into this case is still continuing, but at this stage it is not possible to give any indication as to when it will be completed and a report submitted.

  European Year of Civil Protection
  Mr. Bowis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions he has held with his EC colleagues on the United Kingdom's and the Community's plans for the European Year of Civil Protection beginning on 1 July 1993.

  Mr. Jack
  At a meeting of the Council of Ministers held in November 1990 to discuss civil protection, my right hon. and noble Friend the Lord Ferrers and his ministerial colleagues endorsed a resolution, agreeing in principle that July 1993 to July 1994 should be designated the European Year of Civil Protection. Officials from member states are now working to produce a revised draft resolution.

  New Age Travellers
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many hours of police overtime were worked by Avon and Somerset constabulary and Devon and Cornwall constabulary between 20 June and 11 July, as a result of the movements of new age travellers and rave parties;

  (2) pursuant to his answer of 3 July, Official Report, columns 739–40, what further estimates he has of the costs of extra policing required by the movements of new age travellers and various rave parties between 20 June and 11 July in the counties of Avon, Somerset, Devon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire; and whether he will specify these by police authority.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Police and Fire Services
  Mr. Thomason
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will specify the change in the cost of providing police and fire services within the metropolitan county areas as compared with non-metropolitan areas during the financial years preceding, including and succeeding the abolition of the metropolitan county councils.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Durham Prison
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the average number of hours per day inmates of Durham prison spend outside cells.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The estimated number of hours per day inmates of Durham prison spend outsde cells is 7·5 hours for convicted male inmates, 3·25 hours for male remand inmates and 9·5 hours for convicted female inmates.

  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the average number of hours spent on education for each year since 1981 in Durham prison.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The total student hours spent on education for each year since 1985 in Durham prison are shown in the table. No figures are available for the years 1981–82 to 1984–85.
  979

  Year

  Total student hours

  1985–86

  35,796

  1986–87

  48,284

  1987–88

  62,902

  1988–89

  70,245

  1989–90

  58,893

  1990–91

  57,818

  1991–92

  70,251

  European Union
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the current requirements for the acquisition of a visa for entry into the United Kingdom will be affected by the proposed article 100c (1) of the treaty of Rome.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Article 100c ( 1 ) will transfer into the competence of the European Community the determination of the third countries whose nationals are to be subject to a visa requirement for the crossing of external frontiers of member states. Decisions under the article, which will be taken by unanimity until the end of 1995 and by qualified majority voting thereafter, will depend on the outcome of discussions within the Community and cannot be predicted at this stage. The United Kingdom, like all member states, will be under an obligation to align its national visa requirements with such decisions.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what alterations he proposes to(a) asylum policy and (b) immigration policy in the light of article K I of the treaty on European union.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The chapter of the treaty dealing with co-operation in the fields of justice and home affairs, of which Article K1 forms part, will provide a new framework for intergovernmental discussions on these subjects but leave them within national competence. Of itself, therefore, the article does not entail alterations to the United Kingdom's policies on immigration and asylum.

  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what forms of co-operation he will propose in the area of combating international fraud under article K1 (5) of the treaty on European union.

  Mr. Jack
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Wrongful Convictions
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many allegations of wrongful conviction upon indictment have been received during the last six months by C3 division of the Home Office with a view to a possible reference to the Court of Appeal under section 17 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968; and how many allegations have been dealt with.

  Mr. Jack
  During the six months ending 31 March 1992, the most recent period for which figures are readily available, 301 allegations of wrongful conviction on indictment were received and reviews of 283 cases were completed.

  Maastricht Treaty
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the cost of implementing title VI of the Maastricht treaty in so far as it relates to justice and home affairs.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  Title VI brings together into a more coherent framework existing intergovernmental work in justice and home affairs matters. Additional support services may be needed, which will be negotiated in the usual way through the Community budget procedures. Otherwise, costs will arise only on a case-by-case basis from actions agreed between the member states and will he borne by the member states themselves.

  Bail Statistics
  Mr. Bermingham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of(a) all defendants and (b) defendants charged with violent offences, sexual offences, drug offences, robbery, burglary, theft, fraud and criminal damage respectively were granted hail in England and Wales in the years 1980, 1985 and 1990; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Jack
  The percentages of all defendants granted bail in England and Wales in the years 1980, 1985 and 1990 are given in the following table:

  All offences

  1980

  1985

  1990

  Summonsed

  73

  70

  61

  Arrested and bailed

  23

  25

  34

  Arrested and held in custody

  4

  5

  6

  These figures are published in chapter 8 of "Criminal Statistics, England and Wales". Reliable information on the breakdown of remands into bail and custody according to offence groups is not available centrally.

  Police (Contracting Out)
  Mrs. Gorman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to contract out police functions relating to the issuing of firearms licences and the escorting of heavy loads.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  My right hon. and learned Friend is considering the responses to the recently concluded public consultation on Home Office proposals to establish a new civilian firearms licensing body. No decisions have yet been taken.

  As to police escorts for heavy loads, my Department is considering the issues with the police service and local authority associations. No firm decisions have yet been taken.

  Wheel Clamping
  Mr. Andrew Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to regulate unauthorised clamping of motor cars on private land and the charging of large sums for their release.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  In the light of recent public concern about the activities of firms and individuals offering wheel clamping services on private property, the Government are considering whether any action on their part would be appropriate.

  Mr. T. S. Gill
  Mr. Rooker
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to announce his decision in respect to inquiries being made about Mr. T. S. Gill, No. C42698, of Featherstone prison, since March 1991.

  Mr. Jack
  My right hon. and learned Friend has decided to refer Mr. Gill's case to the Court of Appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968. I will write to the hon. Member.

  European Parliamentarians
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what changes the Government plans in the way Members of the European Parliament are elected in Great Britain or in Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  We have at present no plans to change the way in which Members of the European Parliament are elected in Great Britain or in Northern Ireland.

  Refugees
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Bosnian and Croatian refugees have been accepted in the United Kingdom to date.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  About 1,100 citizens of the former state of Yugoslavia have sought asylum in the United Kingdom between December 1991 and the end of June this year on the basis of claims associated with the various conflicts in that area. The large majority of these applications are still under consideration. Separate figures for the numbers from Bosnia or Croatia are not readily available.

  Race Relations
  Ms. Abbott
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made with the Commission for Racial Equality's investigation into treatment of psychiatric patients of different racial groups; what measures her Department has taken to support the CRE in its investigation; and whether she has been asked to authorise a notice under section 50 of the Race Relations Act 1976.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The CRE will be running a pilot study this month in a London psychiatric hospital to test the questionnaire and methodology for the former investigation.

  In September, 10 psychiatric hospitals nationwide will form the basis of the CRE's general formal investigation into the treatment of ethnic minority psychiatric patients.

  I have agreed to the appointment of an additional commissioner, Dr. Suman Fernando, a practising consultant psychiatrist, to assist in this general formal investigation.

  I have not been asked to authorise a notice under section 50 of the Race Relations Act 1976 in connection with this investigation.

  Dangerous Driving
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he intends to increase the maximum penalty for causing death by dangerous driving and by careless driving while under the influence of drink and drugs.
  982
  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  Those whose dangerous or drunk driving has resulted in the tragic waste of another human life deserve to be punished accordingly. We are aware of public concern about the gravity of driving in a manner which causes fatal accidents and believe that the current maximum penalty of five years for these offences does not allow the courts adequately to reflect the seriousness of the worst cases. We intend, when parliamentary time permits, to increase the maximum penalty to 10 years.

  Prisoners (Early Release)
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what directions he has given to the Parole Board as to the matters it should take into account when discharging its functions regarding the early release and recall of determinate sentenced prisoners under the Criminal Justice Act 1991.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  I have written to the chairman of the Parole Board to give him directions which the board should apply when considering the release and recall of prisoners. The directions are based on the need to protect the public from serious harm from offenders, the desirability of preventing further offending and of securing the offenders' rehabilitation. They will be applied to all parole-elegible prisoners from 1 October this year when part II of the Criminal Justice Act comes into effect.

  Copies of the letter and the directions will be made available in the Libraries of both the Houses.

  Feltham Remand Centre
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he intends to take to improve the regime in Feltham remand centre following the recent report from the Chief Inspector of Prisons on Feltham.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  In addition to the work already under way to tackle the issues raised by the chief inspector in his report on Feltham, I have decided to set up a working group with the following terms of reference:"To support and facilitate the enhancement of the regime at Feltham Remand Centre; to consider and plan for its long term future; and to make recommendations".

  The group will act to help the governor put into effect as quickly as possible his plans to enhance the regime at the remand centre. It will also look at wider issues such as experience and good practice elsewhere in relation to young remands; the remanding practices of courts in the Feltham catchment area; and the long-term future of the remand centre.

  Detainees
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were detained under Immigration Act powers(a) overnight, (b) between one night and one month and (c) for a period of more than one month in (i) Harmondsworth detention centre, (ii) the Queen's building Heathrow, (iii) terminal 4 Heathrow, (iv) The Beehive, Gatwick, (v) HM prison, Haslar and (vi) and other establishments, by name, during (1) 1991 and (2) 1992 to the latest convenient date; and of these people, how many in each category were (A) women, (B) children under 18 years of age and (C) men.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  [holding answer 3 July 1992]: The information readily available relates to the total number of

  983
  persons whose detention spanned at least one night. and is given in the table. Information on the length of the period of detention, the numbers of persons detained at locations other than those listed, and the numbers of women, children and men detained, could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Persons detained overnight or longer at certain locations1

  Location

  1991 (year)

  1992 (January to May)

  Harmondsworth2

  1,119

  192

  Queen's Building, Heathrow

  2,253

  928

  Terminal 4, Heathrow

  2,058

  653

  The Beehive, Gatwick

  2,897

  1,557

  Haslar

  519

  143

  1 Unless otherwise stated, the data include persons initially detained elsewhere prior to being detained at the location given.

  2 Data mainly exclude persons initially detained elsewhere, and exclude illegal entrants and deportees detained.

  Asylum
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will provide a breakdown by nationality of the number of passengers seeking political asylum who were detained under Immigration Act powers in 1991 in(a) prison department establishments arid (b) immigration detention accommodation.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  [holding answer 6 July 1992]I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave on 7 July,Official Report, columns 133–34.

  Water Pistols
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to ban the import and sale of high-powered water pistols; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Leigh
  I have been asked to reply.

  There is no reason to believe that the high-powered water pistols currently on sale pose any undue safety hazards when used as intended. I do not propose to introduce a ban on their import or sale.

  Bailiffs
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take the necessary action to make it a criminal offence for convicted criminals(a) to own, (b) to be directors of, (c) to be employed by or (d) to seek employment by a business operating as bailiffs.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  I have been asked to reply.

  The Government has no plans to introduce a series of such offences. The Lord Chancellor's Department requires high standards of those who are recruited as county court bailiffs. Applicants are required to give information about previous convictions. The Department's policy is not to recruit or retain as a baliff any person with a criminal conviction which could conflict with his or her role as officer of the court. Applicants for certification under the distress for rent rules are required to disclose any convictions. The circuit judge dealing with the application would take this into account when considering whet her to grant a certificate.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Departmental Objectives
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of The Board of Trade if he will set out the objectives of each division and branch of his Department.

  Mr. Heseltine
  The current objectives of the various parts of the Department are set out in the HMSO publications "The Government's Expenditure Plans 1992–93 to 1994–95" for Trade and Industry—Cm 1904—and for Energy—Cm 1905. I announced on 3 July my plans for reorganising the combined Department. These plans include the introduction of the management information system for Ministers—MINIS—system of objective-setting and resource allocation. The first MINIS round will be completed by next spring, and the results—which will show the objectives of each division—will be placed in the Library.

  Whales
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he proposes to introduce a labelling scheme identifying products which contain material derived from whales.

  Mr. Leigh
  No.

  Pyramid Selling
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many breaches of pyramid selling regulations were prosecuted during 1991; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Leigh
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: None.

  Post Office
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what performance standards his Department has set for the Post Office in the past 12 months.

  Mr. Leigh
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: The Post Office at present sets its own performance standards having consulted the Post Office Users National Council. For 1991–92, for example, Royal Mail successfully delivered 89·8 per cent. of first-class letters the next day, against a target of 87·2 per cent. For 1992–93, the target is 90·5 per cent. The Government proposed, however, in the citizens charter White Paper that performance standards should in future be set by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, who will be advised by the proposed new, independent, advisory regulator. The regulator will also monitor Post Office performance against these targets. These changes will require legislation.

  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what new information has been provided about compensation and redress when Post Office service falls below standard; and how this information has been made available to the public;

  (2) when he last reviewed the Post Office compensation arrangements; and how frequently he intends to review them in the future.

  Mr. Leigh
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: In line with the citizens charter, the Post Office was ked to carry out

  985
  an urgent review of its redress schemes in consultation with the Post Office Users National Council. The Post Office, together with POUNC, reported in February this year. They agreed to a number of improvements which are now being implemented. The then Secretary of State, in a reply to a question from the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield, (Mr. Burden) welcomed the reports—20 February 1992, Official Report, columns 262–63. In future, the Government also intend to introduce legislation to take powers for the Secretary of State to approve the Post Office's arrangements for compensation and redress, on advice on the proposed new independent advisory regulator. In the meantime, the Government will continue to review the Post Office's redress schemes from time to time as necessary.

  Information on compensation and redress is provided to the public in a number of different ways. The Post Office's commitment to consumer care and details of contact points etcetra were set out in its leaflet "Putting the Customer First", of which 750,000 leaflets were distributed, mainly through post offices, in spring this year. Information on compensation and redress is also set out in the new "Post Guide", which is now being distributed to every household in the country on a rolling basis during the course of this year. The detailed rules are set out in codes of practice for the three Post Office businesses—Royal Mail, Counters and Parcelforce. The codes are all available at post offices.

  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he intends to introduce a new independent regulator to advise him on issues affecting the interests of Post Office customers.

  Mr. Leigh
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: Legislation to give effect to the Government's proposed reforms of the structure of postal services, including the appointment of an independent advisory regulator, will be introduced as soon as parliamentary time allows.

  British Goods and Services
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what are his Department's objectives in promoting the sale of British goods and services.

  Mr. Leigh
  At home, my Department's objective is to help British businesses to produce competitive goods and services. Overseas, my Department's export promotion activities are aimed at increasing the United Kingdom's earnings, thus strengthening the United Kingdom's economic base.

  Mr. Amess
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans his Department has to extend the buy British goods campaign.

  Mr. Leigh
  My Department has no buy British goods campaign. Such a campaign would be in conflict with the Government's free market policies. However, Ministers often point out the advantages of buying British goods and services where they are competitive in design, quality and price.

  Animal Testing
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will seek to persuade his EC partners to agree to phase out testing of cosmetics on animals; and if he will make a statement.
  986
  Mr. Leigh
  The United Kingdom has called upon the European Community to set 1998 as a target date for the replacement of all skin and eye irritancy tests subject to there being validated non-animal alternatives. The Government is sympathetic to phasing out all animal testing for cosmetics where suitable validated alternatives are available.

  Export Controls
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what proposals the Trade Council expects to receive from the Commission on the harmonisation of extra-European Community export controls during the United Kingdom presidency.

  Mr. Needham
  I expect to receive proposals shortly from the European Commission on the harmonisation of export controls on dual-use goods.

  Compliance Costs
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the subjects of compliance cost assessments carried out since the publication of the White Paper, "Building Businesses Not Barriers".

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  Compliance cost assessments—CCAs—are prepared for all policy proposals likely to affect business. A central list of CCAs going back to 1986 does not exist, and would require disproportionate time and effort to produce. Since 1989, details of new CCAs prepared by Departments have been published every six months. Currently the list appears in "Business Briefing", the weekly magazine of the Association of British Chambers of Commerce. CCAs are currently being produced by the Government at a rate of over 50 per annum. The deregulation unit is planning to set up a computerised database of CCAs.

  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will institute a review of the effectiveness of the compliance cost assessment system operated by his deregulation unit.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The effectiveness of the compliance cost assessment system is kept under continuous review by the unit.

  Civil Servants (Shares)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade 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. Eggar
  My Department provides standing guidance supplemented from time to time by internal notices to all staff. The latest notice on shareholdings was issued in February 1991. Staff, including those in the Department's agencies, are required to report any possible conflict of interest to their senior line managers. Separate
  987
  arrangements exist for the full disclosure of the financial interests of the most senior grades. In addition, all heads of management units are required to consider the potential for conflicts of interest within their area of responsibility, to provide, if necessary, specific guidance, with detailed reporting requirements and to take action in response to any disclosure of shareholdings by staff, to ensure that conflicts of interest do not occur.

  Trade Marks
  Dame Angela Rumbold
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what assessment he has made of the effect on British industry of the application of the registration of trade marks in Germany.

  Mr. Leigh
  My Department is not aware of any general problem for British industry in respect of the registration of trade marks in Germany.

  Dame Angela Rumbold
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to ensure harmonisation across the Community countries for registration of trade marks during the United Kingdom presidency.

  Mr. Leigh
  An EC directive to harmonise substantive provisions of trade marks laws was adopted in 1988. It requires member states to bring their laws into line with its provisions by the end of 1992. In the United Kingdom, we have prepared the necessary legislation, but the Bill is still awaiting a place in the parliamentary timetable. Implementation by other member states is a matter for them, and not the presidency; we understand that. by the end of last year, three of them—Denmark, France and Spain—had passed new legislation in order to implement the directive.

  Dame Angela Rumbold
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade when the Community Trade Marks Office will be established.

  Mr. Leigh
  Progress on the regulation to establish the Community Trade Marks Office—CTMO—has been held up for some years, primarily because of the difficulty of securing agreement on the location of the office. This question has become linked with that of the seats of other EC bodies, and any decision will almost certainly be on a package of such seats. We will, however, be pushing hard during the United Kingdom presidency to try to reach agreement on all the other outstanding issues on the regulation, so that the regulation can come into force as soon as a decision is reached on location. The Commission has said that it expects the CTMO to come into operation around two years after the regulation comes into force.

  European Space Agency
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the British contribution to the European Space Agency, the Hermes spaceplane and the Columbus project, in each of the last five financial years, together with the projection for the current year; if he will express these figures as a percentage of the total expenditure and of the German contribution; and if he will also express the annual British contribution in standard prices.

  Mr. Leigh
  United Kingdom contributions in each of the last five financial years and projected contribution in 1992–93 are:
  988

  ESA

  £ million

  Historic prices

  1992–93 prices

  Hermes

  Columbus

  1987–88

  81

  112

  0

  5

  1988–89

  90

  116

  0

  8

  1989–90

  88

  106

  0

  6

  1990–91

  94

  105

  0

  7

  1991–92

  100

  105

  0

  11

  1992–93

  100

  100

  0

  13

  ESA accounts on a calendar year basis. The following percentages are therefore on that basis:

  United Kingdom contribution as a percentage of:

  ESA total expenditure

  German contribution

  1987

  12

  49

  1988

  8

  37

  1989

  7

  31

  1990

  6

  23

  1991

  6

  27

  Net Book Agreement
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement about the European Court's decision on the net book agreement.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  Until I have seen the text of the court's ruling, I cannot comment on it.

  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will now refer the net book agreement to the Office of Fair Trading.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The net book agreement falls within the Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1976 and as such is a matter for the Director General of Fair Trading to consider.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what are his plans during the United Kingdom presidency of the EC for promoting deregulation both at a Community level and in member states' implementation of EC directives.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  During the United Kingdom presidency of the Community, the Government plan to introduce a resolution at the Industrial Affairs Council aimed at strengthening the Commission's fiche d'impact system of assessing the costs to business of Community legislation and encouraging the Commission to consult business more fully before proposing legislation. We will continue to attach importance to prompt implementation of Community directives by member states. In the United Kingdom, we will continue to press the Departments responsible to implement Community directives on time and with the minimum possible burden to business.

  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how he proposes to ensure that the work of the deregulation liaison Minister in each Department is monitored and that an overall view of the Government's achievements in the field of deregulation is brought together; and if he will publish an annual report of those achievements.
  989
  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  Progress under the deregulation initiative in all regulatory departments is co-ordinated and monitored by the deregulation unit in the Department of Trade and Industry. As the Minister with particular responsibility for the initiative, I take an active lead in liaising with deregulation Ministers in other Departments. Reports of progress and announcements are made regularly; the most recent such announcement was on 18 February,Official Report, columns 122–25. As stated by the Prime Minister on 19 May, Official Report, column 113, there is a ministerial committee on industrial, commercial and consumer affairs whose terms of reference are
  "to consider industrial, commercial and consumer issues, including questions of competition and deregulation".

  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade 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. Neil Hamilton
  I and my ministerial colleagues have met our EC counterparts and European Commissioners on a number of occasions since 18 April. The importance of minimising the burdens on business of community legislation was emphasised in relevant meetings. During the United Kingdom presidency, I and my colleagues will attach great importance to making progress on minimising burdens on business.

  European Atomic Energy Agency
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to bring forward proposals during the United Kingdom presidency of the European Council to reduce the secrecy stipulations in article 194 of the treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Agency.

  Mr. Eggar
  The Commission has the exclusive right to bring forward proposals in the fields covered by the treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community. We are not aware that the Commission has any plans to make proposals in respect of article 194.

  Hospital Radio
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what conclusions his Department has drawn from recent tests concerning hospital radio receiving its own frequency;

  (2) what progress has been made in securing an individual frequency for hospital radio.

  Mr. Leigh
  My Department—the Radiocommunications Agency—and the Radio Authority have recently completed the pilot experiment at East Surrey hospital. Redhill. The Radiocommunications Agency and the Radio Authority are meeting shortly to reach conclusions on the results of the experiment and discuss future plans for hospital radio.

  Property Misdescriptions Act 1991
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the progress which has been made in drafting the orders which arise under the 990
  terms of the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991; if he will indicate when he expects the drafts of the proposed orders to be published; and when he intends to lay the proposed orders before the House.

  Mr. Leigh
  My Department circulated a draft Property Misdescriptions (Specified Matters) Order for public consultation last December. The proposed order is being redrafted in the light of responses to the consultation, and my hon. and noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Consumer Affairs and Small Firms intends to lay it before Parliament as soon as possible.

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

  Mr. Heseltine
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given by the Prime Minister on 13 July,Official Report, columns 430–31.

  Shipbuilding
  Ms. Quin
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he has had with representatives of the United Kingdom shipbuilding industry on the current EC proposals to aid shipyards in east Germany; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  I discussed the EC proposals to aid the east German shipbuilding industry during a meeting with a delegation from the Shipbuilders and Shiprepairers Association on 24 June.

  RECHAR
  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what payment has been received this year under the RECHAR programme; and when arrangements will be completed to allow RECHAR grants to be paid.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  For the RECHAR programmes, the United Kingdom has so far this year received payments of £33,793,000 from the European regional development fund.

  The approval of projects is the responsibility of the programme monitoring committees, which are now meeting. Arrangements are in place for RECHAR grants to be paid in respect of approved projects once the normal conditions for payment have been met.

  Bicycles
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on circumvention of the generalised system of preferences tariff by Asian bicycle companies.

  Mr. Needham
  Although this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Paymaster General, I have agreed to reply.

  A number of investigations have been carried out by Customs and Excise to verify that bicycles coming from Asian countries have been manufactured in accordance with the rules of origin of the generalised system of preferences. No evidence has been found of circumvention. Customs continues to monitor imports to ensure that correct rates of duty are imposed.
  991
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he has any plans to review the European Community policy whereby Chinese bicycles enjoyed generalised system of preferences duty free status; if he has any plans to impose anti-dumping duties on Chinese and Taiwanese bicycles; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Needham
  The operation of the European Community's generalised system of preferences scheme is due for review this year. The concerns of the bicycle manufacturers, along with those of other sectors of industry, will be considered during discussions in the Community. I have no plans to impose anti-dumping duties on Chinese and Taiwanese bicycles, since such action is a matter of Community competence. The European Commission is currently carrying out an anti-dumping investigation into imports of these bicycles.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many bicycles were imported from(a) China and (b) Taiwan in (i) 1990 and (ii) 1991; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Needham
  The number of bicycles imported into the United Kingdom from China and Taiwan in 1990 and 1991 were as follows:

  1990

  1991

  China

  100,983

  141,874

  Taiwan

  694,032

  657,738

  I have nothing to add to my earlier replies on this subject.

  European Funds
  Mr. Cash
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the United Kingdom's contribution to(a) the EC European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund, guidance section, (b) the European social fund and (c) the European regional development fund; and what was the United Kingdom receipt, by region, of these funds for the current year.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Member states contribute to the EC budget as a whole rather than individual parts of it. The United Kingdom's share of contributions in 1992 is forecast to be around 17 per cent. before abatement. Forecast structural funds receipts in 1992 for the EC as a whole and for the United Kingdom are shown in the table. Figures showing receipts by regions of the United Kingdom are not readily available.

  Forecast Structural Funds Receipts for 1992

  £ million

  Total EC

  United Kingdom

  (A) European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund Guidance Section

  1,874

  80

  (B) European Social Fund

  3,370

  411

  (C) European Regional Development Fund

  5,302

  458

  Total Structural Funds

  10,546

  949

  Agencies
  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what targets he has set the National Engineering Laboratory agency for 1992–93.
  992
  Mr. Heseltine
  When the National Engineering Laboratory was launched as an executive agency in October 1990, it was set the longer-term target of recovering its full economic costs through arm's length contracts from customers by 1994–95. I congratulate the chief executive and his staff on the excellent progress they have made towards meeting this target.

  In addition to building on the position reached in respect of the above target, the agency has been set the following targets for 1992–93:
  Non-Department of Trade and Industry income as a proportion of full economic costs to grow by 10 per cent. compared with the results for 1991–92—as published in the agency's annual report 1991.
  Fee earning hours on "arm's length" contracts, as a proportion of all hours, to increase by 10 per cent. compared with the published results for 1991–92.
  Fee earning hours on "arm's length" contracts, as a proportion of available engineer hours to increase by 7 per cent. compared with the published results for 1991–92. Per capita office space to reduce by 10 per cent. compared with 1991–92.
  By 1 October 1992 to introduce a concise contract-completion questionnaire, to provide systematic feedback from all clients of all technical centres as part of NEL's commitment to deliver to its clients the standard of service they require.
  To train at least 60 per cent. of staff in six of the basic competences they will require for operating in a commercial environment.

  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what targets he has set the National Weights and Measures Laboratory agency for 1992–93.

  Mr. Leigh
  The agency has been set the following key targets for 1992–93:

  to operate within its current expenditure budget;

  to achieve the specific objectives set out in its 1992–93 to 1995–96 corporate plan, a copy of which was placed in the Library of the House in April this year;

  to reduce the unit cost of a programme-hour by 1·5 per cent. in real terms.

  The agency is also required to meet a number of other targets, including quality of service targets. Its achievements against these last year will appear in its annual report 1991–92, which is due to be published shortly.

  These targets will be subject to annual review.

  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what targets he has set the Insolvency Service executive agency for 1992–93.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The Insolvency Service expects to deal with about 36,000 new insolvencies in 1992–93 and against this background I look to it to preserve the very considerably efficiency gains it has already achieved. The service will continue to bring proceedings for the disqualification of directors of failed companies where these are in the public interest, and to submit prosecution reports where there is evidence of criminal behaviour.

  The quality of service targets for 1992–93 are:

  to report to creditors on assets and liabilities within nine weeks in at least 75 per cent. of all cases.

  to hold the initial meeting of creditors within 12 weeks in at least 80 per cent. of all cases.

  to check and action at least 95 per cent. of payment requisitions within 10 days or by the due date.

  to submit reports within 10 months in at least 80 per cent. of cases where there is evidence of criminality.

  to submit disqualification reports within 15 months in at least 80 per cent. of cases where there is evidence of unfit conduct by directors.

  I have set it a target of completing the administration of at least 24,000 cases in 1992–93.
  993
  I would like to congratulate the chief executive and his staff on their success last year in handling a considerably increased workload whilst managing to achieve most of their targets. For 1992–93, I have asked the chief executive to ensure a consolidation of the productivity gains already made. At the same time I have raised the target for a reduction in real terms of the average unit cost of the initial stage for bankruptcies and liquidations to 45 per cent. over the period 1990–91 to 1992–93.

  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what targets have been set for the Companies House executive agency for 1992–93.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The chief executive of Companies House has been set the following quality of service and financial performance targets:

  to make all documents available for public inspection within a maximum of five working days of receipt in Companies House;

  to provide a two-hour search service for all customers, and to provide a one hour search service to all customers by April 1994;

  to achieve a compliance rate for companies filing accounts and annual returns of 86 per cent. by June 1993 and 90 per cent. by June 1994;

  to reduce real unit costs by 2 per cent. in 1992–93;

  to achieve a 6 per cent. average annual return in the form of an operating surplus expressed as a percentage of average net assets employed at current values.

  Executive agency status has led to significant improvements in efficiency and in the standard of service provided to Companies House's customers. The adoption of trading fund status last October has further increased the quality and flexibility of the agency's financial management, placing its finances on a more commercial footing.

  The targets which I have set are designed to ensure that Companies House builds on these improvements in its performance, by requiring further increases in efficiency and improvements in the rate of compliance.

  Urban Regeneration Agency
  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what will be the relationship between English Estates and the proposed new Urban Regeneration Agency.

  Mr. Heseltine
  I greatly value the work English Estates does in the assisted areas and elsewhere to ensure the provision of premises and sites for new and growing businesses. I see great advantage in bringing this role within the remit of the new Urban Regeneration Agency.My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and I have, therefore, agreed that the activities of English Estates should be subsumed within the new agency when it is set up.

  Counterfeit Goods
  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made in dealing with the problems of counterfeit consumer goods; and if he will give the latest estimate of the cost to the manufacturing industry of this illicit trade.

  Mr. Leigh
  The Government's role in combating counterfeiting is limited to providing the necessary legislative framework. Around three years ago, provisions 994
  came into force making the counterfeiting of a trade mark a criminal offence carrying heavy penalties. The enforcement of the law is the responsibility of local trading standard officers, who may act either on their own initiative or on intelligence from industry. There is also the possibility for industry to take civil action against counterfeiting. The Government have no figures of their own as to the extent of the trade in counterfeit consumer goods.

  Electricity
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many people were employed in the electricity division of the Department of Energy on 1 July 1990.

  Mr. Eggar
  One hundred and thirteen people were employed in the Department's electricity divisions as at 1 July 1990.

  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will seek to amend legislation so as to allow electricity companies to establish that premises are lawfully occupied before being compelled to connect supply.

  Mr. Eggar
  The obligation to supply electricity derives from section 16 of the Electricity Act 1989. Any dispute arising under that section may be referred to the Director General of Electricity Supply. The Government have no plans to amend this legislation.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what consultations he has had with the Director General of Electricity Supply concerning his decision of 7 July on the target real rate of return on assets and annual maximum price change formula on domestic electricity prices via the cost passed through mechanism.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: I have consultations with the Director General of Electricity Supply from time to time on a range of issues. Licence conditions, including the price controls, are a matter for the director general.

  Nuclear Power
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what assessment he has made of the impact of the coal privatisation programme on the competitive position of Sizewell B with regard to the merit order; what further consultations he has had with the EC competition directorate general concerning the applicability of(a) the existing nuclear operating agreement and (b) the nuclear levy payments to Sizewell B in the period 1994 to 1998, (c) extension of life of the Magnox stations and (d) extension of life of the nuclear levy beyond 1998; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  The capacity and output from Sizewell B is included in Nuclear Electric's contract with the regional electricity companies, which expires on 31 March 1998. The treatment of Sizewell B by the appropriate regulatory authorities will be no different from that of Nuclear Electric's existing stations. The commercial arrangements relating to Nuclear Electric's operations up to 1998, including Sizewell B, were notified to the European Commission in March 1990 under state aid notification procedures.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what assessment he has made of the impact on
  995
  eastern bloc and European nuclear safety of the $100 million fund set up at the Group of Seven to cover retrofitting Soviet-designed nuclear power stations;

  (2) if he will make a statement on the conclusions of the G7 summit meeting on Soviet-designed eastern bloc nuclear reactor safety problems and Group of 24 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development retrofit safety programmes and the British nuclear industry contribution to those programmes.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: I welcome these important conclusions, which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister referred to in his statement to the House on 13 July 1992. As he explained, the G7 countries have given support to a multilateral programme of action to improve the safety of Soviet-designed nuclear power plants in the former Soviet Union and central and eastern Europe. The programme aims to achieve significant improvements in the short-term in operational safety and in strengthening regulatory regimes in those countries. A supplementary multilateral mechanism, details of which have still to he settled, will be set up to fund necessary short-term safety improvements which are not adequately covered by bilateral programmes of assistance.

  At the same time, the programme lays the foundation for longer-term safety improvements by setting in train energy studies covering replacement sources of energy and the scope for, and cost implications of, upgrading nuclear plants of more recent design.

  The G7 countries have urged other interested states to contribute to the programme. The group of 24 OECD countries—G24—will co-ordinate this assistance through existing but strengthened procedures. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development will assist in the administration of the multilateral fund in close liaison with the G24 and will report on the potential financial requirements for future energy supplies.

  The British nuclear industry is already playing an active part in bilateral and international assistance programmes and I expect it to make an enhanced contribution within the framework of the multilateral programme which has now been agreed.

  EC Structural Funds
  Ms. Quin
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade, pursuant to his answer of 6 July,Official Report, column 27, about the future of the EC structural funds, how he defines "appropriate" priority.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  The first priority for the European regional development fund is clearly objective 1. The Government consider that objective 2 comes next and should be given clear priority over other operations by this fund.

  Multi-level Marketing
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will bring forward proposals to require all multi-level marketing associations to belong to an organisation enforcing the standards of the Fair Trading Act 1973.

  Mr. Leigh
  No. I have not seen any evidence of the need for such a requirement.

  Offshore Licensing
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) if he will make it his policy to withdraw from the 14 round of offshore licences those blocks of the Pembrokeshire coast that are likely to impact on the Skomer marine nature reserve;

  (2) if he will make it his policy to withdraw from the 14 round of offshore licences those blocks in Cardigan bay which are likely to have impact on those areas which qualify for designation as special protection areas under the EC directive on the conservation of wild birds.

  Mr. Eggar
  Blocks to be offered in the second stage of the 14th round at the end of July are still under consideration. Potential impact on the environment will be taken into account before any blocks are released for licensing.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what environmental conditions are to be attached to exploration licences issued under the 14 offshore licensing round;

  (2) what consideration will be given to the likely effect on the marine environment in assessing licence applications during the 14 offshore licensing round;

  (3) whether he will withdraw from the 14 offshore licensing round those blocks which include marine sites of international nature conservation importance.

  Mr. Eggar
  My officials are currently finalising consultations with other Departments and interested parties to see which blocks can be offered for licence in the second stage of the round at the end of July. The Department of the Environment, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Scottish Office Agriculture and Fisheries Department, fishing organisations, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds are among those consulted. Where blocks covering areas of environmental importance are offered, the offers will be subject to conditions. These conditions, as in 12th round awards, will reflect the nature and degree of concerns at issue on each block. In the 14th round companies will be asked to provide an environmental statement covering the proposed operators' policy towards environmental protection and this will form part of the criteria by which applications are judged.

  Economic Advice
  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade, what arrangements he is making for economic advice in his Department.

  Mr. Heseltine
  Dr. Walter Eltis, director general of the National Economic Development Office will be assisting me as my chief economic adviser on a part-time basis until his appointment as director general comes to an end on 31 December 1992 and thereafter on a full-time basis.

  Renewable Energy
  Mr. Milligan
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he will respond to the fourth report from the Energy Select Committee of Session 1991–92, on renewable energy.
  997
  Mr. Eggar
  I have today placed a copy of the Government's response to the Energy Select Committee report on renewable energy in the Libraries of both Houses.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade, pursuant to his answer of 14 May,Official Report, column 169, if he will break down the figures provided by (a) private sector, (b) generating boards and (c) the European Commission.

  Mr. Eggar
  The answer can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Fine Animal Hair Goods
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what specific steps he proposes to take to ensure that all member states honour the terms of the China/EC bilateral treaty, as it relates to the shipment of fine animal hair goods against agreed quotas; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) if he will make it his policy that any proven over-shipment of fine animal hair goods from China in the last five years will be compensated for in the round of negotiations leading to a new bilateral EC/China treaty to take effect in January 1993;

  (3) if he will create a separate sub-limit exclusive to cashmere fibre within the next agreement with China on fine animal hair goods;

  (4) what steps he is taking to address difficulties relating to trade in fine animal hair goods from the Republic of Mongolia.

  Mr. Needham
  I will write to the hon. Gentleman.

  Libya (Sanctions)
  Mr. Jessel
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in relation to the application by Leppid Ace International Ltd., of King street, Twickenham, to export 5,000 handcuffs, and 1,000 wooden truncheons, helmets, anti-riot shields and field suits to Libya for use by the Libyan police, such exports are consistent with the United Nations resolutions on sanctions; what advice has been given by the United Nations as to whether the Libyan police are paramilitary in this context; whether the United Nations resolution is mandatory or discretionary; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Needham
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Small Firms Loan Guarantee Scheme
  Mr. Gunnell
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what measures the Government are taking to change the small firms loan guarantee scheme to meet their needs in 1992;

  (2) what discussions he has had with external organisations regarding the future of the small firms loan guarantee scheme since 9 April;

  (3) for each year of the operation of the small firms loan guarantee scheme what is (a) the number of companies assisted in that year which had by April gone into receivership and (b) the sum paid out to the lending banks under that scheme;

  (4) how many firms have received money through the small firms loan guarantee scheme each financial year since its inception in 1981;
  998
  (5) what was the total sum guaranteed through the small firms loan guarantee scheme in each financial year from its inception in 1981.

  Mr. Leigh
  I will write to the hon. Gentleman.

  Export Licence Fraud
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) of 6 July,Official Report, column 28, what plans he has to pursue further the issue of fraudulent export control licence documentation with Mr. Tim Kelsey.

  Mr. Needham
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: As I informed the House on 8 July, I had already asked Mr. Kelsey, through his editor, to supply any evidence he had about the fraudulent use of end-user certificates so that my Department might follow up his allegations. He has not done so.

  Thermal Measurement Ltd.
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he received the letter from the hon. Member for Rugby and Kenilworth dated 27 April about Thermal Measurement Ltd.; when it was transferred to the Department of the Environment; when he notified the hon. Member of the transfer; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Leigh
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: My hon. Friend wrote to me on 27 April. The letter was received on 29 April. Following advice from officials, the case was transferred to the Department of the Environment since it fell within their areas of responsibility. My hon. Friend was informed of this in a letter of 7 July. I understand that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State replied to my hon. Friend on 14 July. I regret the delay in dealing with this case.

  Orimulsion
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how much orimulsion was imported in each year since 1989; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: Imports of orimulsion in each year were:

  thousand tonnes

  1989

  47

  1990

  156

  1991

  465

  Relocation
  Mr. Betts
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what assessment he has made of the number of civil servants in his Department who could be relocated to provincial centres as part of the policy of devolving and decentralising Government Departments.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: I am currently reviewing the location of London-based DTI staff, but I expect there to be only limited potential for further relocation. Over 50 per cent. of DTI staff are already located outside London.

  Cashmere
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will urge all member states to(a) honour the China-EC bilateral treaty negotiated in their name as members of the European Community, (b) provide compensation by reduction of units equivalent to the ownership of cashmere from the next round of negotiations with China due to commence in September this year for the implementation in January 1993, (c) create a separate sub-limit exclusive to cashmere within the agreement, and (d) recognise that the same problems apply to future negotiations with Mongolia.

  Mr. Needham
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: I will write to the right hon. Gentleman.

  Environment Awards
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the countries and projects, respectively, that won the European better environment awards for industry this year.

  Mr. Maclean
  I have been asked to reply.

  First prizes this year went to:
  Good environmental management category—Techagri M, Srl, of Italy, for an integrated scheme, involving farmers and other sections of food production, that makes use of recycled by-products, to reduce greatly any need for chemical fertilisers.
  Clean technology category—Shell International Chemie Maatschappij BV, the Netherlands, for a catalytic system to clean up poisonous gaseous oxides of nitrogen (NOx) from industrial exhausts.
  Eco product category—Papeteries MatussiCre et Forest, of Lyon, for a technological breakthrough in recycled paper.
  Recovery of waste category—Hovione Socieda Quimica, of Portugal, for a treatment plant at an antibiotics factory to recover solvent waste chemicals. Highly recommended award winners were:
  Good environmental management—BP Exploration, UK, for the good management of its on-shore Southern England oil-field—Wytch Farm, Dorset.
  Clean technology category—A combined British entry from the University of York and Contract Chemicals Ltd. for a new form of catalyst based on clay that has large potential to improve, environmentally, a range of chemical processes.
  Eco product category—BP Chemicals, UK, for a new airfield runway de-icer that does no harm to fish or other life when it runs off into water-courses.
  Recovery of waste category-a process for recycling scrap motor car tyres into useful material, from the Dutch firm, Vredestein Icopro BV.
  Technology transfer category, for technologies that can be transferred to third world countries—the French operation, GPS Salt Producers and Organisation/Univers-Sel, that enables villagers in west Africa to recover salt without the need to burn timber.

  Human Rights Ethics
  Ms. Abbott
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make it his policy for the human rights ethics of a country to be taken into consideration prior to permitting trade between that country and Britain.

  Mr. Needham
  I will write to the hon. Lady.

  Disclosure of Information
  Mr. Duncan-Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to end unnecessary secrecy and to promote openness in his Department.
  1000
  Mr. Heseltine
  My officials are taking part in an interdepartmental review of restrictions on disclosure of information and will consider the scope for any relaxation in the present arrangements.

WALES

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales 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. Gwilym Jones
  The Welsh Office will, of course, participate in events being organised at the UK level and we will also consider proposals for events in Wales as appropriate.

  Ozone-Depleting Chemicals
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales 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. Gwilym Jones
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Environment on 15 July.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to introduce a mandatory recovery scheme for the recycling of CFCs.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply given to him today by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment and Countryside.

  Local Government
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many representations he has received which advocate the maintenance of each district council in Mid-Glamorgan in their present form; and if he will break the figures down according to current district council areas.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  My right hon. Friend has received no representations advocating the maintenance of each district council in Mid-Glamorgan in their present form. There is widespread support, in Mid-Glamorgan as elsewhere, for replacement of the present district councils and county councils by unitary authorities.

  Dentistry
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will extend the role of community dentists to include patients who are currently denied access to general dental practitioners who refuse to treat national health service patients.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The community dental service is obliged to provide facilities for a full range of treatment to patients who have experienced difficulty in obtaining treatment in the general dental service.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish a list of those family health services
  1001
  authorities in Wales that have contacted his Department to express concern as to their inability to provide national health service dental services due to the shortage of dentists willing to be employed on family health services authority pay scales.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  No family health services authority in Wales has, to date, expressed concern to the Department that it would be unable to recruit salaried dentists.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what estimate he has made of the effect of the current dispute on the time taken for people to obtain dental treatment.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The time taken for people to obtain dental treatment will vary from area to area according to local circumstances. If patients are unable to obtain treatment within a reasonable period they should approach their family health services authority for assistance.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will place in the Library the criteria each family health services authority in Wales uses to measure cross-infection rates in dental surgeries.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The measuring of cross-infection rates is a matter for each family health services authority. Information on techniques used by individual authorities is not held centrally. However, guidance on cross-infection control is issued by the Department from time to time and I refer to the answer which was given to the hon. Gentleman on 10 July 1991,Official Report, column 388.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the number of dentists in Wales in the national health service and that number as a percentage of dentists in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Provisional figures as at 30 September 1991 show that there were 832 dentists in the general dental service in Wales. This represented 4·5 per cent. of the United Kingdom figure of 18,621.

  As at 30 September 1990, the latest information available, there were 292—207·9 whole-time equivalent—dentists in the hospital and community dental services. This represented 6·2 per cent. of the United Kingdom figure of 4,676, or 6·5 per cent. of the whole-time equivalent of 3,182·2.

  Housing Associations
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will take steps towards the withdrawal of the consultation document, "Improving the Effectiveness of Housing Association Development and Management".

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  No.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) if he will continue to encourage housing associations to discuss with potential tenants their housing designs before commencing new build;

  (2) if he intends to permit housing associations to continue to place contracts with builders for (a)10 units, (b)10 to 20 units, (c)20 to 30 units, (d)30 to 40 units and (e)40 to 50 units;
  1002
  (3) if he has any plans to reduce the provision of housing association new build in rural areas by introducing a minimum threshold number of new units to be contracted for in a limited geographical area;

  (4) if he has any plans to introduce changes in the operation of housing associations that would reduce the percentage of new build provided by small builders.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  These are matters for Housing for Wales to consider in the first instance. The board has just issued a relevant consultation document entitled, "Improving the Effectiveness of Housing Association Development and Management.

  Oystermouth Bus Station
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales for what reason he decided to call in the planning application for the Oystermouth bus station, Swansea.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The application raises matters of more than local significance.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he has visited the site of the proposed development at the Oystermouth bus station, Swansea.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  No.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment he has made of the way in which his Department has dealt with the two planning applications for the development of land at the Oystermouth bus station, Swansea.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Both applications have been dealt with in accordance with the statutory procedures.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many times he has agreed to an extension of time for the applicant to negotiate with Swansea city council on the proposed development at Oystermouth bus station, Swansea, after he had first called in the application.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Twice.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will announce a date by which he will decide whether to order a public inquiry into the current planning application to develop the Oystermouth bus station, Swansea.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  A decision on whether to hold a public inquiry will be made in the near future.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will indicate in relation to the current application before Swansea city council for planning consent at the Oystermouth bus station(a) the dates of any meetings he has had with any objectors, (b) those present at the meetings, (c) the dates of any meetings his officials have had with any objectors, (d) those present at the meetings with officials and (e) the number of representations he has had for the application to be called in; if he will place copies of the representations in (e) the Library; and when he made the decision to call in the application.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Several representations have been made including 15 in writing. It is not normal practice to
  1003
  place copies of representations on call-in references in the Library of the House. A decision to call in the application was made on 9 July 1992.

  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions his officials have had on the current planning application regarding the Oystermouth bus station, Swansea with officials of Swansea city council.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  None apart from a response to a request from officers of Swansea city council on 10 July 1992 about any additional information required as a result of the call-in direction.

  Environmental Protection Act 1990
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many industrial process operators have yet to apply for Environmental Protection Act 1990 authorisation in Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The responsibility for implementing the provisions of part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in Wales is split between Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution and district councils. HMIP is responsible for dealing with applications for integrated pollution control from those industrial processes with generally a greater potential for pollution while district councils administer air pollution control over the less polluting processes.

  These new controls are being phased in over a period of time—applications may be made up to September 1992 for local authority processes and to January 1996 for HMIP processes—and it would not be possible to estimate at this stage how many outstanding applications have yet to be made.

  Any process operator who does not apply for authorisation within the allocated time is liable to prosecution.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what visits he has made to his EC counterparts in each member state to discuss deregulation matters since 18April; 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. David Hunt
  My Department is committed to easing, wherever appropriate, the regulatory burdens on

  Applications called-in 1989–90 (1 April 1989–March 1990)

  Proposed Development

  Call-in Date

  Subsequent Result

  Proposed Porthcawl Marina Grid Reference—SS 8200 7680

  24 April 1989

  Not yet determined

  Proposed Deeside Waterfront—SJ 2865 7112 to SJ 3092 7220

  17 April 1989

  Application withdrawn 15 June 1989

  Proposed Dwellings, Iand Adjacent to Eshowe, Wiston, Dvfed—SN0217 1807

  28 April 1989

  Permission refused 20 January 1989

  Proposed Tourism and Leisure Development, Glyn Rhonwy, Llanberis, Gwynedd—SH 5685 6080

  28 July 1989

  Application not received

  Proposed Flint By-Pass—SJ 2700—716

  16 Augudy 1989

  Permission refused 17 September 1990

  1004
  small businesses, especially through the deregulation initiative co-ordinated by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. I have made no visits to discuss deregulation with EC counterparts since 18 April.

  Unwanted Medicine
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what action he is planning to allow pharmacists to continue to make arrangements for the collection and disposal of unwanted medicines without having to complete consignment notes giving a description of the waste, its chemical constituents and their concentrations and total quantity and source.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Pharmacists receiving unwanted medicines are subject to a wide range of waste management controls including a requirement to complete consignment notes. Representations from the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain on the controls that apply to the disposal of unwanted medicines are being considered in the context of the review of the Control of Pollution (Special Waste) Regulations 1980.

  Housing for Wales
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will place in the Library a list of any new appointments he has made during the last 12 months to the board of Housing for Wales, together with the name of the persons or bodies that made the nomination, a summary of the experience of the nominees in housing matters and the date of appointment.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  I will write to the hon. Gentleman and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

  Planning Applications
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish for each of the last three years in relation to every planning application he has called in for his own determination(a) the date he called them in, (b) the Ordnance Survey grid reference squares of the sites, (c) the precise reasons underlying his decisions to call them in and (d) the subsequent result of the decision.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The information requested is as follows. Decisions relating to applications for listed building consent are not included. All the applications were called in because it was considered that they raised matters of more than local significance.
  1005

  Proposed Development

  Call-in Date

  Subsequent Result

  Proposed Residential Development and Golf Course, Tymawr and Bailea Farms, Gilwern, Gwent—SO 2550- 1570

  23 February 1990

  Application not received

  Proposed conversion of Redundant Farm Buildings, into a residence, Runston Farm, Shirenewton, Gwent—ST 4943 9180

  4 December 1989

  Permission granted 20 December 1990

  Departure Applications

  Called-In

  Present Position

  1989–90

  Land adjoining Gilwern Park Roads and other side works for Industrial and commercial development—ST2580 1500

  26 May 1989

  Not yet determined

  Residential Development at Loo Choo Farm, Haverfordwest—SM 9415 1645

  27 July 1989

  Permission refused 1 August 1990

  Applications called-in 1990–91 (1 April 1990–31 March 1991)

  Proposed Development

  Call-in Date

  Subsequent Result

  Proposed Opencast Mining, Pwll Du, Blaenavon, Gwent

  7 June 1990

  Not yet determined

  Proposed Retail Park, Rhuddlan Road, Rhyl, Clwyd—SJ 0227 7952

  25 April 1990

  Permission granted 10 June 1991

  Proposed River Protection Work, Morfordian, Llanidloes, Powys—SN 9647 8557

  4 October 1990

  Not yet determined

  Proposed Wind Farm, Mynydd Cemaes, Cemaes, Powys SH 8700 0800

  22 November 1990

  Permission granted 19 September 1991

  Proposed Landfill Site, Pen-y-Bont, Chirk, Wrexham, Clwyd—SJ 2925 4165

  1 March 1991

  Application withdrawn 15 March 1991

  Proposed Diversion and Upgrading in parts of B4248 between Brynmawr and Blaenavon, Gwent

  6 December 1990

  Not yet determined

  Proposed Riverside Development, Caerleon, Newport, Gwent—ST 3450 9075

  6 February 1991

  Application withdrawn 15 May 1992

  Proposed Mixed Development, Oystermouth Bus Station, Mumbles, Swansea—SS 6160 8825

  25 March 1991

  Application withdrawn 12 March 1992

  Applications called-in 1991–92 (1 April 1991–31 March 1992)

  Proposed Development

  Call-in Date

  Subsequent Result

  Proposed Coal Storage and Screening Plant, Iand West of Griffin Valley, Pwll Du, Gwent—SO 2325 1150

  23 April 1991

  Not yet determined

  Proposed Refuse Disposal Site, Blaen Pig Void, Pwll Du Gwent—SO 2400 1150

  23 April 1991

  Not yet determined

  Proposed Extension, Masonic Hall, Tower Hill, Denbigh. Clwyd—SJ 6514 6602

  11 July 1991

  Application withdrawn 28 October 1991

  Proposed Extraction and Processing of Limestone, Cilyrychen, Quarry and Glangwenlais Quarry, Llandybie, Ammanford, Dyfed—SN6100 1650

  23 October 1991

  Application withdrawn 10 June 1992

  Proposed Oil and Gas Terminal, Point of Ayr, Talacre, Clwyd—SJ 1235 8390

  16 December 1991

  Not yet determined

  Proposed Workshop Unit and Car Track, Iand South of Newton Road, Wentloog, Cardiff—ST 2365 7833

  2 January 1992

  Application withdrawn 21 January 1992

  Proposed Conversion of former Coach House into 6 Self Contained Dwellings, Garthmyl Hall, Garthmyl, Welshpool. Powys—SO 1895 9890

  20 December 1991

  Not yet determined

  Departure Applications

  Called-In

  Present Position

  Croes Bleddyn Farm Itton Chepstow Golf Course and associated access road and Car Parking—ST 4915 9625

  7 February 1992

  Application withdrawn 31 March 1992

  P33/1482 Porthcasseg Farm St. Arvans, Chepstow 18 hole golf course—ST 5250 9770

  7 February 1992

  Application withdrawn 21 May 1992

  Clinical Waste
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the landfill waste disposal sites in Wales licensed to accept clinical waste.
  1006
  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  This information is not held centrally. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the district councils, which are responsible for licensing such sites.

  Environmental Protection Act
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many additional posts have been created by local authorities in Wales to undertake work under part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The number of full-time equivalent manual and non-manual staff employed on environmental health by Welsh councils was 1,460 on March 1992, an increase of some 8 per cent. on the March 1991 figures.

  The Department does not have details of how this increase was distributed between the various environmental health functions.

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

  Mr. David Hunt
  The Welsh Office's broad objectives are set out in "The Government's Expenditure Plans 1992–93 to 1994–96: Departmental Report by the Welsh Office", Cm. 1916.

  Civil Servants (Shareholdings)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales 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. David Hunt
  Guidance based on the civil service pay and conditions of service code covering the personal interests and conduct of civil servants, including the use of official knowledge for private gain, is contained in the Welsh Office handbook which is available to all staff. This instructs staff on the procedures to be followed when a potential conflict of interest arises. Staff are reminded of the guidance from time to time.

  Any self-reported or otherwise reported private interest, including shareholding, of a member of staff is considered and recorded in order to highlight a potential conflict of interest. If there is potential conflict, appropriate action is taken to avoid it. No record is kept of the number of such reports.

  The same arrangements apply to Cadw, the only next steps agency within the Welsh Office.

  Skin Cancer
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the number of deaths in each year from 1988 to 1991 attributable to skin cancer in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The number of registered deaths to residents of Wales in each year from 1988 to 1991 where the underlying cause of death was skin cancer are shown in the following table:1008

  Malignant melanoma of skin (ICD 172)

  Other malignant neoplasm of skin (ICD 173)

  1988

  47

  36

  1989

  65

  29

  1990

  75

  30

  1991

  75

  29

  Source: Office of Population Censuses and Surveys.

  Farming Accidents
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the number of deaths in farm accidents in Wales in 1991; what was the number as a percentage of farming fatalities overall in(a) the United Kingdom and (b) the European Community; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  There were five fatal injuries in the agricultural sector in Wales reported to Health and Safety Commission enforcing authorities in 1990–91, representing 7 per cent. of the United Kingdom figure of 71 fatal injuries for the same year. Provisional estimates for Wales and Great Britain for 1991–92 are 10 and 57 respectively. Comparable figures for the European Community are not available.

  Teachers
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many(a) advisers and (b) advisory teachers have been employed in each local education authority area in Wales in each year since 1987.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  Information on(a) the number of advisers in each local education authority in Wales is not collected on a formal basis.

  Information on (b) the number of advisory teachers has only been collected as a separate category since 1990 and this is shown in the following table:

  (b) Advisory Teachers1

  Authority

  1991

  1990

  Clwyd

  0

  0

  Dyfed

  10

  10

  Gwent

  22

  17

  Gwynedd

  12

  10

  Mid Glamorgan

  66

  44

  Powys

  23

  16

  South Glamorgan

  27

  26

  West Glamorgan

  76

  83

  WALES

  236

  206

  1 The source of this information is the Department of Education Form 618G which states:

  "Advisory teachers are defined as qualified teachers paid under the terms of the School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document but employed for purposes other than teaching. Does not include advisers or inspectors paid on other scales".

  Schools Inspection
  Mr. Rowlands
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what estimate he has made of the number of people from Wales qualified to inspect schools in Wales;

  (2) when he expects to appoint the Chief Education Inspector for Wales;

  (3) how many inspectorate teams will be required (a)to inspect 25 per cent. of secondary schools in 1993–94, (b)to inspect 50 per cent. of secondary schools in 1994–95, (c)

  1009
  to inspect 25 per cent. of primary schools in 1994–95 and (d)to complete a full inspection of all secondary and primary schools by 1997.

  Mr. David Hunt
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd, North-West (Mr. Richards) on 15 July, in which I announced the appointment of the chief inspector for Wales from September 1992. Inspections by teams headed by a registered inspector will be carried out every five years and will start for secondary schools from September 1993 and for primary and special schools from September 1994. It will be for the chief inspector to decide which inspectors should be registered in the light of their qualifications, experience and following training by Her Majesty's inspector.

  When the new system is fully in force in 1995–96, there will be inspections of some 45 secondary schools and some 360 primary, special and nursery schools a year.

  Energy Efficiency
  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what progress has been made in his explorations with Welsh TV concerning how the energy efficiency message can be promoted through popular television programmes in relation to the 1990–91 annual report of the ministerial group on energy efficiency.

  Mr. David Hunt
  My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary has responsibility for energy efficiency in my Department a task, which he has inherited from his predecessor. He will continue to explore with Welsh TV ways in which the benefits of energy efficiency can be promoted in their popular programme.

  A494
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he proposes a public inquiry on the A494 road widening project at Queensferry in Ewloe; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  It is too early to comment on whether I will hold a public inquiry in respect of the proposed improvement of the A494 between River Dee and Ewloe. Once the public consultation exercise is completed I shall consider the comments received and decide whether to protect a route for planning purposes. Should I do so, draft statutory orders, as required by the Highways Act 1980, will be published in due course. Anyone wishing to comment or object to the orders will have the opportunity to do so at that time and depending on the objections received a decision will be made on whether to hold a public inquiry.

  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many representations he has so far received from residents concerning the A494 road widening scheme; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  My Department is currently undertaking a public consultation exercise in respect of proposals to improve a section of the A494 between the River Dee and Ewloe; 463 representations have been received to date.

  National Curriculum Tests
  Mr. Richards
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what arrangements he intends to make for the national curriculum tests in Wales in 1993; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The arrangements for the assessment of seven and 14-year-olds in schools in Wales will parallel those for schools in England as announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education. Additionally for schools teaching the subject of Welsh pupils will be assessed in their language skills in this subject where it is taught either as a first or as a second language.

  The assessment of seven-year-olds will, in 1993, be extended to include the subjects of history and geography. Additionally provison is being made to extend the period in which teachers will be required to administer the tests until four weeks before the end of the summer term.

  Next year's assessment of 14-year-olds will be the first under the statutory arrangements. They will cover the core subjects of English, Welsh, mathematics and science together with technology and Welsh second language. The key features will include:
  assessment by means of a combination of teachers' own assessment and short, unseen written examinations. Pupils' oral skills in Welsh and their designing and making skills in technology will be tested by longer standardised tasks.
  all results, which will be reported to parents, will be subject to a rigorous audit by independent examining bodies.
  test results will be preferred to teacher assessments in determining overall subject scores but both are available in relation to the same attainment target with teacher assessments used in relation to those attainment targets which are not tested.
  the tests will be conducted over a two-week period beginning 7 and 14 June so as to provide organisational flexibility for schools and to minimise the clash with the GCSE timetable in Wales.

CHURCH COMMISSIONERS

  Borrowings
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, as representing the Church Commissioners, if he will give a breakdown of how much has been borrowed by the Commissioners for each year since 1989; and if he will set out the name of the lender and the rates of interest charged for each loan.

  Mr. Michael Alison
  As shown in their annual reports and accounts the additional net amount borrowed by the Church Commissioners in 1989 amounted to £133 million and in 1990 to £70 million. The total outstanding at the end of 1990 amounted to £518 million which was reduced to £383 million in the course of 1991 by net repayments of £135 million.

  I will write to the hon. Member with further information.

SCOTLAND

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

  Mr. Stewart
  I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 13 July, which covered the United Kingdom position.

  Scotland is represented at the United Kingdom advisory group and Scottish Office officials are working closely with those of the Department of Health in the preparations for the year. All the task groups include members from Scotland who are actively involved in the development of a United Kingdom programme which will include a range of Scottish events.

  The Government have acknowledged the importance of the concerns of older people by including in the programme for the United Kingdom presidency of the EC

  Regional assistance in Scotland 1991–92

  Regional selective assistance

  Regional development grants1

  Regional enterprise grants

  Gross expenditure2

  Number of offers accepted

  Forecast new jobs3

  Forecast safeguarded jobs3

  Gross expenditure2

  Gross expenditure2

  Number of offers accepted

  Travel-to-work-area

  £ Thousands

  £ Thousands

  £ Thousands

  Alloa

  641·0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Arbroath

  11,260·0

  3

  70

  80

  29·2

  18·6

  —

  Ayr

  30,050·

  1

  30

  0

  154·8

  —

  —

  Badenoch

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Bathgate

  11,929·5

  13

  950

  250

  3,746·0

  265·6

  23

  Campbeltown

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Cumnock and Sanquhar

  246·0

  7

  260

  0

  3·0

  29·1

  5

  Dumbarton

  716·0

  2

  30

  0

  9·0

  56·6

  4

  Dundee

  2,866·6

  11

  340

  120

  944·7

  192·6

  17

  Dunfermline

  719·0

  3

  70

  0

  —

  41·9

  12

  Dunoon and Bute

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Forres

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Falkirk

  2,334·0

  3

  20

  70

  —

  —

  —

  Girvan

  19·0

  1

  10

  0

  —

  —

  —

  Glasgow

  21,319·7

  62

  2,460

  720

  2,912·6

  1,262·2

  155

  Greenock

  4,717·5

  3

  220

  0

  1,119·7

  19·5

  2

  Invergordon and Dingwall

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Irvine

  3,978·7

  7

  470

  30

  2,095·2

  130·5

  18

  Kilmarnock

  454·0

  5

  110

  30

  49·6

  84·2

  10

  Kirkcaldy

  2,294·0

  8

  640

  130

  —

  25·0

  17

  Lanarkshire

  6,065·9

  30

  810

  420

  1,128·3

  545·6

  69

  Lochaber

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Newton Stewart

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Skye and Wester Ross

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  St. Andrews

  224·0

  1

  30

  30

  —

  —

  —

  Stewartry

  400·0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Stirling

  170·0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Stranraer

  430·0

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Sutherland

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Western Isles

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Wick

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  1 Includes expenditure on original and revised Regional Development Grant schemes. The Regional Development Grant scheme was closed to new applications on 31 March 1988.

  2 Includes payments on offers accepted in previous years.

  3 Forecast at time of offer.

  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list each recipient company and the level of grant provided through regional assistance since 1984–85 in each of the assisted travel-to-work areas 1012
  a major international conference "The Social Integration of the Older Person", which will take place in St. Andrews on 30 September to 2 October 1992 and which will serve as a prelude to the European Year for Older People.

  Assisted Places
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what was(a) the expenditure on regional assistance, (b) the number of offers and (c) the associated numbers of (i) new jobs and (ii) safeguarded jobs for each assisted area in Scotland for the most recent available year;

  (2) if he will give the expenditure on regional development grants in each of the assisted travel-to-work areas in Scotland for the latest available year

  (3) if he will give (a)the expenditure on regional enterprise grants and (b)the number of offers in each assisted travel-to-work area in Scotland for the latest available year.

  Mr. Stewart
  Information is given in the table.

  Mr. Stewart
  Information in the form requested could be provided only at disproportionate cost. In the period 1 April 1984 to 30 June 1992, over 11,000 projects in Scotland have benefited from regional assistance grant offers. Details, including the level of grant, the company name and the location of the project, of projects assisted
  1013
  by regional development grant or regional selective assistance, where the grant exceeds certain values, are published quarterly in "Department of Employment Gazette"—tables 9.6 and 9.8. Similar details were published in "British Business" until this publication ceased in September 1989. Copies of both publications are in the Library. Details of projects receiving regional enterprise grants are not published.

  Fishing Industry
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many fishing vessels from Scotland have been registered in the United Kingdom fishing vessel register for each year for the last 20 years.

  Sir Hector Monro
  The fishing vessel register held by the Department of Transport does not identify where the United Kingdom vessels are based. However, table 1 in the publication "The Scottish Fishing Fleet at 31 December 1990"—ISBN No. 0748 006060—shows the number of fishing vessels based in Scotland each year from 1965 onwards and is available from the House of Commons Library. A similar publication for 1991 is due out shortly.

  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the fishing industry in Scotland.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Given the poor state of a number of our main fish stocks, improved conservation has been a major priority of the Government over recent years. The need to reduce fishing effort is now paramount and our recent package, which includes a substantial financial commitment from the Government for vessel decommissioning is intended to achieve that. I am determined to do all I can to secure a good long-term future for the industry.

  Sheltered Housing
  Mr. Dewar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will provide a table showing the amount of very sheltered housing for the elderly provided by(a) district councils, (b) housing associations and (c) other public agencies, for each district council area in Scotland as at 31 March 1991 or the latest date available.

  Mr. Lang
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Parliamentary Constituencies
  Mr. Charles Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received on the possible implications of future changes in the structure of local government on the shape of parliamentary boundaries.

  Mr. Stewart
  My right hon. Friend has received no such representations. The Boundary Commissions Bill, which is now before Parliament, requires that the Parliamentary Boundary Commission for Scotland, in carrying out its current review of parliamentary boundaries, has regard to local government areas which are in operation at whichever is the earlier of the date of its report or 1 June 1994.

  Speeding
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many police forces in Scotland are fully equipped with remote red light cameras and speed camera technology to meet the requirements, introduced on 1 July, of the Road Traffic Act 1991; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Peebles High School
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how he intends to respond to Peebles high school board's response to consultation paper by Scottish Office Education Department "School Management: The Way Ahead"; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  I am at present giving careful consideration to the response from the Peebles high school board and to the other responses to the consultation paper on school management issued by the Scottish Office Education Department earlier this year. I intend shortly to bring forward firm proposals.

  Road Safety
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to improve road safety education in schools; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Housing Organisations
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what initiatives he intends to take in support of the work of housing associations and co-operatives; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  I shall write to the right hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Scottish Homes
  Mrs. Fyfe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will review the time scale which projects such as Maryhill housing association's Barnes road renewal are required to accept due to Scottish Homes's uncertainty over its own funding from year to year.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The allocation of funds to individual housing association projects is entirely a matter for Scottish Homes and, as such, the hon. Member may wish to pursue her particular constituency interest direct with the chief executive of Scottish Homes. Scottish Homes is allowed to pre-commit up to 80 per cent. of any year's expenditure programme into the next year; this should minimise uncertainty for individual projects.

  Electoral Registration
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to encourage and improve electoral registration in Scotland; what additional resources he intends to provide for this purpose; and if he will make a statement.
  1015
  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Road Junctions
  Mr. Charles Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will estimate the average cost to his Department of a trunk road junction alteration feasibility study; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The cost of a trunk road scheme feasibility study may vary considerably depending on factors such as the scale and complexity of the proposals and topographical constraints. To calculate an "average cost" for junction alterations would serve little practical purpose and could not be taken as an indicative figure.

  Mr. Charles Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland is he will state the total cost involved in preparing, printing and delivering his Department's publication, "A9 Trunk Road: North Kessock Junction"; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Potato Storage
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he intends to reveal the successful applicants for the grant aid provided under the EC processing and marketing scheme towards the provision of potato storage facilities; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  It is for the European Commission to decide which projects should receive grant aid. Final decisions on the current round were taken earlier this month and I expect to be able to announce the outcome shortly. The next round should be decided by the end of December.

  Housing Associations
  Mrs. Fyfe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will give consideration to the difficulties caused to housing associations when they are expected to start work on projects based on agreement in principle, but with no guarantee of funding until completion.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I am not aware of any such difficulties. The grant procedures operated by Scottish Homes do not allow housing associations to start site works until the scheme has been approved, and a formal commitment to funding has been given. Grant is paid out, thereafter, in tranches, as the works proceed.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland 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. Stewart
  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.
  1016
  Small businesses are of crucial importance to the Scottish economy and are continuing to benefit from the comprehensive schemes of support which the Government have introduced. My Department has overall responsibility for assisting small firms in Scotland while specific schemes are delivered mainly through Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and the network of 22 local enterprise companies. In addition to providing services specific to Scotland, these bodies also have responsibility for the delivery and monitoring in Scotland of United Kingdom services on behalf of other Departments including the Department of Trade and Industry. Measures operated directly by my Department to assist small business includes the regional enterprise grant for investment, regional enterprise grant for innovation and regional selective assistance. For the period 1991–92 my Department made 106 offers of regional selective assistance to the value of over £14·5 million to small companies—those employing fewer than 200. This contributed to the creation of 2,120 planned new jobs and the safeguarding of 310 existing jobs. Under both the investment and innovation elements of the regional enterprise grants scheme, 360 offers to the value of £3·9 million were made in Scotland in 1991–92 to companies employing fewer than 25 people, contributing to the creation of 1,450 planned new jobs and the safeguarding of 1,210 existing jobs.

  The success of these and other Government policies is demonstrated by statistics for VAT registration. A total of 9,800 additional companies registered for VAT in 1980. In 1990 the comparable figure was 14,900, an increase of 52 per cent. At the end of 1990 the total number of VAT-registered businesses in Scotland was 115,100, an increase of 21,700 or 23 per cent. on the comparable figure for 1979.

  Electoral Registration
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the fee paid to each of the returning officers in Scotland for general election duties in March and April in the current year.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Anglers
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how he intends to respond to the representations made by the Scottish Anglers National Association; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  Officials from my Department will be meeting the Scottish Anglers National Association to discuss their representations shortly.

  ReChem
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what information he has as to the amount and type of toxic materials deposited by ReChem in the City of Glasgow; if he will list all such sites; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  This information is not available centrally. The City of Glasgow district council is responsible for monitoring records of wastes consigned
  1017
  under the Control of Pollution (Special Waste) Regulations 1980 for disposal in the city of Glasgow. I understand that the council has no record of such wastes being deposited by ReChem.

  Civil Servants (Shareholdings)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland 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. Lang
  I shall reply to the hon. Member in writing as soon as the information is available.

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

  Mr. Lang
  I shall write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

  Women's Refuges
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will introduce legislation making it a statutory requirement on local authorities to provide refuges for women.

  Mr. Lang
  I shall write to the right hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Housing Capital Receipts
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when the results of his review of housing capital receipts will be made known to the public; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  I shall write to the right hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Homelessness
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his estimate of the number of(a) registered homeless and (b) unregistered homeless, in Scotland in each year since 1981; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  I shall write to the right hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Sites of Special Scientific Interest
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what provision is made in central Scotland for sites of special scientific interest of value to the migratory bean goose.

  Sir Hector Monro
  No sites of special scientific interest have been notified in central Scotland in respect of bean 1018
  geese. Scottish Natural Heritage is investigating how the habitat used by the small number of bean geese which winter in the area might most effectively be protected.

  Rescue Archaeology
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the Government's policy with regard to rescue archaeology in Scotland.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Our policy is to ensure that rescue excavations are carried out whenever possible, to record archaeological sites which would otherwise be lost. Where the threat is from development we look to the developer to meet the costs of the excavation.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what guidance his Department has issued to planning authorities in respect of rescue archaeological excavations where the urgency has been caused by(a) natural causes and (b) a development project.

  Sir Hector Monro
  In the case of(a), none; in the case of (b) archaeological desk assessment guidelines.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much money has been spent on or allocated to the work of the central excavation unit in 1989–90, 1990–91, 1991–92 and 1992–93 in(a) Orkney, (b) Shetland and (c) Scotland.

  Sir Hector Monro
  The central excavation unit has not existed for a number of years. The amount of money spent by Historic Scotland and its predecessor body on rescue excavations in the years in question, with an estimate for 1992–93, was a follows:

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  11992–93

  Orkney

  0·098

  0·108

  0·151

  0·102

  Shetland

  0·041

  0·005

  0·028

  0·105

  Scotland

  0·996

  1·373

  1·605

  1·016

  1 Estimated.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what proportion of the annual budget of the central excavation unit was allocated in each of the last five years to rescue excavation in(a) Orkney, (b) Shetland and (c) Scotland: and what sum has been earmarked for each of these areas in the 1992–93 budget for rescue digs.

  Sir Hector Monro
  The central excavation unit has not existed for a number of years. The percentage of the annual budget for rescue archaeology in Scotland spent by Historic Scotland and its predecessor body in each of the last five years in Orkney and Shetland was a follows:

  1987–88

  1988–89

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  Orkney

  16

  13

  10

  8

  9

  Shetland

  5

  7

  4

  4

  2

  The percentage of the total archaeological budget for Scotland spent by Historic Scotland and its predecessor body on rescue archaeology was as follows:

  1987–88

  1988–89

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  94

  86

  81

  85

  87

  Resources are not earmarked for particular areas but for projects. The amounts allocated for rescue projects in these areas in 1992–93 are as follows:

  1019

  £ million

  Orkney

  0·102

  Shetland

  0·105

  Scotland

  1·016

  Conservation
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will request advice from Scottish Natural Heritage on the likely environmental effects of the ending of the conservation management agreements made under the Scottish island agricultural development programme, in March 1993.

  Sir Hector Monro
  There have been mutual benefits for farmers and crofters and the environment from the measures introduced on the Scottish islands under the agricultural development programme, and I have no reason to believe that these will not continue once the programme is completed next year. If necessary I will of course look to Scottish Natural Heritage for advice on this matter, but do not propose to do so at this time.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to provide continuing support for farmers and crofters in receipt of conservation management agreements under the Scottish islands agricultural development programme beyond March 1993.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Support for farmers and crofters to continue or to commence environmentally friendly farming practices is available to those who operate in environmentally sensitive areas. In the Scottish islands, part of the Western Isles is presently so designated, and the Shetland islands and the Argyll islands will be given this status on 1 April next year. Other sources of assistance are available to farmers who carry out works which bring environmental benefits, for example, through the farm and conservation grant scheme. More generally, support for conservation management is now inherent under the agreement to revise the common agricultural policy. It is now incumbent on all member states to bring forward further programmes to encourage environmentally sensitive farming.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the actual or planned expenditure, as part of the Scottish islands agricultural development programme, on conservation management agreements for(a) Shetland, (b) Orkney and (c) the inner Hebrides, for each of the five years of the programme.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Expenditure on environmental management measures in each of the five years of the agricultural development programme is as follows:

  Orkney

  Shetland

  Other ADP islands

  £

  £

  £

  1988–89

  22,082

  4,147

  117,874

  1989–90

  139,433

  22,193

  1126,717

  1990–91

  259,117

  44,673

  1297,408

  1991–92

  133,336

  65,250

  1241,838

  1992–93

  185,000

  55,650

  2260,000

  TOTAL

  738,968

  191,913

  943,837

  1 Actual.

  2 Committed.

  Environmentally Sensitive Areas
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland on what basis the then Nature Conservancy Council for Scotland made its selection of areas appropriate for designation as environmentally sensitive areas.

  Sir Hector Monro
  The then Nature Conservancy Council for Scotland put forward its list of priority areas for designation in a third round of environmentally sensitive areas in response to a request from the Scottish Office Agriculture and Fisheries Department in terms of section 18(1) and (2) of the Agriculture Act 1986. The selection of areas for inclusion in the list was a matter for the council in the light of the guidance issued by the Department.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what criteria his Department has set for the former Nature Conservancy Council for Scotland for application when it is considering areas in Scotland appropriate for designation as environmentally sensitive areas; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  When the Scottish Office Agriculture and Fisheries Department asked the former Nature Conservancy Council for Scotland and the Countryside Commission for Scotland to consider areas in Scotland appropriate for designation in a third round of environmentally sensitive areas, it suggested that the areas should be of high conservation interest; that the conservation interest of the areas should, to a considerable extent, depend on maintaining or adopting particular farming practices; and that the areas should be relatively homogeneous in agricultural terms. In addition, the Department asked the council and commission to consider areas suitable for designation in order to protect or enhance heather or other upland vegetation.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what areas were recommended to him for designation as environmentally sensitive areas by the former Nature Conservancy Council for Scotland prior to the announcement in March 1992 of a further five areas in Scotland.

  Sir Hector Monro
  The Nature Conservancy Council for Scotland's list of priority areas for designation in a third round of environmentally sensitive areas contained the following areas:The Inner Hebrides (Islay, Jura, Colonsay, the west coast of Mull, Coll, the Firth of Lorn, Skye, Lochalsh and the Small Isles), the Cairngorms, Shetland, Orkney, South Lochaber, Deeside, and the Outer Hebrides.
  The council also recommended the southern uplands as an area suitable for designation in order to enhance and restore upland plant communities. In putting forward these recommendations the council indicated that in its view a larger part of Scotland would also benefit from environmentally sensitive area designation.

  West Lothian College
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will set out the latest position on funding the development of West Lothian college.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  New Towns
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give the number and details of European regional development fund assisted projects within each of the Scottish new towns; and which will be subject to disposal on the dissolution of each of the development corporations.

  Mr. Stewart
  The European regional development fund—ERDF—has assisted or is assisting a range of projects in the Scottish new towns as follows:

  Number of projects

  Eligible expenditure

  ERDF Grant

  £ million

  £ million

  Cumbernauld Development Corporation

  15

  12·7

  5·8

  East Kilbride Development Corporation

  8

  17·0

  7·5

  Glenrothes Development Corporation

  15

  2·6

  0·9

  Irvine Development Corporation

  15

  12·5

  3·3

  Livingston Development Corporation

  51

  26·4

  9·9

  Plans for the transfer and disposal of new town assets are currently being formulated in consultation with the development corporations and will take account of the conditions attached to ERDF grants.

  Historic Monuments
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when staff at Historic Scotland commenced work for the paper on alternatives to scheduling to provide protection of monuments in Scotland; when it will be completed; and what its findings were.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Officials in Historic Scotland began an investigation of possible alternatives to scheduling last year. Their findings will be presented to the next meeting of the Ancient Monuments Board, in October.

  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) when the consultants Peat Marwick McLintock commenced their review into the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments (Scotland); how long the review took; when it was completed; how much it cost; and what its findings were:

  (2) if he will instruct the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments (Scotland) to inform Historic Scotland of all cases on damage to scheduled monuments caused by trees and vegetation; and if he will review the liaison mechanisms between the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments (Scotland) and Historic Scotland to secure greater efficiency in the preservation of historic monuments.

  Sir Hector Monro
  I shall write to the hon. Member about these matters.

  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has made additional resources available for 1992–93 to Historic Scotland in line with the recommendations of the Ancient Monuments Board for Scotland.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Resources have been redeployed within Historic Scotland to enable additional staff time to 1022
  be devoted to scheduling in the current financial year, consistent with recommendation two in the Ancient Monuments Board's report for 1991.

  Meeting, St. Andrews House
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he hopes to make a statement on the outcome of the meeting on 13 July at St. Andrews house, Edinburgh between the Minister and the hon. Members for Livingston (Mr. Cook) and for Linlithgow.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Balmoral Estate
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what grants have been given from(a) Scottish Natural Heritage or its predecessor bodies and (b) the Forestry Commission to the owners of the Balmoral estate, in each of the past 20 years.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Grants have been paid to the present owners and their predecessors, in respect of what now forms the Balmoral estate, under the following provisions:

  Countryside Commission for Scotland:

  The Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967.

  Forestry Commission:

  Dedication Schemes Basis II and III (planting, restocking and management grants).

  Woodland Grant Scheme (planting grant).

  Water
  Mr. Welsh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what(a) consultations and (b) meetings have taken place between representatives of (i) OFWAT, (ii) the National Rivers Authority and (iii) other bodies relevant to water and his Department in 1992; and if he will list the dates and locations of the discussions.

  Sir Hector Monro
  No departmental meetings have taken place with representatives of OFWAT during 1992. Many circulars and reports prepared by OFWAT are sent for information to the Scottish Office and contact with officials is sometimes necessary to seek clarification or further information on these. Consultations and meetings with N RA officials and the many other bodies concerned with water take place frequently in the course of normal business. It is not practicable to list dates and locations of all such contacts.

  Mental Health
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish a table showing(a) the allocations made to local authorities as mental health specific grant in each year since 1985 in cash and constant terms and (b) the proportion of these allocations to projects helping people with dementia; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  The information required is not currently available, but I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to introduce policies which will impact upon the provision of respite care in hospitals for
  1023
  people with dementia; what operational aspects of this provision are and will be subjected to compulsory competitive tendering; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to improve information collection systems in health services and local authorities so that accurate statistics can be collected on the numbers of people with dementia who receive services.

  Mr. Stewart
  Accurate statistics on those people with dementia receiving hospital treatment are already available.

  A multi-disciplinary standing group on community care information requirements is currently being established by social work services group to ensure that local social work, health and housing information systems yield a common minimum set of data for use at local and national level. The group will consist of representatives of policy and statistical interests from social work, health and housing branches in the Scottish Office, and representatives from local authority social work, local authority housing and Scottish Homes and health boards.

  At local level these matters are being addressed through joint planning mechanisms.

  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) if he will make a statement on the results of arrangements to monitor the priority that dementia services are given in health board expenditure; how these compare with the recommendations contained in the SHARPEN report of 1988; and what plans he has to change these arrangements;

  (2) if he will list those health boards and local authorities which have treated dementia as a separate special needs category in their community care plans; and if he will make a statement;

  (3) what duties and responsibilities Scottish health boards have in relation to the development of preventative services in the community for people with dementia ; how these are co-ordinated with other agencies; what plans he has to improve joint planning arrangements with agencies including local government; and if he will make a statement;

  (4) what plans he has to increase the level of privatisation of long-term care for people with dementia; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Housing
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) if he will make the sale of Scottish Homes stock in Glasgow open to competitive tender;

  (2) if he will make it his policy to suspend the Scottish Homes transfer process in Glasgow while the National Audit Office is investigating the financial position of the Borders region transfer to Waverley Housing;

  (3) what is Government policy towards the provision of additional inducements to non-profit-making businesses bidding for Scottish Homes stock;

  (4) if he will separate the independent advice role in public sector stock transfer from the disposal agency, Scottish Homes;
  1024
  (5) whether he is prepared to make finance available for independent advice for tenants targeted for change of landlords by Scottish Homes and various housing associations in Glasgow;

  (6) if he will make it his policy to offer choices in stock transfer to tenants of Scottish Homes in Scotland in line with those available to new town tenants;

  (7) what is the district valuers assessment of the current tenanted market value of Scottish Homes stock in north west Glasgow within the area being considered for sale to Cube housing association.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Law Commission
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he intends to reply to the question from the hon. Member for Glasgow, Central of 18 June, relating to the Scottish Law Commission.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  I shall write to the hon. Member shortly and will arrange for a copy of my letter to be placed in the Library.

  Young People (Hardship Payments)
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he intends to take to reduce the number of 16 and 17-year-olds applying for severe hardship payments due to their inability to secure a place on a youth training scheme.

  Mr. Allan Stewart
  I am assured by Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise that there are sufficient youth training places available throughout Scotland for those young people who want one.

  Liaison arrangements exist between the Benefits Agency's severe hardship claims unit based in Glasgow and these organisations and their networks of local enterprise companies, to provide additional help where required to young people claiming a severe hardship allowance while seeking a youth training place. I understand that these arrangements are working satisfactorily.

  Elderly People
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish a table showing the number of national health service beds for the long-term care of elderly people provided through contract arrangements with the private sector for each Scottish health board in each year since 1981; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Dangerous Driving
  Mr. Gallie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he intends to increase the maximum penalty for causing death by dangerous driving or by careless driving while under the influence of drink and drugs.

  Mr. Lang
  The Government recognise understandable public concern about deaths caused by dangerous or careless driving. We propose to increase from five to 10
  1025
  years the current maximum penalty for such offences at the earliest legislative opportunity. This will allow the courts to deal adequately with the worst offenders.

  Parliament House Extension
  Mr. Gallie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects the extension to Parliament House to be completed; and what other plans he has for the provision of accommodation for the Supreme court in Edinburgh.

  Mr. Lang
  The extension to Parliament House will be completed and ready for use by September 1992. Following the completion of the new Edinburgh sheriff court house in 1994 it is proposed that the Lawnmarket building in Edinburgh, suitably refurbished, will be made available for use by the High Court of Justiciary and a phased programme of major repair and refurbishment work undertaken in the accommodation used by the supreme courts in Parliament House. I am inviting interested parties to comment on these proposals which are directed to ensure that the supreme courts in Edinburgh will have fully adequate accommodation well into the next century.

  Fisheries Protection Agency
  Mr. Raymond S. Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to publish the annual report and accounts of the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency for 1991–92.

  Mr. Lang
  I have today published the report, copies of which have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

  Historic Scotland
  Mr. Raymond S. Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish the annual report and accounts of Historic Scotland for 1991–92.

  Mr. Lang
  I have today laid in the Libraries of both Houses copies of Historic Scotland's annual report and accounts for 1991–92.

  Ministerial Meetings
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) when he last met representatives of Scottish chambers of commerce; and what matters were discussed;

  (2) when he last met representatives of the Confederation of British Industry (Scotland); and what matters were discussed;

  (3) when he last met representatives of the Scottish Trades Union Congress; and what matters were discussed.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 9 June 1992]: My colleagues and I frequently meet representatives of these bodies, both formally and informally. Recent subjects discussed include the Scottish economy; the implications of European Community policies; business rates; local government reform; and other matters of interest to business and industry in Scotland. We place a high value on these contacts and look forward to a continuing exchange of views.

  Islands Agricultural Development Programme
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the actual or planned expenditure on the Scottish islands agricultural development programme for(a) Shetland, (b) Orkney and (c) the inner Hebrides, for each of the five years of the programme.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Expenditure under the agricultural development programme for each of the five years is as follows:

  Orkney

  Shetland

  Other ADP Islands

  £

  £

  £

  1988–89

  1,129,404

  419,402

  11,351,562

  1989–90

  2,322,411

  816,581

  12,619,463

  1990–91

  3,000,206

  1,009,961

  13,002,429

  1991–92

  2,713,556

  981,007

  12,865,758

  1992–93

  2,083,209

  1,537,811

  22,279,363

  Total

  11,248,786

  4,764,762

  12,118,575

  1 Actual.

  2 Committed.

  Public Appointments
  Mr. Llwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make it his policy to ensure that all lists of candidates for public appointments in Scotland contain equal numbers of men and women.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 9 June 1992]: All public appointments must be made on the basis of aptitude and merit. It is, however, Government policy to ensure that the names of women are included on the shortlist of candidates for public appointments prepared for Ministers' consideration. Good reasons must be given for the absence of women's names.

  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list any public appointments by his Department since 1987 which have involved people from organisations criticised in published reports by Department of Trade and Industry inspectors.

  Mr. Lang
  Information on public appointments which is held centrally by my Department is not sufficiently comprehensive to enable me to provide the information requested. However, my Department takes all relevant factors into account when considering public appointments.

  Spastics Centre, Elderslie
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he plans to visit the Scottish Council for Spastics' Wallace Court residential centre in Elderslie; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 11 June 1992]: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has no plans at present to visit the Scottish Council for Spastics' Wallace Court residential centre in Elderslie.

  I fully recognise the valuable services which the council provides. My right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State maintains regular contact with the council through my Department's representatives on the council's professional advisory committee.

  Renfrew District
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what consideration he has recently given to giving enterprise zone status to any part of Renfrew district; and what criteria he applied in reaching his conclusions.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 11 June 1992]: Approval has recently been secured for an enterprise zone in Lanarkshire because of the sudden and severe worsening of the economic situation there. This reflects Government policy for enterprise zones which is that no new zones will be created except in very exceptional circumstances. Such circumstances do not bear upon Renfrew district which has the benefit of development area status and the full range of development incentives available from my Department and from Renfrewshire Enterprise.

  Publicity
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish a table showing the total spent on publicity, public relations, publications and press by the Scottish Office in each year since 1982 and the planned expenditure for the financial years 1992–93, 1993–94 and 1994–95; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 11 June 1992]: The figures are:

  £

  1982–83

  541,000

  1983–84

  506,000

  1984–85

  746,000

  1985–86

  895,000

  1986–87

  1,101,000

  1987–88

  1,704,000

  1988–89

  1,927,000

  1989–90

  3,082,000

  1990–91

  2,640,000

  1991–92

  2,349,000

  Estimated expenditure for 1992–93, 1993–94 and 1994–95 is £3·6 million, £2·9 million and £3 million respectively.

  Elderly Forum
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the development of the Elderly Forum movement in Scotland.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 11 June 1992]: I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Sports Facilities
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next plans to meet representatives of the Scottish Sports Council to discuss the development of community sports facilities; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 11 June 1992]: I met the chairman and chief executive of the Scottish Sports Council on Wednesday 3 June. We discussed a number of initiatives which the council is currently promoting, including those which are related to the development of
  1028
  community sports facilities. The council will be keeping me closely in touch with the range of sports matters within its interest. I look forward to further meetings with council representatives from time to time.

  Environment Protection Agency
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received from the CBI in Scotland regarding the proposed Scottish environment protection agency; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 4th June 1992]: The Confederation of British Industry submitted on 8 April 1992 its response to the consultation paper on the proposals to create a Scottish environment protection agency. The confederation generally welcomed the proposals and offered helpful and constructive comments in a number of areas. A copy of its response has been placed today in the House Library.

  More than 160 responses were received as a result of the consultation exercise and they are currently being considered. An announcement about the final shape of my right hon. Friend's proposals will be made later in the summer.

  Official Functions
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list each official function(a) he has hosted in his position as Secretary of State or (b) hosted by the other Scottish Office Ministers or civil servants, since he was appointed; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 11 June 1992]: The information requested is as follows:

  (a) Functions hosted by the Secretary of Slate

  23 November 1990

  Dinner for representatives of Scandinavian Companies in Scotland.

  27 November 1990

  Buffet lunch to mark the visit to London of the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.

  3 December 1991

  Reception for Members of the Board of the Scottish Development Agency.

  15January 1991

  Reception for the Parliamentary Lobby and Gallery Correspondents.

  8 April 1991

  Reception to mark the launch of Historic Scotland as an Executive Agency.

  8 April 1991

  Reception to mark the Japan Festival.

  28 April 1991

  Reception to mark the Diamond Jubilee of the National Trust for Scotland.

  24 May 1991

  Reception to mark the visit to Scotland of o the Rev. Billy Graham.

  12 June 1991

  Reception for Scottish Parliamentarians.

  21 Sepetember 1991

  Dinner in honour of His Excellency Crown Prince Naruhito of Japan.

  24 Sepetember 1991

  Buffet lunch to mark the launch of NHS in Scotland "Charter for Health".

  7 October 1991

  Reception to honour citizens who have assisted the Police.

  26 November 1991

  Buffet lunch to mark the visit to London of the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.

  7 December 1991

  Dinner in honour of His Excellency President Masire of Botswana.

  7 January 1992

  Reception for delegates attending the conference of the University Association for Contemporary European Studies.

  20 January 1992

  Reception for a delegation of Russian Business and Political Leaders.

  22 January 1992

  Reception for the Parliamentary Lobby and Gallery Correspondents.

  19 February 1992

  Dinner in honour of the President of Bavaria.

  1029

  9 March 1992

  Reception to mark the launch of the Community Investment Charter.

  9 June 1992

  Reception for Scottish Parliamentarians.

  (b)(i) Official functions hosted by Mr. Michael Forsyth MP

  17 December 1990

  Christmas Party for disabled and disadvantaged children.

  8 February 1991

  Reception for participants in the World Schools Debating Championship.

  28 February 1991

  Reception to mark the introduction of management reforms in Scottish Further Education Colleges.

  11 March 1991

  Reception to mark the launch of Scottish Further Education Week.

  25 March 1991

  Reception to mark the Centenary of the Scottish Football league.

  23 April 1991

  Reception for delegates to the EC Seed Congress.

  8 July 1991

  Dinner to mark the visit to Scotland by an Australian Commonwealth Parliamentary Association delegation.

  2 September 1991

  Lunch in honour of the New Zealand Education Minister, Dr. Lockwood-Smith.

  3September 1991

  Reception for delegates to a conference of the International Federation of Social Workers.

  20 Sepyember 1991

  Reception to mark the 20th Anniversary of the Children's Hearing System.

  25 September 1991

  Reception for NHS staff in the Greater Glasgow Health Board area.

  30 September 1991

  Reception for the Japanese Rugby World Cup Team.

  1 October 1991

  Reception for members of the Scottish Consultative Council on the Curriculum.

  8 November 1991

  Lunch in honour of the Danish Minister for Education.

  2 December 1991

  Reception to mark 1991: Year of Sport.

  6 December1991

  Reception for drugs and AIDS workers.

  9 December 1991

  Christmas Party for disabled and disadvantaged children.

  (b)(ii) Official functions hosted by Lord James Douglas-Hamilton MP

  14 December 1990

  Reception to recognise the work of the Voluntary Housing Movement.

  15 February 1991

  Reception to launch the publication "Civilising the City".

  10 May 1991

  Reception for the Scout Movement in Scotland.

  12 July 1991

  Reception for the members of the Butler Trust.

  11 November 1991

  Buffet lunch to launch the "Scottish Housing Opportunities" booklet.

  17 January 1992

  Reception for the Business Sponsors of the Arts Incentive Scheme.

  (b)(iii) Official functions hosted bv Mr. Allan Stewart MP

  14 January 1992

  Reception for Japanese Inward Investment companies.

  22 February 1991

  Reception for Enterprise and Education advisers.

  14 March 1991

  Dinner to promote the Industrial De-regulation Initiative.

  28 June 1991

  Reception to mark the Silver Jubilee of the General Teaching Council.

  25 November 1991

  Dinner on the occasion of the visit to Scotland of a European "Quartiers en Crise" delegation.

  13 December 1991

  Reception to recognise Enterprising Scottish companies.

  31 January 1992

  Reception for Japanese Inward Investment companies.

  (b) (iv) Official functions hosted by Lord Slrathclyde

  20 March 1991

  Reception for the Scottish Travel Trade.

  17 May 1991

  Dinner on the occasion of the visit to Edinburgh of the European Monetary Committee.

  1030

  21 June 1991

  Reception for agricultural interests. Royal Highland Show.

  19 August 1991

  Reception for Highlands and Islands interests.

  (b) (v) Official functions hosted by Lord Fraser

  28 May 1992

  Reception to mark the meeting of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh and the American College of Surgeons.

  (b)(vi) Official functions hosted by Sir Hector Monro, MP

  8 May 1992

  Reception for the Scottish Tour of Agricultural Attaches.

  1 June 1992

  Reception to mark the launch of Scottish Natural Heritage.

  (b)(vii) Official functions hosted by Scottish Office officials

  15 February 1991

  Reception to mark the "Carrying Stream" exhibition prepared by the School of Scottish Studies, Edinburgh University—hosted by the Permanent Secretary.

  17 May 1991

  Lunch on the occasion of the visit to Edinburgh by His Excellency the Russian Ambassador—hosted by the Permanent Secretary.

  18 September 1991

  Reception for members of the Alcohol Education Research Council—hosted by the Secretary of The Scottish Office Home and Health Department.

  17 October 1991

  Reception to mark the 150th Anniversary of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain—hosted by the Secretary of The Scottish Office Home and Health Department.

  In addition, hospitality was provided on a number of less formal occasions, including working lunches and dinners.

  Sunday Trading
  Sir John Wheeler
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will set out the arrangements in Scotland for the retail trade to open for business on a Sunday; and what representations he has received in favour of bringing the law in Scotland in line with that of England and Wales as set out in the Shops Act 1950.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 22 June 1992]: The restrictions on Sunday trading contained in the Shops Act 1950 do not apply in Scotland, other than to hairdressers and barbers. Since the start of this year, my right hon. Friend has received two representations advocating the imposition of restrictions on Sunday trading in Scotland.

  Earnings Statistics
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what has been the increase in average male manual earnings in real and constant price terms in Scotland since 1979.

  Mr. Stewart
  The average earnings of full-time male manual employees on adult rates in Scotland increased by two and a half times between 1979 and 1991, which is equivalent to an increase of about one tenth in constant price terms.

  Employment Training
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many places were available in Scotland on employment training in April in each of the years since it started.
  1031
  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 16 June 1992]: The information is not available in the form requested. However, the numbers of employment training places filled in April of each year since the programme started are set out in the table.

  Employment Training filled places in Scotland

  Numbers

  1989

  22,200

  1990

  126,380

  1991

  20,693

  1992

  216,840

  1 March 1990 figure—April 1990 figure not available.

  2 Estimated by Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise (returns from local enterprise companies not yet complete).

  School Playing Fields
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will earmark cash in the Sports Council grant aid to enable the Sports Council to list the current stock of school playing fields land.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 18 June 1992]: School playing fields in the public sector are the responsibility of education authorities and the Scottish Sports Council has no role in their provision, maintenance, or use. I am aware that the Sports Council of Great Britain has been commissioned to compile a register of recreational land, including school playing fields, for England. I am keeping the need for such a register in Scotland under review.

  Water Privatisation
  Mr. Canavan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions his Department has had about the privatisation of the Scottish water industry; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 25 June 1992]: In the course of normal business over the last few months, officials in the Scottish Office Environment Department has been contacted by a small number of organisations to express their views about Scottish water services and investment needs.

  Electronics Industry
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give the total number of jobs in the electronics industry in each of the years 1979 to 1991.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 22 June 1992]: The estimated numbers of employees in employment in electronics, which have been derived from the Scottish register of employment, in each of the years 1979 to 1991 are as follows:—

  Electronics employment in Scotland—1979–1990

  Year

  Gross employment

  1979

  42,500

  1980

  42,100

  1981

  39,100

  1982

  38,700

  1983

  41,500

  1984

  43,500

  1985

  42,800

  1032

  Year

  Gross employment

  1986

  42,200

  1987

  43,600

  1988

  44,800

  1989

  46,600

  1990

  146,500

  1991

  145,500

  1 Provisional.

  Labour Statistics
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total number of part-time and full-time employees in employment for each of the years December 1979 to December 1991, inclusive.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 22 June 1992]: Information at the level of detail required is only available from the censuses of employment conducted by the Employment Department. Within the period of time for which data are requested, information is available for the following years: 1981, 1984, 1987 and 1989. The table shows the figures requested.

  Employees in employment

  September

  Full-time

  Part-time

  1981

  1,593,000

  397,000

  1984

  1,497,000

  407,000

  1987

  1,448,000

  433,000

  1989

  1,502,000

  465,000

  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was(a) the total number, (b) the number of males, and (c) the number of females, of employees in employment and self-employed for each year since December 1979.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 22 June 1992]: The information requested is shown in the table. It has been derived by the Employment Department and is from a series of quarterly estimates of the civilian work force in employment.

  Employees in employment

  Self-employed

  (a)

  (b)

  (c)

  (a)

  (b)

  (c)

  December

  Total

  Male

  Female

  Total

  Male

  Female

  1979

  2,094

  1,197

  897

  157

  127

  30

  1980

  2,037

  1,158

  879

  152

  124

  28

  1981

  1,958

  1,095

  864

  157

  126

  31

  1982

  1,903

  1,067

  836

  172

  133

  39

  1983

  1,891

  1,045

  846

  182

  141

  41

  1984

  1,901

  1,045

  856

  193

  148

  45

  1985

  1,891

  1,031

  860

  203

  158

  45

  1986

  1,863

  1,005

  858

  200

  159

  41

  1987

  1,896

  1,014

  883

  204

  160

  44

  1988

  1,943

  1,016

  927

  226

  173

  53

  1989

  1,971

  1,033

  938

  235

  182

  53

  1990

  1,992

  1,043

  949

  244

  190

  54

  1991

  1,985

  1,031

  954

  264

  207

  56

  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give the total number of employees in employment in services industries and manufacturing for each of the years December 1979 to December 1991, inclusive.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 22 June 1992]: The figures showing the total number of employees in employment in

  1033
  service and manufacturing industries are taken from the civilian work force in employment estimates compiled by the Employment Department. The figures are shown in the table.

  Total employees in employment

  Thousands

  December

  Services industries

  Manufacturing industries

  1979

  1,221

  596

  1980

  1,237

  532

  1981

  1,217

  497

  1982

  1,199

  460

  1983

  1,215

  437

  1984

  1,231

  434

  1985

  1,242

  427

  1986

  1,243

  412

  1987

  1,280

  407

  1988

  1,319

  415

  1989

  1,350

  402

  1990

  1,376

  403

  1991

  1,407

  383

  Forestry Commission Land
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list all the different methods and categories for the disposal of Forestry Commission land and give a definition for each type of disposal; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 29 June 1992]: This information is given in paragraph 18 of appendix IX to the Forestry Commission's 1989–90 annual report and accounts, a copy of which is in the Library.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list all the Forestry Commission land which has been disposed of since July 1981 on an offer-back basis, giving the county or region, name of estate, area in hectares, name of purchaser, book value, sale price, and year sold.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 2 July 1992]: I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

  Disability
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what action is being taken to ensure that rural areas are not discriminated against in the proposed changes in funding for employment rehabilitation for visually impaired people in Scotland.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 30 June 1992]: The provision of all employment rehabilitation services will be subject to competitive tender with effect from 1 April 1993. Guidelines for tendering are still under consideration, but it is likely that tenders will be assessed and contracts awarded against criteria of need, provision of a high-quality service, accessibility and value for money. This process should ensure that all areas of Scotland are covered by provision appropriate to their circumstances.

  Forests
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total amount of forest as a proportion of total land mass in(a) the United Kingdom and (b) each of the other EC nations in (i) 1980 and (ii) the latest year for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.
  1034
  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 8 July 1992]: The United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organisation—FAO—publishes a production yearbook which includes this information. The latest edition is the 1990 yearbook, which includes information for 1989 and 1979. but not 1980. This is given in the table.

  The FAO states that great care should be taken in making comparisons between countries or over time. This is because the definition of forest land may vary between countries, which may also use different definitions in different years.

  Percentage of Land Area Covered by Forest

  Country

  1979

  1989

  Belgium/Luxembourg

  21

  21

  Denmark

  12

  12

  France

  26

  27

  Germany

  29

  30

  Greece

  20

  20

  Ireland

  5

  5

  Italy

  22

  23

  Netherlands

  9

  9

  Portugal

  32

  32

  Spain

  31

  31

  United Kingdom

  9

  10

  Councillors' Allowances
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total cost of all councillors' allowances claimed in return for council duties for the last year for which figures are available shown as a percentage of total local government expenditure in Scotland for the same year; and what are the corresponding percentages for 10 and 15 years earlier.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 6 July 1992]: Councillors' allowances were reviewed following the Widdecombe committee of inquiry and the new scheme was introduced in 1991. Current expenditure figures for those allowances which were subsequently replaced by the new scheme were collected for 1987–88. The total expenditure for that year was £4·5 million—0·13 per cent. of total local government expenditure for that year; this expenditure did not include allowances outwith the scope of the new scheme.

  Corresponding figures are not available for earlier years as such information is not routinely collected.

  Quarrying
  Mrs. Ray Michie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the applications for quarrying operations in Scotland since January 1991, including(a) the exact location, (b) the estimated number of jobs created if each application is successful and (c) the type of stone to be quarried; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 6 July 1992]: The information requested is not held centrally. Such applications are considered by planning authorities in the first instance. Only those that raise defined issues of national importance require to be notified to my right hon. Friend, and only where the authority is minded to approve them. Since January 1991 only one quarrying application has been so notified. This relates to a hard rock quarry at Hill of Gibblestone, Shetland which may generate about six jobs. No decision has yet been reached on this application. In addition, a direction has been issued requiring Western Isles islands council to notify my right

  1035
  hon. Friend if it is minded to approve an application for a hard rock superquarry at Rodel, South Harris. It is estimated that the Rodel application could create 20 to 80 jobs if it is successful.

  Since January 1991 a number of appeals relating to quarrying applications have come before my right hon. Friend. The table summarises the information. Details of the potential number of jobs involved are not held centrally.

  Quarrying application appeals received since January 1991

  Location

  Mineral

  Collace Quarry, Kinross, Fife

  Limestone

  Land of Bellmuir Methlick, Grampian

  Sand and Gravel

  Rothens, Monymusk. Grampian

  Sand and Gravel

  Crutherland, Farm, East Kilbride, Strathclyde

  Brick, Clay, Coal

  Watson Farm, Stonehouse, Hamilton, Strathclyde

  Coal

  Cocklicks Farm/Summerfield Farm, Cummertrees, Annan, Dumfries and Galloway

  Sand and Gravel

  Eastcraigs by Blackridge, West Lothian

  Quartz/Dolomite

  Craigie Hill Quarry, Kyle and Carrick, Strathclyde

  Whinstone

  Townhead Farm, Rigside, Clydesdale, Strathclyde

  Brick/Clay

  Nuclear Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when his Department received a copy of the Environment Statement in support of the low-level solid waste pit extension proposal put forward by AEA Technology for the Dounreay nuclear facility; and what public outlets exist in Scotland for interested parties to examine the report, reference JM/MRC/PF06788.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: Highland regional council submitted a copy of this environmental statement to my right hon. Friend on 29 May. Comments on its content, in particular issues relating to the disposal of low level radioactive waste and the radiological impact, were passed to the council by Her Majesty's industrial pollution inspectorate on 26 June. I understand that the statement was sent to a number of public bodies and was advertised, along with AEA Technology's application for planning permission for the proposed extension, in the local press and in the Edinburgh Gazette. Objections to the proposal could be lodged during the period 29 May to 26 June.

  The environmental statement, and accompanying planning application, were made available for public scrutiny at the council's offices, in Wick, Thurso and Inverness. I understand that the statement may still be inspected by the public at these offices and that copies can be purchased from AEA Technology.

  Travellers
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what planning policy guidance he gives to local authorities over the provision of sites for travelling people.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: Guidance notes on site provision were issued in February 1990 by the Secretary of State's advisory committee on Scotland's travelling people. The notes offer advice to local authorities on such aspects as planning, site selection, the grant scheme and design including construction and layout.

  Public Bodies
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland which non-departmental public bodies are sponsored by his Department; which of these are audited by the National Audit Office; which firms of private accountants audits each of the others; by what method of tendering contracts to such firms are awarded; and for what duration.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 10 July 1992]: Those non-departmental public bodies which are sponsored by the Scottish Office are listed in "Public Bodies 1991", a copy of which is available in the House of Commons Library. That publication also shows which bodies are subject to audit by the National Audit Office. As there are a number of bodies whose accounts are audited by private companies, and the tendering methods vary, I will write to the hon. Member as soon as possible with this information and will arrange for a copy of the letter to be deposited in the House Library.

  Child Care, Fife
  Mr. McLeish
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he received the report of the inquiry into child care in Fife; if he will publish it; what was the total cost of the inquiry; and whether Fife regional council will be asked to make a contribution to the costs.

  Mr. Stewart
  [pursuant to his reply, 26 June 1992, c. 363–64]: My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Scotland, has now decided that the report of Sheriff Kearney's inquiry into children's services in Fife should be published as a return to an order to the House when the House reassembles. This will provide the necessary time for proof reading and printing the report, which is lengthy.

  Doctors
  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.

  Football Matches (Arrests)
  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 as a percentage of attendance in the last five years for which information is available.

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

  Speech Therapy
  Mrs. Fyfe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what is the estimated cost of speech therapy provision for children with records of needs in each of the regional council areas; and how many such children there are in each;

  (2) how much of the speech therapy provision announced on 24 February is to be distributed to (a)under-fives, (b)children in mainstream education and (c)children with mental handicaps.
  1037
  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  As soon as the information is available I will reply to the hon. Member in writing.

ENVIRONMENT

  Cremer and Warner Ltd.
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list any contracts Cremer and Warner Ltd. has been awarded by his Department within the past three years, stating whether the contracts were let by single or competitive tender action; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  The contracts are as follows. All were let by competitive tender.

  Pollution control of hospital incinerators;

  Pollution control for processes involving the manufacture or use of phosphorous;

  Pollution control for inorganic halogen processes;

  Pollution control for metal carbonyl processes and the manufacture of compounds of chromium, magnesium etc.

  Rents Guidance
  Mr. Fishburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to publish the paper inviting submissions on the review of the guidance given to rent officers and rent assessment committees when determining the rents of statutory tenants in London.

  Sir George Young
  A paper seeking views on the issue of the increase in fair rents assessed by rent officers and rent assessment committees is being published today. A copy of the paper is being placed in the House of Commons Library.

  Water Supply (Mecoprop)
  Mr. John Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the current levels of the weed killer Mecoprop in Anglian Water's boreholes; and what evidence the National Rivers Authority has of Mecoprop in Cheshire's groundwater supply.

  Mr. Maclean
  Groundwater used for public supplies is regularly monitored by Anglian Water for Mecoprop. Concentrations greater than 0·1µg/1 have been detected at only two borehole sites. At one of these sites an alternative borehole source is available which contains less than 0·1µg/1; nevertheless, granular activated carbon treatment has been installed to reduce contamination. At the other site Anglian Water installed granular activated carbon treatment which has ensured that the water entering supply now meets the standard of 0·1 µg/1 set in the water quality regulations.

  Similarly, North West Water monitors boreholes in Cheshire, where there is no evidence of contamination.

  Birds (Control)
  Mr. Simon Coombs
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will announce proposals to amend the law relating to the control of pest birds; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  I have announced today proposals to amend the law relating to the killing or taking of "pest" species of birds such as crows, starlings and pigeons, and to introduce a licensing system for pest control.
  1038
  At present, the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 enables farmers, Iandowners and local authorities and other authorised persons to carry out year-round control of 13 species of bird which cause agricultural damage or which endanger public health or air safety. But the European Commission does not consider that the 1981 Act fully complies with the EC birds directive which requires member states to protect all wild birds.

  A consultation paper issued today by the Department of the Environment contains proposals to remove all 13 species from the list in part II of schedule 2 and to move to a system of annual general licences to permit their control. These proposals would meet the requirement of the directive while enabling pest control to continue unchanged.

  Farmers and landowners must be able to continue unhindered with their existing programmes of pest control which have served the country well for a long time. We believe we have found a non-bureaucratic solution that would not create the burdensome problems that caused us to withdraw proposals for a licensing scheme in 1990, and puts it beyond doubt that the Government are meeting their obligations under the directive.

  Only a handful of annual licences would be needed, covering broad geographical areas, one or more species and specifying in general terms the nature of the damage caused. No one would have to apply for a licence, justify control or account for numbers of birds killed or taken. Everyone involved in the year-round control of pest birds would be able to carry on with his or her traditional practices exactly as he or she does now.

  Licences would be considered for renewal each year following advice from the Government's statutory scientific advisers, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, which would monitor the status of the species and alert the Department if populations of any fell to levels where care was needed to maintain a satisfactory conservation status. At the moment, populations of the species are stable or increasing and we do not think that pest control would have any detrimental effect on population levels in the foreseeable future.

  Energy Proposals, London
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the implications for power generation proposals in the east London corridor upon domestic water usage; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  The implications of any power generation proposals for water resources will depend on the particular form of the proposals, and will have to be taken into account in any necessary abstraction or discharge authorisations. Abstractions from tidal waters are, however, very unlikely to have significant implication for domestic water usage.

  Planning Applications
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his planning appeal inspectorate's policy towards a planning application refused by local planning authorities because of the cumulative effect of the relevant proposal when considered with other similar proposals not the subject of the isolated application; and if he will make a statement.
  1039
  Mr. Baldry
  In dealing with any appeal, a planning inspector examines the merits of the case, having regard to all material considerations including those raised by the appellant, the planning authority and other parties.

  In an area where there have been significant developments of a particular type, the question of whether the locality is suitable for further development of that nature may be material. In such circumstances, an assessment or the proposal would need to take into account the likely additional impact the individual proposal would have on the locality as well as the cumulative effect of those similar proposals taken together.

  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from Stoke-on-Trent city council and local authority associations concerning the draft notices implying that an individual notice for all major planning applications should be inserted in the local press; what is his estimate of the cost of such individual notices; what provision he has made to ensure local authorities can meet these additional cost implications; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  A number of representations have been received from local authorities and their associations about the costs of compulsory publicity for planning applications. My Department has recently commissioned research into local authority development control costs which will, among other things, investigate the costs of implementing the new publicity arrangements. The Government are committed to taking these extra costs into account when planning application fees are next reviewed.

  Hide Processors
  Mr. Fry
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will take steps to ensure that British hide and skin processors are not more adversely affected than their Community competitors under the implementation of EC directive 76/464/EC.

  Mr. Maclean
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Chlorofluorocarbons
  Mr. Dafis
  'To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will bring forward proposals to treat chlorofluorocarbons as noxious and offensive gases under the terms of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974, and to instruct Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution to proceed to require the installation of emission statement equipment under the terms of the Act for companies that continue to release CFCs in the production of their products.

  Mr. Maclean
  The production of chlorofluorocarbons is regulated under the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974. There is a duty on the operator to use best practicable means to prevent the emission of noxious or offensive emissions to air. This control regime is being superseded by the new integrated pollution controls established under part 1 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Operators will be required to apply for authorisation on the timetable laid down in the Environmental Protection (Prescribed Processes and Substances) Regulations 1991.
  1040
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to ban the use of hydrochlorofluorocarhon 1342 as a substitute for chlorofluorocarbons.

  Mr. Maclean
  We are not aware of the existence of this chemical and, therefore, have no plans to ban it.

  Municipal Incinerators
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those municipal incinerators which do not meet European standards; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Integrated Pollution Control
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the present status of the programme of implementation of integrated pollution control under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

  Mr. Maclean
  The programme of implementation of integrated pollution control is proceeding as set out in paragraph 4 of schedule 3 to the Environmental Protection (Prescribed Processes and Substances) Regulations 1991.

  Recycling
  Ms. Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those posts within his Department designated to deal with local authority recycling plans.

  Mr. Howard
  Two officials in the Department of the Environment's headquarters and one in each of the Department's 10 regional offices have been given responsibility for dealing with local authority recycling plans.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment 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. Howard
  My Department places a high priority on removing unnecessary burdens from small businesses, particularly in inner cities, where a key aim is to encourage new employment. We have already tackled bureaucracy in our main inner city programmes. For city challenge, we have abolished 80 pages of forms, in streamlining the provision of Government grant and increased the Government contribution on revenue projects from 75 to 90 per cent. I have today announced the 20 city challenge areas which will each receive £37·5 million over five years to support integrated programmes of urban renewal. These will include projects which directly help small business, such as the provision of premises and infrastructure.

  In April 1992, the Planning Inspectorate executive agency instituted performance targets for prompt handling of planning appeals, including those from small

  1041
  businesses. This autumn the existing procedures for simplified planning zones are to be streamlined when the relevant provisions in the Planning and Compensation Act 1991 come into force.

  In partnership with the Department of Industry, my Department is exploring how local authorities can assist industry to comply with regulation, by improving consistency in enforcement. On 30 June, the Government launched a pilot project to establish partnerships between local authorities and local businesses in nine areas across the country, improving communications and clarifying the role of the regulatory authority.

  Eutrophication
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the most recent evidence he has on the extent of eutrophication and algal blooms in the estuarial and coastal waters of the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Maclean
  Observational evidence suggests that there is no increase in the frequency of, and no areas with significant problems from, algal blooms caused by eutrophication in the estuarial and coastal waters of the United Kingdom. However, to obtain more systematic evidence, the National Rivers Authority is gathering data on a regular basis. This will be reviewed in conjunction with my Department at the end of the year, together with the other research which my Department is sponsoring on the subject of algal blooms and nutrients in the North sea.

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

  Mr. Howard
  The aims, objectives and targets of my Department are set out each year in the management information system for Ministers documents which are published. I have placed in the Library of the House copies of the MINIS 13 returns, which provide this information for 1992–93.

  Civil Servants (Shares)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment 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. Howard
  Guidance is given in the Department's staff handbook, which also applies to staff in its next steps agencies. Notices giving specific guidance have also been issued in relation to the sale of the water services industry and the proposed sale of businesses within PSA Services. This guidance instructs staff on how to avoid actual or potential conflicts of interest. Two members of staff have sought advice on their shareholdings since 1987.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Sproat
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what visits he has made to her 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. Howard
  I will write to my hon. Friend.

  Community Charge
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has of the number of local authorities affected by the error in the COMCIS computer programme for community charge collection; what is his assessment of the implications of this; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  I am not aware of the problem to which the hon. Member refers.

  Business Rate
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what indication he has of local authorities including uniform business rate arrears in the figure they give as the additional amounts charged for sums not collected; whether all local authorities are acting consistently on this matter; whether he has issued any guidance to local authorities on this point; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The amounts taken into account as "other adjustments" for the purposes of setting community charges is a matter for each individual charging authority.

  Under the statutory arrangements for the national non-domestic rate it is not necessary for authorities when setting their community charges to make provision in their "other adjustments" for non collection of rates due from non-domestic ratepayers.

  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek to amend legislation so as to reduce the business rate liability of empty shop premises using a charitable or non-commercial information display in their windows as a device to improve security and the environment.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  No.

  Joint Nature Conservation Committee
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to reduce the number of staff of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  None. We await proposals from English Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Countryside Council for Wales, in consultation with the JNCC, for a formal staff complement for the committee.

  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the future of funding and manpower of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
  1043
  Mr. Maclean
  No. The future level of funding for the committee will be determined in the normal way as part of the current public expenditure round. We await proposals from the county councils, in consultation with the J NCC, for a formal staff complement for the committee.

  Listed Buildings
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list all applications to demolish listed buildings in each of the last 12 months; and if lie will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  This information is not readily available.

  Private applications for listed building consent are made to local planning authorities, which refer them to the Secretary of State only if they are minded to grant consent. All applications for listed building consent by local planning authorities are submitted to the Secretary of State for his determination.

  In the financial year 1990–91, 79 private applications for consent totally to demolish listed buildings were referred to the Secretary of State and 33 such local planning authority applications were determined by the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State left local authorities to decide 72 of the private applications and called in the remaining seven for his own decision. Of the called-in applications, consent was refused in three cases and granted in four cases. Of the local authority applications, the Secretary of State refused consent in six cases and granted consent in 27 cases.

  Housing Associations
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the housing authorities that have transferred most or all of their housing stock to housing associations stating in each case the year of the transfer and the number of dwellings transferred.

  Sir George Young
  The information is as follows:

  Local authority

  Year of transfer

  Number of dwellings

  Chiltern

  1988

  4,650

  Sevenoaks

  1989

  6,526

  Newbury

  1989

  7,053

  Swale

  1990

  7,352

  Broadland

  1990

  3,721

  North Bedfordshire

  1990

  7,472

  Medina

  1990

  2,825

  Rochester

  1990

  8,029

  South Wight

  1990

  2,119

  Mid Sussex

  1990

  4,426

  East Dorset

  1990

  2,245

  Tonbridge and Mailing

  1991

  6,382

  Ryedale

  1991

  3,353

  South Bucks

  1991

  3,319

  Christchurch

  1991

  1,542

  Suffolk Coastal

  1991

  5,272

  Tunbridge Wells

  1992

  5,519

  Bromley

  1992

  12,393

  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, what(a) evidence and (b) reports he has received from the Housing Corporation on the affordability of new homes provided by housing associations in England.
  1044
  Mr. Baldry
  The Housing Corporation has made available to the Department the work it has done so far in monitoring the rents set for new housing association homes.

  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what(a) evidence and (b) reports he has received from the Housing Corporation on the affordability of new homes provided by housing associations in England.

  Mr. Baldry
  The Housing Corporation has made available to the Department the work it has been done so far in monitoring the rents set for new housing association homes.

  Rural Development
  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list, with the figures shown as a per capita figure, 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
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him yesterday.

  Land Compensation Act 1973
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment why he decided to seek to remove the words "passed the resolution" from section 29(1) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 by schedule 15, part II of the Planning and Compensation Act 1991.

  Mr. Baldry
  The words referred to had been redundant since enactment of the Land Compensation (Scotland) Act 1973, under which Scottish provisions on land compensation were separated from those applying to England and Wales. Removal of the words thus involved no substantive change in the law.

  Zoos
  Mr. Gale
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to treat the proposed EC directive laying down minimum standards for keeping animals in zoos as a priority during the United Kingdom presidency of the European Community.

  Mr. Maclean
  After taking informal soundings within the Community, we announced our support in principle for the proposed zoos directive earlier this year. More recently however, it has become clear that a number of other member states would not support the current proposals, not least because of concerns about subsidiarity. In view of this, and the pressures on our programme for the United Kingdom presidency, we have concluded that the directive should not be one of our priorities.

  Rents-to-Mortgages
  Sir John Stanley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether the tenants of housing authorities whose homes have been transferred to housing associations will be able to participate in the rents-tomortgages scheme.
  1045
  Sir George Young
  We will be consulting shortly on the proposition that entitlement to a statutory rents-tomortgages scheme should extend to former secure tenants whose homes have been transferred to private landlords.

  Urban Development Corporations
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his plans for the urban development corporations; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The urban development corporations will continue their task of securing the regeneration of their areas until the end of their lifetimes.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what percentage of budgets of each urban development corporation is allocated to community development work or similar grant aid to local community projects; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Redwood
  [holding answer 15 July 1992]: The percentage of each urban development corporation's 1991–92 budget which was specifically allocated to community development is shown. Further expenditure related to community development may be charged to individual UDC projects.

  Percentage of total budget specifically allocated to community development.

  per cent.

  Black Country

  1·27

  Bristol

  1·44

  Central Manchester

  2·31

  Leeds

  1·69

  London Docklands

  4·50

  Merseyside

  1·66

  Sheffield

  2·00

  Teesside

  0·71

  Trafford Park

  3·06

  Tyne and Wear

  1·98

  Urban Development Areas
  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment pursuant to his answer of 9 July,Official Report, columns 307–10, if he will display the figures shown as a per capita figure.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The per capita figure can be arrived at by dividing the figures in the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Darlington (Mr. Milburn) on 9 July Official Report, columns 307–10, by the population estimates given below.

  Population estimates

  (000s)

  Authority

  1987

  1988

  1989

  1990

  Sandwell

  298·4

  296·3

  295·5

  295·0

  Walsall

  281·8

  262·3

  263·6

  263·9

  Wolverhampton

  250·5

  249·4

  249·9

  249·4

  Bristol

  384·4

  377·7

  372·6

  374·3

  Manchester

  450·1

  445·9

  443·6

  446·7

  Newham

  206·5

  207·0

  207·0

  208·6

  South wark

  216·8

  217·0

  219·8

  225·5

  Tower Hamlets

  159·0

  161·8

  163·9

  166·9

  1046

  Authority

  1987

  1988

  1989

  1990

  Leeds

  709·0

  709·6

  711·7

  712·2

  Liverpool

  476·0

  469·6

  465·9

  462·9

  Sefton

  297·3

  297·6

  299·6

  299·6

  Wirral

  334·8

  334·8

  336·2

  335·3

  Sheffield

  532·3

  528·3

  526·6

  525·8

  Hartlepool

  89·8

  88·4

  88·7

  89·9

  Langbaurgh

  145·6

  144·8

  144·5

  144·0

  Stockton

  175·9

  176·8

  176·9

  176·6

  Middlesbrough

  143·3

  143·2

  142·7

  141·6

  Trafford

  216·1

  215·8

  215·3

  214·8

  Salford

  237·7

  235·6

  234·6

  234·1

  Newcastle

  282·7

  279·6

  277·6

  277·8

  North Tyneside

  192·9

  192·9

  192·7

  191·7

  South Tyneside

  156·3

  155·7

  155·8

  156·0

  Sunderland

  297·1

  296·1

  296·2

  296·1

  Note: Figures are not yet available for 1991.

  Source: OPCS Mid-Year Population Estimates.

  Council Tenants
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he intends to take to ensure that council tenants are given the same protection and rights under the Housing Act 1985 and the Land Compensation Act 1973 as private sector tenants; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir George Young
  The Land Compensation Act 1973, together with other relevant legislation. lays down the basis on which compensation is available to those who are adversely affected by action taken under statutory powers. There is in general no difference in the position of public and private tenants under the compensation code.

  Energy Efficiency
  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will publish an update of the league tables on departmental performance of Whitehall-type buildings, and departmental expenditure on energy and energy efficiency measures.

  Mr. Maclean
  Data on the progress of the energy efficiency campaign on the Government estate will be included in the second-year report on the environment to be published in the autumn.

  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will initiate a study into the impact of the client contribution in the home energy efficiency scheme on the level of take-up.

  Mr. Maclean
  The home energy efficiency scheme is cash limited, and there has been no difficulty in meeting its targets. Abolishing the client contribution, far from increasing the numbers who could benefit, would reduce the number of jobs which could be done by increasing the cost of grant for each job.

  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made on the establishment of an independent working party to monitor the progress of Departments of state in implementing the energy efficiency improvements following the annual report, 1990–91, of the ministerial group on energy efficiency.
  1047
  Mr. Maclean
  A working party was set up in 1991 comprising of officials, with outside consultancy support, to monitor and advise on the progress of Departments towards achieving the 15 per cent. energy savings target; it has met three times since December 1991.

  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Secretary of Slate for the Environment how much revenue savings from local authority energy efficiency investments have been recycled into energy efficiency capital programmes and into designated energy funds since April 1990.

  Mr. Maclean
  This information is not collected centrally; it is for local authorities to decide their own expenditure priorities.

  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will publish the 1991–92 annual report of the ministerial group on energy efficiency.

  Mr. Maclean
  I have decided that the responsibilities of the ministerial group on energy efficiency should be taken over by the green Ministers, who co-ordinate environmental initiatives across Government. The second-year report on the environment will include an update on developments in the energy efficiency field and data on the campaign to improve energy efficiency on the Government estate.

  House Renovation Grants
  Mr. Bates
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement about the outcome of his Department's review of the house renovation grant system.

  Sir George Young
  Last July, I announced our intention to review the new renovation grant system to establish how well it is working, and to consider what changes might be needed further to improve its operation. More than 200 responses from local authorities and others were received.

  The review has shown widespread support for the main principles of the new system, particularly the improved targeting of resources on the worst housing and of those least able to pay for repairs. Concerns included the harshness of the means test for grant applicants on lower incomes, the scope for the system still to pay out large grants to those on relatively high incomes, and the resources available to meet demand for grants.

  The question of resources is a matter for the public expenditure survey. In response to the other concerns, I propose making the following adjustments to the system:
  to introduce a limit of £50,000 on mandatory grants to owner-occupiers, tenants and landlords;
  to adjust the grant premium and taper in the means test for owner-occupiers and tenants to give more help to those just above income support level and less to the better off; to uprate the allowances and premiums in the means test to reflect new housing benefit and community charge benefit rates;
  to remove the capital value element of the landlords' test of resources which has proved difficult to work effectively; to increase the limit on minor works assistance to £1,080 per year and to £3,240 over three years;
  to remove some of the obstacles to group repair schemes by adjusting the qualifying criteria both inside and outside renewal areas and by increasing average cost limits per dwelling to £16,000 in London and £13,000 elsewhere.

  I also plan to make a number of minor adjustments to improve the working of the system. Full details of all proposed changes are contained in the Library.
  1048
  These changes will help make the system more effective, by improving targeting of resources on those least able to afford essential repairs. I have decided that it would further complicate an already necessarily complex system to seek to make specific allowance for mortgage costs in the means test, as some authorities have suggested. However, the changes I propose will go a considerable way towards recognising the housing and other costs of lower-income households. All these changes can be introduced under existing legislation or by adjustments to secondary legislation, on which we will consult in the usual way. We aim to implement changes early next year.

  We plan to consult further on two longer-term changes: the introduction of possible target times for local authorities handling inquiries on grants prior to formal application, and extending minor works assistance to mobile home owners for small repairs. These changes could require primary legislation. We shall continue to keep the grant system under review and will consider any further long-term changes that appear desirable.

  Mortgage Arrears
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many homes are expected to become vacant in 1992 as a consequence of abandonment by their former occupiers, generally as a consequence of mortgage arrears.

  Mr. Baldry
  Statistics of mortgage arrears and possessions are collected by the Council of Mortgage Lenders. The figures for the first half of 1992, to be published shortly, will incorporate details of "voluntary possessions", which include those arising as a consequence of abandonment by their former occupiers.

  Unitary Authorities
  Mr. Matthew Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what powers he has to ensure localities neighbouring shire counties are included in the review by the Local Government Commission for consideration of the granting of unitary authority status.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Under section 13 of the Local Government Act 1992, the Secretary of State may direct the commission to conduct reviews of specified areas, and he may vary his direction to the commission to include areas adjacent to those so specified.

  Greater London Council
  Mr. Thomason
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give details of the resources released through disposal of surplus assets consequent upon the abolition of the Greater London council.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Since its inception in 1986 the London residuary body has distributed £522·16 million in capital receipts to the London boroughs.

  Atmosphere
  Mrs. Gorman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give the relative proportions of(a) water vapour, (b) methane and (c) sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere.

  Mr. Maclean
  The concentrations in the lower atmosphere of water vapour and methane relative to
  1049
  sulphur dioxide are on average approximately 10 million and 1,000 respectively. Both water vapour and sulphur dioxide concentrations vary considerably with geographical location, altitude and meteorological conditions.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Thomason
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will indicate the change in cost for the provision of local government services in the former

  Local authority revenue expenditure 1984–85 to 1986–87

  Total Expenditure

  1984–85

  1985–86

  1986–87

  Change 1984–85 to 1985–86

  Change 1985–86 to 1986–87

  £ million

  £ million

  £ million

  Per cent.

  Per cent.

  Metropolitan Areas

  10,332

  10,218

  11,297

  —1·1

  10·6

  Non-metropolitan areas

  10,979

  11,443

  12,463

  4·2

  8·9

  All England

  21,312

  21,661

  23,760

  1·6

  9·7

  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those local authorities which benefit from the area cost adjustment, and by how much, in the years 1990–91, 1991–92 and 1992–93.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: I will write to the hon. Member.

  Jubilee Line
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on his Department's assessment of the effect of the Jubilee line extension on economic regeneration in the east Thames corridor.

  Mr. Baldry
  The proposed Jubilee line extension is one factor being taken into account in the study of development capacity and potential offered by the east Thames corridor, which is being undertaken for this Department by consultants.

  Standard Spending Assessments
  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when, and in what manner, he proposes to utilise information for the 1991 census in calculating the standard spending assessment of local authorities.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Sheffield Development Corporation
  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) how many jobs, excluding those at Meadowhall, the Sheffield development corporation has created to date;

  (2) how much land Sheffield development corporation has made ready for development to date, excluding Meadowhall;

  (3) how much money the Sheffield development corporation has spent to date;

  (4) what plans he has to extend the life span of Sheffield development corporation;

  (5) what plans he has to extend the boundaries of Sheffield development corporation;

  (6) when he expects the Sheffield development corporation to be wound up.
  1050
  metropolitan county areas as compared with non-metropolitan areas in the financial years preceding, including and succeeding the abolition of the metropolitan county councils.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The information requested is as follows:

  Mr. Robin Squire
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Environment Council
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to meet the director of environmental affairs at the Confederation of British Industry before 19 October, to discuss the implementation of the United Kingdom priorities for the presidency of the European Environment Council.

  Mr. Maclean
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Environmental Organisations
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the progress made with(a) the Advisory Committee on Business and the Environment, (b) the Central and Local Government Environment Forum and (c) the Voluntary Sector Environmental Forum since each was established last year.

  Mr. Maclean
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Cryptosporidosis Outbreak, Hull
  Mr. Michael Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether, following the outbreak of cryptosporidosis in Hull, he has decided to prosecute Yorkshire Water Services Ltd. for supplying water unfit for human consumption.

  Mr. Howard
  I have now received the recommendation of the chief drinking water inspector following his investigation of the outbreak of cryptosporidosis in the Hull area in December 1989 and January 1990.

  Section 54 of the Water Act 1989—now replaced by section 70 of the Water Industry Act 1991—made it a criminal offence for a water undertaker to supply water unfit for human consumption. It is, however, a defence under the Act for the undertaker to show that all reasonable steps were taken and all due diligence exercised to secure that the water was fit for human consumption.

  The inspectorate's investigation was based on the report of the outbreak control group—made up of representatives of the health authorities, the local

  1051
  authorities, the water company and the Public Health Laboratory Service—which was completed and made available to the public in March 1991. The inspectorate then sought advice from the Government's Chief Medical Officer, from independent experts on epidemiology and water treatment, and from leading counsel.

  The inspectorate's investigation of the Hull case has been extensive and thorough, and carried out in a professional manner. I have accepted the chief inspector's recommendation that, in the light of best expert advice available, the evidence is not sufficient to form the basis for a successful prosecution. I have asked the inspectorate to prepare a report on any lessons to be learned from the incident and for the report to be made public.

  There are a number of gaps to be filled in scientific knowledge about cryptosporidium and, in accordance with the recommendations of the expert group chaired by Sir John Badenoch, a collaborative research programme co-ordinated by the inspectorate is seeking to do that.

  The inspectorate is continuing its investigations of certain other incidents, and in some of these cases is considering the possibility of prosecution.

  City Challenge
  Mr. Michael Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, which local authorities have been successful in the city challenge round two competition.

  Mr. Howard
  My ministerial colleagues and I have carefully considered the 54 bids submitted by local authorities and their partners for the round two city challenge competition. We came to the conclusion that the following local authorities should, with their partners, be invited to prepare five-year action plans to start in April 1993:Barnsley, Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Brent, Derby, Hackney, Hartlepool, Kensington and Chelsea, Kirklees, Lambeth, Leicester, Newham, North Tyneside, Sandwell, Sefton, Stockton, Sunderland, Walsall and Wigan.

  It is intended that these 20 inner-city areas will, subject to agreement of their individual action plans and satisfactory performance, share £750 million in Government city challenge funding over five years to support major regeneration programmes.

  Since city challenge was launched by the then Secretary of State for the Environment in May 1991, it has created an unprecedented partnership between local authorities, businesses and local people. At the same time, it has brought together Government Departments and all the other agencies involved to identify needs and promote opportunity. City challenge confirms the value of competition, already demonstrated in other initiatives such as housing investment programmes and training credits.

  Last year, 11 areas were successful in the first—'pacemaker'—round of city challenge. The 20 new winners will be able to draw on this experience and example of the pacemakers whose programmes started last April.

  Unsuccessful authorities will naturally be disappointed. But the proposals they have drawn up will provide a focus for future development of their area, and may be used as a basis to make progress through private and public funding of some initiatives.

  In the meantime, Government Departments will continue to co-operate with all inner-city local authorities and other interested parties to assist urban renewal efforts. These areas will continue to be eligible for support from
  1052
  the range of targeted programmes including city grant, derelict land grant and estate action. Outside London, most inner-city areas are also eligible for regional enterprise grants for innovation.

  Alongside city challenge this year, we also invited local authorities to make a case for an inner-city task force. We received 15 bids. Most of the bids identified areas of high deprivation which task forces are intended to address.

  I am announcing today the opening of new task forces in Birmingham, Haringey, Plymouth and Stockton. Two of these, Birmingham and Stockton, will link with new city challenge areas to reinforce those initiatives directed at disadvantaged local residents. But two of the strongest cases came from areas which were not successful in city challenge round two. I believe that task forces in Haringey and Plymouth will of themselves be able to achieve significant benefits for local people.

  The task force initiative is a rolling programme and we will in the course of the coining months be closing the task forces in Bristol, Coventry, Middlesbrough and west London whose work is nearing completion.

  Urban Regulation Agency
  Mr. David Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has developed his proposals for an urban regulation agency.

  Mr. Redwood
  I shall shortly issue a consultation paper which will set out my proposals for the agency.

  Toxic Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the implications for future imports of toxic waste into the United Kingdom of the European Court of Justice ruling on 9 July on the case of the appeal against the government of Wallonia in Belgium over its banning the import of toxic and hazardous wastes.

  Mr. Maclean
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Domestic Fuels (Sulphur Content)
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking to regulate the sulphur content of domestic solid fuels.

  Mr. Maclean
  My Department has today issued a consultation document proposing a prohibition on the supply for domestic use of solid fuel with a sulphur content greater than 2 per cent. by weight. A copy has been placed in the Library of the House. The Government are firmly committed to controlling emissions of sulphur dioxide—SO2—a national and local level in order to protect human health and the environment. The proposed measure will help to contain SO2emissions, particularly in areas where extensive use is made of solid fuel. It will reinforce our work on improving air quality through the clean air Acts and contribute to our compliance with the mandatory European air quality standards.

  The proposal has been endorsed by the statutory committee on hazardous substances as required under section 140 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Consultees have until 18 September to submit comments.

  United Nations Environment Fund
  Mr. Merchant
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the level of the Government's contribution to the United Nations Environment Fund in 1992; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  The United Kingdom gave £4·5 millionߞUS$7·7 million-to the United Nations Environment Fund this year, £0·5 million more than our contribution in 1991. This is the second successive annual increase in the United Kingdom's contribution and makes the United Kingdom the largest single contributor to the environment fund. I would urge other countries to make similarly generous contributions to this important work.

  Public Appointments
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list any public appointments by his Department since 1987 which have involved people from organisations criticised in published reports by DTI inspectors.

  Mr. Howard
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: Such information is not available centrally, but in making appointments full account is taken of all relevant factors.

  Departmental Advisers
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment 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. Howard
  [holding answer 14 July 1992]: I am aware of none.

  Noise
  Mr. Adley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will include rights, within the citizen's charter, for those living alongside, or underneath, the creators of environmentally damaging noise.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 13 July 1992]: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram) on 7 July, Official Report, column 154, on the proposed charter for local authority environmental services. We would expect such a charter to include rights for people who are disturbed by certain noisy activities.

  Cities
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what criteria are used in determining city status for local authorities.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I have been asked to reply.

  In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the title of city is an honour conferred by the Sovereign, by letters patent; it is not a right, which can be claimed by the fulfilment of specific conditions.

  Southport
  Mr. Matthew Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he received the report of the Local Government Boundary Commission for England on a review under schedule 9 to the Local Government Act 1972 initial review of counties in relation to Southport.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  I have been asked to reply. I will write to the hon. Member.

  Secret Intelligence Service
  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the capital cost of the Secret Intelligence Service headquarters building that is currently under construction at Vauxhall.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I have been asked to reply.

  The cost of the Vauxhall site and office construction is in the region of £150 million. The cost of adaptation, which will be borne out of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office vote, is estimated to be of the order of £90 million.

  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will state the reasons why the Secret Intelligence Service is moving from its existing office accommodation to a new building at Vauxhall.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I have been asked to reply.

  The new building at Vauxhall will provide SIS with the facilities it needs to undertake its important work.

  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what alternative sites were considered for the relocation of the Secret Intelligence Service headquarters building.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I have been asked to reply.

  As is normal Government practice in projects of this type, a large number of sites were considered.

  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the cost per square foot of the office space currently used by the Secret Intelligence Service; and what will be the corresponding cost in the new headquarters building at Vauxhall.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I have been asked to reply.

  The contractual rent of the present headquarters of SIS is some £9 per square foot. Since the Government own the freehold of the building at Vauxhall, there is no directly comparable rent. But the value used as the basis for acquisition in 1989 was £29 per square foot.

  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received concerning security arrangements at the new Secret Intelligence Service headquarters building.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I have been asked to reply.

  It has been the policy of successive Governments not to comment on matters of this nature.

  Radioactive Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the safety of the current storage of corroded radioactive metal canisters
  1055
  arising from the reprocessing of Magnox fuel at Sellafield; and what discussions he has had with British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., over the future management of this radioactive waste.

  Mr. Eggar
  I have been asked to reply.

  Before 1991, metal cladding from the reprocessing of Magnox spent fuel at Sellafield was placed by British Nuclear Fuels plc under water in storage silos at the site.
  1056
  This intermediate-level waste is subject to continuous surveillance and monitoring to ensure its safe storage pending retrieval and treatment.

  As part of the company's ongoing programme to improve its storage and handling of radioactive wastes, BN FL has built new facilities for the safe encapsulation of' this material. The Magnox encapsulation plant for solid waste started operation in 1991 and a second facility, which includes the capability for sludges, is expected to come on stream early next year.

Preamble
The House met at eleven of the clock (Prayers having been read earlier at the Judicial Sitting by the Lord Bishop of Worcester.): The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax—Took the Oath.

Royal Assent
The Lord Chancellor (Lord Mackay of Clashfern): My Lords, I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified her Royal Assent to the following Acts:

Appropriation (No.2) Act,

Finance (No.2) Act,

Community Care (Residential Accommodation) Act,

Carriage of Goods by Sea Act,

Protection of Badgers Act,

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act,

Tribunals and Inquiries Act,

Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Disclosure of Information) Act,

Peterhead Harbours Order Confirmation Act,

Ulster Bank Act,

Cattewater Reclamation Act,

River Humber (Upper Pyewipe Outfall) Act.

Brompton Hospital: Future
11.2 a.m.
Lord Hatch of Lusby Lord Hatch of Lusby asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will give an assurance that the Royal Brompton National Heart and Lung Hospital will be maintained and not be moved from its existing site in Chelsea as a result of the Tomlinson findings.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Cumberlege): My Lords, the Government cannot decide the future of individual hospitals until after Sir Bernard Tomlinson's report is received by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Health.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, does not the noble Baroness agree that the hospital, with its treatment, research and teaching, is a unique national asset? In the international world it is upholding British medical traditions in all those aspects of its work. Is it not important therefore to keep that national asset on the site of the new hospital to where it was recently moved?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, I know the great respect and esteem in which the hospital is held both in this country and internationally. Eighty-five per cent. of the patients treated at the Brompton come from this country.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, as one whose wife was recently a patient in that magnificent hospital, I find myself in the unusual position of strongly supporting the noble Lord, Lord Hatch of Lusby.
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, unity is pleasurable.
Baroness Gardner of Parkes: My Lords, can the Minister confirm that the Government are aware of the great role that attaches not only to the Brompton but to all the special health authorities which have the postgraduate teaching institutes for medicine attached to them, bearing in mind the important role that they play in educating our doctors? Will the Government take that fully into consideration when deciding the future of services in London, and will they bear in mind the national importance of hospitals such as the Brompton, on whose board I served as a governor for 17 years?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, my noble friend is right. That is one of the many considerations that Sir Bernard and his team will bear in mind when producing their report.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, I warmly support what was said about the Royal Brompton Hospital, and the Minister's reply in relation to the Tomlinson report. Can the noble Baroness assure the House that we shall have the opportunity to consider the recommendations of Sir Bernard Tomlinson before any decisions are taken by the Government?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, I cannot believe that a review on this scale would not generate some public debate.
Lord Carter: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Royal Brompton, like some other London hospitals, is facing a severe financial crisis? It is having to cut back some of its services and to downgrade some of the senior and clinical nursing posts. Can the Minister assure the House that changes in the hospital service in London which follow the Tomlinson report will be based on a system of proper planning and consultation rather than the haphazard operation of the so-called internal market?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, any major decisions such as hospital closures are always subject to consultation before the Secretary of State takes a view.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, can the noble Baroness tell the House when she expects to receive the Tomlinson report? To return to my original Question, does not the noble Baroness agree that it is important that the Royal Brompton Hospital, as a national asset with an international reputation, should have its name preserved? As the hospital was moved quite recently, is it not important also that its work should not be disrupted once again by its being moved to another site?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, considerable investment has been placed in the Brompton Hospital. Over the past four years, £26 million has been invested

315
in the new capital plant, and the revenue allocation for the current year was increased by nearly 15 per cent. The Tomlinson inquiry will report early in the autumn. The Secretaries of State for Education and Health will then establish a special unit to implement the Government's decisions and to help manage the changes. The Government wish to ensure that their decisions are acted upon decisively and rapidly.

NHS Staff Contracts: Confidentiality
11.6 a.m.
Lord Carter Lord Carter asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will introduce legislation to prohibit confidentiality clauses in National Health Service contracts of employment.
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, the Government have no plans for such legislation. However, new staff guidelines for expressing views about NHS service provision will be issued for consultation shortly.
Lord Carter: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Do the Government agree with the Health Service Commissioner that NHS staff should not be inhibited from raising issues concerning the care of patients? Does she further agree with the NHS consultants' association that the priorities of NHS staff should be, first, to the patient; secondly, to the original concepts of the health service; and, thirdly, to the hospital unit in which they work?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, all staff should have an opportunity to bring before their local management any grievances that they feel. Banning confidentiality clauses is not the answer. However, as the noble Lord said, there is a need to strike the right balance between the responsibility of staff to patients and loyalty to their employers. The guidance we propose to issue will help to ensure that the right balance is struck.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, does the Minister agree that a special situation exists in relation to those NHS staff who are directly involved in patient care? Therefore is not their first responsibility to patients? Will she accept from me my pleasure on hearing her say that there is no place for confidentiality clauses in such agreements?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, the noble Lord misunderstands me. I said that I did not believe there was a case for banning confidentiality clauses in the terms and conditions of service. Staff have a duty to patients; they also have a duty to their employers. Open hospitals that are self-critical and generate an atmosphere of care and compassion certainly encourage staff to come forward with any complaints that they may have.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, as I misunderstood the reply given by the Minister, will she permit me to withdraw the compliment that I paid to her?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, I am heartbroken.
Lord Carter: My Lords, if the Government are not prepared to ban so-called gagging clauses, will the Minister say how they are compatible with the aims of the Patient's Charter? How can the Government and the health service ensure that standards set for the charter are achieved if staff are silenced and prevented from speaking about the poor standards of care which sometimes occur?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, it is up to local managers to manage. The NHS has invested considerable sums of money in improving management within the NHS. Aggrieved staff, or staff who feel that they have a case concerning patients, have the opportunity to go not only to their local manager, but to the chief executive, the non-executives and the chairman of the board. They can also go to the regional health authority and the NHS management executive. They can seek support from staff associations and professional bodies. As a last resort they can take their case to the Health Service Commissioner.
Lord Bruce of Donington: My Lords, will the noble Baroness clarify the position as regards aggrieved patients? As she well knows, there are cases in which patients have a legitimate claim against a particular institution for lack of proper care. Are we to understand from the Minister that a person in a hospital who knows that things are wrong is prohibited from communicating in any way with the patient concerned? Does she believe that the confidentiality clause that she proposes will override any subpoena served on the person concerned?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, of course staff have a very responsible and prime duty towards their patients. I am saying that if the staff have a cause for grievance then their first port of call should be the local management. If that management is uncaring or does not listen, then there are the lines further up the chain which I mentioned in my previous answer.

Thoroughfares in London
11.12 a.m.
Lord Greenway Lord Greenway asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will take action to preserve thoroughfares of special tourist interest in London.
Viscount Astor: My Lords, we have in this country an excellent system for ensuring the conservation of buildings, including development planning controls for their erection or modification. These take into account the impact of developments on the surrounding environment and help to ensure the conservation and preservation of our built heritage. This is of benefit to both visitors and local residents.
Lord Greenway: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Are the Government aware that certain areas of special charm and interest in London are in danger of disappearing? For instance, there is the area of Cecil Court and St. Martins Court between Charing Cross Road and St. Martins Lane which is well known for its specialist book and ephemera shops and where

317
owners are in grave danger of being forced out by ever-increasing rent rises. Can the Minister say whether there is any way that action can be taken now before it is too late to prevent central London being deprived of these areas of special interest to both tourists and locals alike, presumably to be replaced by yet more litter-producing fast-food outlets and tat shops?
Viscount Astor: My Lords, rent increases are a matter for negotiation between the landlord and tenant in accordance with the terms of the lease. It is not for the Government to intervene. However, I am not aware in the area that the noble Lord mentioned of any rents being demanded which are exorbitant. Of course the change of use from a retail shop to something else requires planning permission.
Lord Morris of Castle Morris: My Lords, is it not a fact that Cecil Court is already in a conservation area? Is it not also true that use class orders prevent a change of use between different shops without planning permission from the local authority? Does the Minister agree with me that the best service that bibliophiles like him and me can render to Cecil Court would be to get up there this afternoon to purchase some of the excellent books which are to be had at most advantageous prices?
Viscount Astor: My Lords, I certainly agree with the last point made by the noble Lord. Local authorities have powers to designate conservation areas and Cecil Court and St. Martins Court are within such an area. The local authority is required to formulate proposals for preserving and enhancing a conservation area. Use class orders prevent certain types of shop use being changed without planning permission; for example, a book shop could not become a building society or an antique shop a fish-and-chip shop without planning permission.
Baroness Gardner of Parkes: My Lords, will the Minister confirm that he is aware of the importance of tourism to London which is mentioned in the Question and of the great income which it creates, besides the importance of retaining all our traditional things which are so valued by people overseas?
Viscount Astor: My Lords, I certainly am aware of that. Tourism represents at least £25 billion to this country's gross domestic product. It also employs 1.4 million people. I would draw your Lordships' attention to a letter in The Times today from the Chairman of the British Tourist Authority in which he says:
"Official figures for the first four months of this year show that overseas visitors are, once again, arriving in record numbers. In April alone,1.5 million overseas visitors spent an estimated £570 million".

Legal Aid
11.15 a.m.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter Lord Boyd-Carpenter asked Her Majesty's Government:
What action they are taking to halt the growth in the cost of legal aid.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, we are determined to improve the control over legal aid expenditure. I have already announced that standard fees are to be introduced later this year for the majority of criminal legal aid cases in magistrates' courts.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, I thank my noble and learned friend for that helpful reply, but can he indicate whether the increase in the cost of legal aid over the past two or three years has been faster than for any other social service?
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, it is true that the rising cost of legal aid is a source of anxiety. There are two elements in this. One is that the number of people helped is increasing. The principal concern that I have is that in my view the rate per case is increasing faster than it should. It is certainly rising faster than the annual rate up-rating that I allow under the regulations. That is one of the reasons why in my view an extensive system of standard fees would be a considerable improvement.
Lord Hooson: My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord agree that, as regards the first part of his reasoning, the most effective way of controlling the cost of legal aid is to control the growth of crime in this country? Does he further agree that it is the enormous increase in crime which is mirrored in the increasing cost of legal aid, certainly on the criminal side?
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, the noble Lord has just pointed out that there are two sides to the question of legal aid; one is civil and the other criminal. The rise in prosecutions for crime rather than the crime rate itself has an effect. That is the first factor that I mentioned. The second factor remains important and it is one which I believe should be subject to control.
Lord Renton: My Lords, as regards legal aid in civil cases, is my noble and learned friend quite sure that all that can be done is being done to take advantage of the conciliation process which exists, especially in Family Division cases?
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, in granting legal aid the legal aid authorities have to take account of what is a reasonable action on the part of the person applying for legal aid. I personally would like to see conciliation used greatly in matrimonial and family cases. I believe that it is a very useful way of helping people to solve their own problems in that area.
Lord Richard: My Lords, perhaps I may put two questions to the noble and learned Lord. First, why is it that he has decided to proceed with standard fees in magistrates' courts in advance of the decision of the Royal Commission which, as I understand it, is going to consider this point in particular? Secondly, does he agree that, however one wants to slow down the growth in legal aid, one way in which it should not he done is by delaying the payment of fees which have been properly incurred and properly taxed? In that

319
respect is he satisfied with the operation of the central taxation unit which he has set up as regards the payment of legal aid in criminal cases?
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, it is clear that the present system of legal aid taxation in individual cases is a costly procedure which takes time. As regards the central taxing units, they are concerned primarily with cases in which the fees charged are £4,000 and over. It is necessary that these should be examined thoroughly. The improvement in the performance of the taxing teams has been quite considerable. I hope that further improvements will eventuate.
On the first point, the Royal Commission is considering the system of criminal justice under a wide-ranging remit, but I have responsibility for determining legal aid remuneration. I shall, of course, pay attention to anything that the Royal Commission may say on the matter, but it is quite clear to me that the Royal Commission does not wish to intervene between me and the profession in my discharge of my duty. It may comment on the result.
Baroness Faithful,: My Lords, may I ask the noble and learned Lord whether a lot of legal aid could be saved by the better programming of court hearings?
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, the programming of court hearings is quite a difficult operation because so many people have to be considered. Obviously, in so far as it is possible, we are seeking to improve these arrangements and any improvement necessarily produces a saving in costs when it works. The main difficulty in programming courts is the number of people and interests which have to be taken into account in reaching a view of the date on which a case will start. Perhaps I may say in elaboration of that that, even when one has fixed a date for a case to start, one often finds that the case collapses at the last minute. That is the sort of problem that the listing officers face.
Lord Harris of Greenwich: My Lords, is the noble and learned Lord aware of the statement made by Judge Stephen Tumim in his report on Feltham young offenders' institution, pointing out that in the first nine months of last year over 700 inmates were not produced in court, thus causing wholly unnecessary expenditure on legal aid? Is he also aware that when replying to the debate on young offenders, the noble Viscount, Lord Astor, said that that problem existed in other institutions as well? Given his responsibility both for legal aid and for magistrates' courts, can the noble and learned Lord tell us what action he hopes to take to deal with this situation?
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, there is undoubtedly a difficulty and this is an illustration of the point that I was making in response to the last question. If a case is listed and one of the principal parties to the case does not arrive for reasons within the control of others, whatever arrangements the listing officer has made are rendered nugatory. I am very concerned about this particular problem, and I
320
believe that it is being dealt with, particularly by the department for which the noble Viscount, Lord Astor, was speaking when replying to that debate.

Foreign Compensation (Amendment) Bill [H.L.]
11.22 a.m.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lady Chalker of Wallasey, I beg to introduce a Bill to amend the Foreign Compensation Act 1950 so as to extend the powers to make Orders in Council under Section 3 of that Act; and for connected purposes.
I beg to move that this Bill be now read a first time. Moved, That the Bill be now read a first time.—(Baroness Trumpington.)
On Question, Bill read a first time, and to be printed.

Damages (Scotland) Bill [H.L.]
Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Macaulay of Bragar, I beg to introduce a Bill to clarify and amend the law of Scotland concerning the right of certain relatives of a deceased person, and the right of executors, to claim damages in respect of the death of the deceased from personal injuries; to make provision regarding solatium where personal injuries result in loss of expectation of life; and for connected purposes.
I beg to move that this Bill be now read a first time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read a first time.—(Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove.)
On Question, Bill read a first time, and to be printed.

Midland Metro Bill [H.L.]
Read a second time, and committed to an Unopposed Bill Committee.

Liaison Committee
The Chairman of Committees (Lord Ampthill): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That a select committee be appointed to advise the House on the resources required for select committee work and to allocate resources between select committees; to review the select committee work of the House; to consider requests for ad hoc committees and report to the House with recommendations; to ensure effective co-ordination between the two Houses; and to consider the availability of Lords to serve on committees;
That as proposed by the Committee of Selection, the following Lords be named of the Committee—

L. Belstead,

L. Cledwyn of Penrhos,

L. Dormand of Easington, B.

Hylton-Foster,

E. Jellicoe,

L. Jenkins of Hillhead,

L. Thurlow.,

L. Wakeham (L. Privy Seal) (Chairman).

That the Committee has leave to report from time to time;
That the Committee has power to appoint specialist advisers.—(The Chairman of Committees.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Boundary Commissions Bill
11.24 a.m.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this Bill is to facilitate the work of the Parliamentary Boundary Commissions so that their reports can be presented in good time in order that the next general election may be fought on up-to-date boundaries. Were it not for the Bill there would be a very real danger that the next election could be fought on boundaries which would be nearly 20 years out of date.
Since the present boundaries were drawn up, population changes have caused wide disparities in constituency electorates. In England, these now range from just over 42,000 to more than 101,000—a difference of some 60,000. Similar disparities exist in the other parts of the United Kingdom, although on a smaller scale. Northern Ireland has a difference of 25,000 electors between its largest and its smallest constituencies. The difference is 41,000 for Wales, and 58,000 for Scotland—although, of course, both in Wales and Scotland the geographical considerations make some of these differentials legitimate.
These differences, jolt the principle of parliamentary democracy. At the 1992 general election, a vote in Hammersmith was twice as valuable as a vote in Huntingdon, and this is not an isolated example. A similar comparison was drawn in the debate on this Bill in another place between the constituencies of Kensington and Peterborough. These disparities do not, of course, come about by design. The present boundaries were drawn up using the electoral figures of 1976. Since then, of course, there have been huge population movements.
The constituency of Eastleigh now has over 92,000 electors on the 1992 register. It had only 70,000 on the 1976 register. Similarly, the electorate of Hampshire, East has risen from 67,000 to 93,000. That of The Wrekin has risen from 65,000 to 92,000 and that of Swindon has risen from 68,000 to 91,000.
There have also been dramatic decreases in electorates. Chelsea, for example, had an electorate of 63,000 in 1976. It is now down to 42,000. That such a decrease can occur over a 15-year period—and it is one-third of the whole of the electorate—indicates that the timescale within which boundary commissions are required to hold their reviews is too protracted.
I give your Lordships these figures because it is the easiest way to explain how necessary it is to review the present parliamentary constituencies. There are plenty
322
of other examples which could be used. Without this Bill, there would be a danger that an election in 1996 would be fought on electoral figures which would be 20 years out of date and which would then include disparities which would be even greater than the 60,000 difference in electorates which exists today.
The Bill therefore sets a deadline of 31st December 1994 for the completion of the next review of each of the commissions for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I would emphasise that this new deadline is only around six months before the reviews were widely expected to be completed—although it is around three years before they actually had to be completed.
The problem is not confined to the electorates for the next election. The present system of reviews of parliamentary constituencies could give rise to a similar situation in, say,20 years from now. The Bill therefore seeks to put a permanent provision on the statute book which would ensure that the situation in which we find ourselves now cannot repeat itself. This means shortening the time within which the commissions have to report.
The present requirement is that each commission should report not less than 10, but not more than 15, years after its previous report was submitted. Under the Bill, this will be shortened to between eight and 12 years after the previous report.
It may be helpful if I were to remind your Lordships of a little of the historical background to the work of the Parliamentary Boundary Commissions in order to put these changes into perspective. In 1939, constituencies ranged in size from 15,000 to 150,000 electors. In order to deal with this situation, four boundary commissions were set up in 1944—in the middle of the war, of all curious things—one for each part of the United Kingdom. Each commission had to produce proposals for the redistribution of parliamentary constituencies every three to seven years. The commissions first reported in 1947. They then reviewed the situation, for the first time, in 1954.
To ask the commissions to produce reports in such a short timescale after their first review was found to be unsatisfactory and so the timescale in which they had to report was extended in 1958 to between 10 and 15 years. These arrangements were consolidated by the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 and remain in force to this day. But this now seems to be too long a period. The Bill contains three main provisions which are designed to correct the defects of the current system.
Clause I amends Schedule 1 to the 1986 Act in order to allow for the remuneration of commissioners. At present commissioners provide their services without reward. Assistant commissioners are though paid when they hold local inquiries and when they prepare reports on these inquiries for the commissioners to consider. This is obviously an anomalous situation. Leading people from the legal profession and from public administration give up their time to this important work, and it is only fair that they should receive some reward.
The second provision, in Clause 2 of the Bill, is one to which I have already referred. The clause states that

323
the next reviews of all four commissions are required to be submitted by 31st December 1994. At present the report of the Northern Ireland Commission is due by 1997 and those of the other three by early in 1998, although they are expected much earlier. These reports are in fact required more quickly.
The deadline which is proposed can be achieved. The English commission started work in February of last year and the Scottish commission started in February of this year. The other two commissions have considerably smaller tasks.
There is a provision in this clause which states that the failure to submit a final report on time will not in itself invalidate the report. This will take the pressure off the commissioners and will ensure that their democratic procedure of consultation will not be threatened.
As I have said, subsequent reviews will also be subject to a shorter timescale. A period of between eight and 12 years has been substituted for the 10 to 15 year period in recognition of the fact that the electorate moves about much more than it used to do.
It is important to remember that nothing in this Bill in any way affects the ability of the commissioners to undertake interim reviews between those which are required by law. Interim reviews can be undertaken when it is considered by a commission that the electorate in a small area has departed so far from the norm that it is not possible to wait for the next general review before correcting the situation. The power to carry out these interim reviews will remain.
The third clause deals with positions of local government boundaries and how the commissions should take them into account both when publishing their provisional recommendations and when submitting their final reports. In general, how much regard the commissions are to pay to local government boundaries will remain as is set out in the 1986 Act. But Clause 3 of this Bill specifies the latest dates by which commissioners can reasonably be expected to take account of changes which may have occurred, or which may occur, in local government boundaries.
It is important that the distinction is recognised between the provisional recommendations and the final reports of the boundary commissions. For each area a commission publishes provisional recommendations well in advance of the date of the submission of its final report. This is in order to allow time for local inquiries if they should be required. As well as that—and specifically in the case of England—the publication of provisional recommendations can take place several years in advance of the final report, just because of the sheer size of the task which faces the commission. For this reason, separate guidelines are required, both for the purposes of provisional recommendations and for the purposes of final reports, which will detail those local government boundaries of which the commissions need to take account.
An exception has been made for the Boundary Commission for Wales which provides that, for the forthcoming report only. the Welsh commission should take account of any boundary changes which
324
are included in an Act of Parliament which may be passed by 1stJune 1994—even if these boundaries are not operative by that date.
The provisional recommendations, which will precede the next report of the Boundary Commission for Wales, must take account only of those boundaries which are included in a Bill which has received its Second Reading in another place before the recommendations are published. For example, for the forthcoming review which is to be completed by 31st December 1994, the latest date by which changes in local government boundaries would have to take effect in order to feature in the final report would be 1st June 1994. But when publishing recommendations for a particular area, a commission can take account of a boundary which has been included in primary or subordinate legislation even if this boundary is not by then in operation. The purpose of this special dispensation for the Boundary Commission for Wales is to allow for the possibility of a Welsh Local Government Reform Bill.
After the Welsh Bill has received its Second Reading in another place, the commission will be able to publish its proposed recommendations on the basis of any boundary changes which may be included in that Bill. The effect of this clause is, therefore, to make it abundantly clear to each commission which boundaries are to be taken into account for each review.
A safety net exists as a result of the fact that interim reviews can be conducted if it is felt that a local government boundary change, becoming operative subsequent to a boundary commission report, has such significance that it warrants the alteration of parliamentary constituencies before the next general review. There is no question of altering any of the admirable democratic procedures which these politically impartial commissions follow in arriving at their conclusions. To do so would require the English commission to halt the work which it has been doing for the past 18 months, and it would have to start all over again.
The English commission has already published provisional recommendations for 17 counties, and it has already held the first local inquiries. The Scottish Commission, too, has already started work, although more recently.
The intention of the Bill is simply to bring forward the deadline for the next review and to shorten the timescale for future reviews. In order to make this feasible, the Government have proposed that funds are made available for the extra costs of the commissions, and they have set out clearly the framework of local government boundaries on which the commissioners should base their work.
That is what the Bill proposes—and why. The methods by which the boundary commissions reach their conclusions have proved fair and beyond political reproach. We are, indeed, fortunate that this has been the case, and the Bill does not affect those methods. The only drawback throughout the whole process has been the time which has elapsed between each review. That one drawback is addressed by the Bill. I commend the Bill to your Lordships.
Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time.—(Earl Ferrers.)
11.38 a.m.
Lord Underhill: My Lords, the House will be grateful to the noble Earl for so clearly explaining the provisions of the Bill. As he said, this is a very important matter. Although, like me, your Lordships have no vote in parliamentary elections, we are deeply interested in parliamentary democracy. Therefore this Bill is a vital contribution to our democratic system.
The noble Earl made it quite clear that the Bill in no way changes the rules or procedures. However, it is how the commissions carry out the rules that is important. It was stated clearly in the Second Reading debate in another place that there was no proper consultation with the other political parties. I deeply regret that. Consultation would have removed any suggestion that the work of the commissions was there for a particular party's advantage. In a previous capacity, before I came to your Lordships' House, I attended consultations with the commissions in order to discuss how they proposed to work. That should have been done this time. I may have to return to that point before I conclude my speech.
I agree completely with those who have said that it would be wrong to proceed to the next election with constituencies based on out-of-date electorates—that is, those of 20 years ago. As the noble Earl said, without the Bill, we could be in the position of going into the next election with electorates based on those of 1976. Therefore, the provision in the Bill for the payment of commissioners has the Opposition's full support. Provided that the commissioners do what we want them to do in the form of extra work, the reviews will be speeded up and we will receive them on time. However, I hope that there will be consultation at the appropriate times with the other political parties on the appointments that are made to the commissions. That will also encourage full support and approval of the commissions' work.
As the noble Earl explained, the proposal in the Bill is to reduce the periods in which reports may be submitted from 10 to 15 years to a new figure of 8 to 12 years. We are in complete agreement with that. In the debate on Second Reading in the other place, the shadow Home Secretary, Roy Hattersley, said that it is preferable to have details of new constituency boundaries well before an election rather than when it is imminent. As the noble Earl pointed out, without that change in the Bill, we could be in the position where a review is not presented until 1998 or, in the case of Northern Ireland,1997. That would undoubtedly be after the next general election and would not satisfy the Opposition's request that changes should be agreed well in advance of a general election.
During discussion in another place, considerable attention was given to the work on the constituency electoral register. Many Members stressed the importance of the electoral register of a constituency having some relationship to the resident population of that constituency. Instances of unsatisfactory work on registration were given. I know that that has
326
concerned political parties for some time: it has even concerned the organisation representing the officers who deal with the administration of elections.
In the debate the Home Secretary appeared to be satisfied that registration had achieved 95 per cent. success. I should like to point out—as, indeed, did other Members of another place—that a 5 per cent. shortage in registration could mean the difference between winning or losing a constituency. Therefore, the maximum amount of success in registration work is vital. If proper consultation takes place—which, as I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, should be the case—then a consensus might be arrived at as to how registration work could be improved. I was fortunate enough to be a member of the recent Hansard Society commission which looked at various questions regarding the running of elections. The noble Lord, Lord Fraser of Kilmorack, was also a member. Considerable attention was given to the question of how best to improve our registration work within the constituencies. Indeed, it may well be possible to achieve some consensus if there is proper consultation.
It should be pointed out that Rule 5 of Schedule 2 to the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 provides that a boundary commission may depart from the rules where there is,
"an excessive disparity between the electorate of any constituency and the electoral quota".
When he replies, perhaps the noble Earl can interpret what will be regarded as "excessive disparity". Alternatively, is that one of the cases where, if there had been consultation, the views of the commission could be ascertained as to how it proposed to interpret certain matters before the actual review began? How one interprets the phrase "excessive disparity" is most important.
During the Committee stage in another place, which was taken on the Floor of the House, an amendment was proposed to allow a delay in the submission of a report if the electorate of any area was significantly different from that of the population. The Secretary of State said that the amendment would serve no worthwhile purpose and that it would cause needless delay. The promoters of the amendment were not impressed by that argument. The matter was pressed to a Division which was lost, but only by 303 votes to 244. So there was considerable support for the view that something should be done. I suggest that there is a difference between the electorate and the population and that it is as important as the difference between the electorate and the electoral quota.
Rule 4 of Schedule 2 to the 1986 Act, in respect of the boundary commissions, provides that consideration must be given to the specified parts of a local authority area which shall be included in a constituency. Keeping that point in mind, Clause 3 of the Bill gives rise to some concern. After reading the Bill carefully and listening to the noble Earl's introduction, I take it that, other than in Wales, it will be in order for a commission to take into consideration recommendations included in a Bill approved by Parliament irrespective of the actual date

327
on which the changes come into effect. If that is the correct interpretation, then I, and I think the Opposition, would support the proposal.
However, the proposal for Wales causes considerable concern. I believe the best that I can do is to read the actual part of the Bill. Clause 3(3) (b) states that,
"a boundary which has not yet come into operation on a particular date and which, apart from this subsection, would not be regarded as prospective on that date shall be so regarded if it is specified in a Bill which, on or before that date, has been read a second time by the House of Commons".
That is an assumption that a Bill containing a local authority boundary change would not be amended between the Second Reading and Third Reading stages in the House of Commons. It ignores any possibility of changes being made by your Lordships' House.
It was pointed out in the debate in another place that local government reorganisation, as the noble Earl said, is further ahead in Wales than in England and Scotland. A Bill to give effect to that reorganisation may be introduced and have a Second Reading in the other place. Under the Bill, the boundary commission would be allowed to take account of those proposals even though there were still further stages to go through in the House of Commons and all stages in your Lordships' House. The Minister actually admitted that there was a risk that the Bill might be amended after Second Reading. If such an eventuality occurs, perhaps the noble Earl can tell us what action is proposed.
The proposal was described by Members of another place as showing contempt and disregard for Parliament and particular disregard for your Lordships' House. I urge that the Government should either vary the proposal or withdraw it from the Bill. One can hardly say that it is a democratic suggestion. We have emphasised all along when discussing the Bill that the question of democracy and democratic procedure is the sole purpose of the Bill.
I wish now to refer to the situation that may arise in London. Rule 4 of Schedule 2 to the 1986 Act states that,
"so far as is practicable",
constituencies should not cross London borough boundaries. Again, given proper consultation, what is regarded as being "so far as is practicable?" That may be an important definition when we deal with boundaries in London. I have already referred to Rule 5 which gives the commission discretion to depart from that rule. But what is regarded as an excessive disparity when dealing with the matter'?
The problem in London arises because the Local Government Boundary Commission is to complete a review of London's boundaries by 31st October 1992. The disparity between the electoral quota and the 1991 register is already being worked out. People are busy establishing what the difference will be. In London, the allocateion of constituency seats depends upon the electorate in the borough. It may result in three, four or five constituencies. Consultation would have decided how the commission proposed to deal with that matter. If a number of boroughs have their figures raised to the next point, that might affect the position
328
of one constituency party. If they are lowered to achieve an equitable result the other constituency party might be affected.
Vast changes of population in London take place regularly. As the population bears no relationship at the moment to the electoral register—the 1991 register—that is an important matter. When it was raised on Third Reading in another place the Secretary of State said:
"We are satisfied that the boundary commission, which will have regard to that rule, can, if it judges fit, use that rule to justify crossing borough boundaries, which it declined to do when it adjusted the London boundaries on the previous occasion. Rule 5 gives two bases on which it is perfectly proper for the boundary commission to depart from a strict adherence to the boundaries. The first basis is when it is necessary or desirable to avoid a disparity between the electorate of a constituency and the national quota. That is less likely to arise in the London area".
I do not know what basis he had for saying that. He continued:
"More importantly and relevantly in parts of London, borough boundaries may be crossed if it is desirable to avoid an excessive disparity between the electorate of any constituency and that of neighbouring constituencies. I am sure that the boundary commissioners will have regard to what was said in debates in the House".—[Official Report, Commons,30/6/92; col.722.]
I can only hope that that will apply. Sound criticism came from various quarters in the other place.
The commission has certain powers and duties. How it carries them out should be the subject of genuine consultation between the parties so that it does its work properly and there can be no suggestion that the boundary revision has been arranged to suit any one party.
11.53 a.m.
Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, I too thank the Minister for his clear introduction of the Bill. Like him and the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, I take as my starting point the fact that democracy must operate as well as it possibly can and that that must be the principal criterion for the Bill. As we have been reminded, there are huge disparities between the electorates of certain constituencies. We have been given a number of examples. We on these Benches cannot let this moment pass, even if it means detaining your Lordships for a further 30 seconds at the end of the Session, without mentioning proportional representation. I hear your Lordships' laughter. I knew that that remark would obtain a reaction, but I have it on the record, and I shall not detain your Lordships longer on that matter.
Democracy means that we need to look also at public participation in the work of the boundary commissions. It is a broad issue. One of its aspects must be to allow time for objections to the provisional recommendations to be made. I understand that the Government have accepted the recommendation of the Home Affairs Select Committee that the present short period of one month for objections to provisional recommendations be increased to two months. That provision is not in the Bill. I hope that it will be brought before your Lordships before too long.

329
I am bound to compare some of the processes involved in setting parliamentary constituency boundaries with the criteria identified in the recent Local Government Act for the structure of local government where the commissioners must look at what is effective and convenient for local government. Your Lordships spent a good deal of time when considering that Bill seeking assurances that local community, identity and accountability would all be taken into account. We were assured that that would be so. Indeed, the guidance to the commission refers to such matters, although it refers at far greater length to financial rather than community matters. I feel strongly that they are matters which need to be borne in mind in the setting of parliamentary boundaries.
As we have also been reminded, Rule 4 in the schedule to the Parliamentary Constituencies Act, which deals with the local government boundaries to he taken account of, takes precedence over Rule 5. In other words, not crossing a county boundary is to take precedence over the rule relating to the size of the electorate so far as is practicable. That is another example of the contortions produced by a voting system which is less fair than it might be.
There is another paradox: a parliamentary boundary commission is to take account of county boundaries but not those of districts, although the Local Government Commission may result in us shortly having districts but no counties, depending upon its views on the structure of local government.
I understand the anxieties over Wales expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, and the feeling of the Welsh people that yet again they are being treated as somewhat poor cousins of the English. The word used in Clause 3(1) which adds a subsection to the principal Act provides that the boundaries of which a boundary commission may take account are those which are "prospective" in the case of English constituencies. That provision is different from the one contained in subsection (3) (b). If one were to use one term for the boundaries to apply in Wales I think that that would be "potential" rather than "prospective".
I also understand the anxieties expressed in another place by those who represent Scottish constituencies about the problems that might arise in Scotland when the restructuring of local government arrives there, as I dare say it will. There may be a lack of coincidence between local government and parliamentary boundaries there.
With regard to the frequency of reviews, I support the recommendations but with a slight reservation' which I believe it is right to mention. The increasing frequency of reviews may make it more difficult for a Member of another place to represent his constituency if he is certain only that he can represent it for the life of two Parliaments. It might undermine the development of a long-term relationship between a Member of Parliament and all parts of his constituency if at every second Parliament Members are uncertain about what the boundaries will be at the next general election. That may not be good for the democratic process, which should involve party organisations prepared to offer a choice at each general election. Uncertainty can be detrimental to
330
effective representation and democratic choice. In that connection, I note that the Select Committee did not recommend a change from the current period of 10 to 15 years.
We are not today discussing a change in the rules under which the commission is to work, but I wish to take the opportunity to welcome the assurance given by the Minister in another place on 30th June, at col.750 of Hansard. He said:
"Next time, there will be time to consider carefully between the parties what changes perhaps should be made to the rules that exist now".
I believe that there is a need for changes to the rules and we on these Benches are grateful for the assurance that there will be inter-party consultation.
12 noon
Baroness White: My Lords, I had not intended to take part in this debate-
Noble Lords: Order!
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, if the noble Baroness wishes to speak, perhaps she should do so after the last of the speakers on the list and before the Front Bench speakers. I thought that she was rising to put a point to the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee. However, she seemed to wish to take part in the debate so I hope that she will not mind if I speak. I did not wish to appear discourteous.
Baroness White: My Lords, I apologise, but I have another engagement to go to. I simply wished to ask for active consideration—
Noble Lords: Order!
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, in that case, I give way to the noble Baroness so that she may make her point.
Baroness White: My Lords, I apologise. I had not realised that the position for Wales would be as serious as my noble friend and the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, on the Liberal Benches indicated. It is a worrying situation if we are to accept only a Second Reading in the other place as regulating the procedures in Wales. That is the main point I wish to make and I apologise to the House and am extremely grateful to the noble Lord.
Noble Lords: Order!
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, perhaps I may interrupt. I do not hesitate to mention to the noble Baroness, since she is disappearing and leaving the Chamber, that the conventions of the House are that normally noble Lords listen to the speech after the one they have made. My noble friend Lord Campbell of Croy gave way to the noble Baroness and I think it is slightly unparliamentary to blow off and then blow out. I think that she should at least have listened to the speech that the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, was going to make had she not intervened.
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, my noble friend the Deputy Leader of the House has made a point which will ensure that everyone recognises and remembers what are the conventions of the House. I

331
am happy that I could enable the noble Baroness to make her point, short though it was, on behalf of Wales. For those who may not have a list, I am the next speaker on it and I shall now try to proceed.
I thank my noble friend Lord Ferrers for the clarity with which he introduced the Bill to us and explained its purpose. I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, who speaks from his knowledge and experience, particularly having been the national agent of the Labour Party. I hope that the Government will take note and consider the points he made about the importance of having an efficient and effective system of registration.
I support the purpose of the Bill, in particular in reducing the interval between the reviews of the commissions from the existing 10 to 15 years to eight to 12 years. The sizes of the constituency electorates can change materially in a few years. Even when the present limit of 15 years has applied, practice has shown that a general election can be held with constituency boundaries as much as 20 years out of date so far as concerns population surveys, with the necessary procedures adding to the time.
Because of geography and sparse, scattered populations in some rural areas, it has been accepted that precise numerical equality is not feasible. The commissions are expected to get as near to that goal as possible, taking the special factors into account. The first of these special factors is the historical one, which has not yet been mentioned. It is that Scotland should have at least 71 constituencies and Wales at least 35. In the case of Scotland, the reason is the continuation of a principle agreed in the Act of Union in 1707. I suggest that governments would be rash to change those minimum figures for Scotland or Wales unless they were generally agreed as part of a major constitutional reform.
After the periodic reviews each of the four boundary commissions is required to produce a report making the most sensible distribution within the part of the United Kingdom with which that commission is concerned. It is clear from this that the average size of a constituency in England will be larger than one in Scotland because of the historical factor that I mentioned. I intend to concentrate in particular on features of the subject which I believe have been a cause of political controversy for the past half-century at least but which I suggest should raise less argument now.
Since World War II there has been an exodus of population from the centres of cities. Electorates there have become smaller. Most of the constituencies concerned have normally been expected to be won by Labour. There has naturally been concern when what seemed like the severe re-carving of boundaries in the centres of great urban areas was producing fewer of those constituencies. I completely understand the anxiety of the Labour Party's officials about that in the past.
At the other extreme, constituencies in areas with few inhabitants in remoter parts of the country have contained relatively few registered electors, although geographically vast. My home near Inverness is close
332
to some of those constituencies. I live in what was my constituency, although the names and boundaries are all different now. However, I make it clear that my constituency was not itself one of the huge, sparsely populated ones.
The Scottish Boundary Commission, like the other three commissions, in that situation has to balance numbers with distance, mountains and salt-water barriers. There was a time when it was thought that making such constituencies larger to raise the electorate figures to nearer the average, thereby increasing their geographical size, would reduce the number of parliamentary seats normally held by Conservatives. That is no longer so. Almost all such seats in Scotland are at present occupied by the other parties. Who knows for how long that may be?
While there may be a case in those remoter areas for increasing their size, based on improved, modern communications, the boundary commission still has the aim of producing constituencies that are manageable, both as entities and for the Members of Parliament.
I am familiar with such problems, but more familiar still with them is my noble friend Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish, who will speak after me, because he represented one of those constituencies, which was also formerly represented by my noble kinsman, the late Lord Glenkinglas.
I wish the boundary commissions well and all success in trying to even out the electorate between constituencies as best they can, given the factors that must be taken into account. At present, the diversity extends from the largest electorate of some 101,000 for the Isle of Wight to about 23,000 for the Western Isles of Scotland, which consist of several islands separated from the mainland by many miles of sea.
The chair of each commission is taken by the Speaker of another place but he plays little other than a formal part. The deputy in each of the commissions is a judge. The other members, I suggest, should be remunerated as now proposed. There will be more frequent reviews and the work is no doubt challenging and at times arduous.
I hope that there will be no reason in future to have the kind of argument that occurred in Parliament in 1969. That was the previous occasion on which there was a political argument about the commissions and their work. I remember that occasion well as I took part in that debate as a Member of the Shadow Cabinet from the Opposition Front Bench in another place. Action then on the four boundary commissions' reports was delayed by the government of the day. After legal action was started by a citizen outside Parliament. the necessary orders were laid by the Government, with the unusual recommendation that they be rejected. The government majority in another place at that time made sure they were rejected. That situation continued until there was a change of government in 1970 and the process was started again. I believe that this Bill should not be politically controversial although all the political parties must be deeply interested in every provision which it contains.
12.11 p.m.
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: My Lords, there can he no more important subject for a democracy than the building blocks which form the basis of that democracy. For those of us who believe in a single member, first past the post system, it is absolutely essential that those single member constituencies properly represent the population and are numerically equal, as near as we can possibly make them. If they are not equal, the results of maldistribution can bring the first past the post system into disrepute. That occurs more particularly at local government level than at national government level.
In some recent local government elections the party that obtained the majority of the vote, or the largest portion of the vote, did not win the largest portion of the seats. Before I am interrupted from the Liberal Democrat Benches and told that this means that I should support proportional representation, I should say that if the constituencies, the building blocks, had been properly distributed numerically that situation would not have occurred. Indeed, if I believed in proportional representation, which I do not, I would oppose the Bill today because the more we bring about an imbalance between different constituencies, the more ludicrous will be the end result and the better will be the case for those who believe in proportional representation. Therefore it is important that we, who believe in a single constituency and a first past the post system, make sure that those single constituencies are in good heart, are well up to date and are properly distributed numerically.
At the recent election the distribution became very skewed and deviated greatly from the average figure in England, in Wales and indeed in Scotland. I shall say more about Scotland later. However, the same principle must hold throughout the United Kingdom. I warmly welcome the decision by the Government to narrow the periods between the boundary commissions because it is absolutely clear to anyone who takes a mathematical interest in these matters that between the 1983 election and the one just past the distribution of numbers between the smallest seats and the largest seats has become far too great. That is an important aspect of the Bill; it explains why I at least warmly welcome its provisions.
My noble friend Lord Campbell of Croy mentioned the 71 constituencies in Scotland which are clearly spelt out in the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986. Paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 2 to that Act states:
"The number of constituencies in Scotland shall not be less than 71".
As my noble friend said, that imbalance goes back to the treaty of union and the fact that the historic union between our countries was always considered to be a little out of kilter, as England is that much larger than Scotland, and therefore a degree of redistribution was necessary to give Scotland a slightly better voice in another place in numerical terms. That was perhaps a better arrangement than Scotland deserved. The principle is as justified today as it was when the founding fathers—I hope I may use that American expression—laid down the treaties of union in 1707. If other people prevail and there is some kind of
334
parliamentary devolution in Scotland, my argument is immediately torpedoed and there is no justification for 71 constituencies. However, I do not believe there is much justification for 72 seats in Scotland. That leads me to the main part of my speech.
There are 72 seats because at the previous meeting of the boundary commission a commissioner was persuaded that the city of Glasgow should have one extra seat. There was no mathematical justification for that decision. Some of the seats in the city of Glasgow are the smallest in Scotland apart from special areas such as the Western Isles, Orkney and Shetland and Caithness and Sutherland. The seats in the city of Glasgow are small not only in Scottish terms but also in United Kingdom terms. They were small when the boundary commission decided to give Glasgow an extra seat. I hope that this time the boundary commission will not consider the position as it is today but will be prepared to ask itself more basic and fundamental questions.
My noble friend Lord Campbell of Croy said that one of the justifications for more seats in Scotland that is often proposed is that there are large areas of Scotland, including the constituency I had the honour to represent in another place, where the population is pretty thinly spread. One would think on that basis that the constituencies in Scotland with the smallest electorates would be situated in the rural areas of Scotland. Indeed, the bottom three are situated in the rural areas of Scotland. Interestingly, however, of the 10 largest seats that currently exist in Scotland—the position was roughly the same when the boundary commission finished its work in the early 1980s—six are rural while of the smallest 10 seats, half are urban. In Scotland the seats that have slightly smaller electorates than even the Scottish average comprise largely urban seats. The seats that have enormous electorates in Scottish terms are rural seats.
The Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for Inverness Nairn and Lochaber represents a greater spread of real estate than many noble Lords in this House, even those with the most extensive land ownership. That seat has an electorate now of 70,000. However, at the other extreme, a seat in the city of Glasgow—Provan—has an electorate of 36,000. A boundary commission that produces figures such as those is not attempting to make sure that the only case for departing from average figures is a geographical one. Interestingly enough, the top two seats in numerical terms are held by the Liberal Democrats. In Scottish terms those two seats are enormous. The constituency of Gordon has an electorate of 81,000. There is not a seat in the central belt of Scotland which comes anywhere near having an electorate of 81,000. If noble Lords are thinking of tramping round a Scottish constituency on their holidays, I suggest they will need to train hard before visiting Gordon. Many of the small seats in population terms would constitute a gentle afternoon stroll, although I suspect that the countryside may not be quite as pretty.
I now come to the main burden of my speech. It is important that we consider some of the restrictions which are imposed, or else are self-imposed, on the boundary commission when it considers drawing up

335
constituencies. Schedule 2 to the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 lays down the rules for drawing up constituencies. There are simple rules such as those about the minimum number of seats in the constituent parts of the kingdom and about single member constituencies. The important rule is Rule 4. That rule has already been referred to: it is relevant to changes in local government boundaries. The rule states:
"So far as is practicable having regard to rules 1 to 3 … in Scotland, regard shall be had to the boundaries of local authority areas".
The same is true of England and Wales and causes many of the problems that other people have identified in relation to London. The arguments about London will no doubt be well rehearsed in your Lordships' House. They were well rehearsed down the corridor. This is not just a Scottish parochial argument; it was heard over and over again in the other place in connection with London. The argument is that Rule 4, if given primacy, leads to enormous distortions, which, in my view, are totally unjustified. Rule 5 says:
"The electorate of any constituency shall be as near the electoral quota as is practicable having regard to rules 1 to 4",
in other words, having regard to local government boundaries.
The Boundary Commission for Scotland accepted that it could not abide by district council boundaries all the time and that it had to breach some of them. I may be wrong—my noble friend may be able to help me when he sums up—but from my reading of the Acts the Boundary Commission for Scotland imposed on itself the rule that it could not cross regional council boundaries.
That is fine if local authority boundaries are fair and reasonable when it comes to numerical distribution. However, we all know that they were not devised to be reasonable and fair for numerical distribution. They were devised for entirely different reasons—community of interest, natural boundaries, and so on. So the parliamentary boundary commission starts off with building blocks which are inevitably in conflict with Rule 5—which, in my view, ought to be higher up the list of rules—which provides
that the electorate ought to be as near the electoral quota as possible. I believe that even at this late stage of the Bill some consideration should be given to ensuring that at least the new boundary commissions regard electoral size as being just as important as the local authority boundaries. Perhaps I may give one or two examples to illustrate my point.
The constituencies of East Lothian and East Edinburgh are adjacent. I doubt whether most of us would know when we had driven from one into the other. Currently, the constituency sizes are 67,000 and 46,000. All that stops the boundary commission equalising them is the boundary between the city of Edinburgh and East Lothian District Council. I cannot believe that it is sensible to have such ill-distributed constituencies cheek by jowl simply because a local government boundary goes through them.
336
More particularly, if we look at regional boundaries we find the interesting case of the two regional councils in the south of Scotland. Borders Regional Council, previously Roxburgh, Peebles and Selkirk, has an electorate today of 84,000. Galloway, Upper Nithsdale and Dumfries, on the other hand, has an electoral population of 116,000. Both regions merit two parliamentary seats. A minute spent with a calculator tells one that in Scottish terms Dumfries, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale indeed merits two seats but the Borders merits only a seat and a half. It has two seats because we cannot cross local government boundaries.
I could take your Lordships on a geographical tour, which would show, as other people have shown for London, that by restricting the commission through rules that accord such high regard to local government boundaries we inevitably cause distortions. Those distortions are bad enough at the first election in which the boundaries are used but their seriousness increases as the second and third elections are fought.
Therefore, I say to my noble friend that perhaps when we deal with the Bill in Committee we can look at ways at least to put the rules on all fours so that the boundary commission has to take equal regard of local government boundaries and of population. For my part I would put population higher. If we do not have constituencies which, taking one area with another, are well balanced and which roughly represent the same numbers of people we create distortion in our first past the post system which rightly brings it into disrepute and allows those who would have us go down the dangerous road of proportional representation the chance to make a better case than I believe they can ever justify.
12.25 p.m.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I am very grateful for the contributions which your Lordships have made to the debate on the Bill. My noble friend Lord Campbell of Croy was quite right when he said that this is not a politically controversial Bill but that each political party will be deeply interested in the results. That is so. I am grateful for the knowledge and the views which your Lordships have expressed.
I could not help being amused when the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, mentioned PR. I thought that the guffaws which greeted that stopped her somewhat in her tracks. PR has absolutely nothing to do with the Bill. I do not know how on earth the noble Baroness thought that that subject could have anything to do with the Bill but I admire her ingenuity for slipping it in. My noble friend Lord Mackay, speaking from behind me, knocked the idea on the head when he said that, if one wanted to be really obstructive and if one wanted PR to work as well as possible, one would be against the Bill because the smaller the constituencies and the greater the disparities, the greater the chances of PR operating and the more chance there would be of minority parties having some influence on government. However, that has nothing whatever to do with the Government's philosophy.
Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, the noble Earl tempts me too far. I did not intervene when the noble Lord, Lord Mackay, made his point, but aspersions should not be cast on my colleagues on these Benches to suggest that democracy somehow takes second place to the interests of a minority party as if that were somehow different from democracy.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, the interests of minority parties are always enormously important. We believe that that is so, too, but we happen to believe that PR does not work and will not work. Anyhow, it is not a system; it is 12 different systems and each one of the 12 would produce a different answer. However, let us not get too involved with PR.
The other event for which the debate has been remarkable was the astonishing intervention of the noble Baroness, Lady White. I suppose that I should not refer to it since the noble Baroness is no longer present. However, as she absented herself of her own volition immediately after making her speech, it might be worth re-emphasising that normally noble Lords wait at least until the end of the speech following their own before leaving. In this particular instance that was done with extraordinary rapidity.
There was also the fascinating example of Scotland. I have always wondered how boundary commissions work and have always been thankful that I was never invited and never will be invited to be a member of the boundary commission because it seems to me to be the most insuperable task. Whatever one decides, people complain that it is not right. My noble friend Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish produced some very good arguments this morning as to why he thought that boundary distribution in Scotland was not as just as it might be. I have no doubt that the Boundary Commission will take note of those points.
I would just make this point to my noble friend. He said that the boundary commissions were hampered by Rule 5 of the 1986 Act. They are not compelled to keep to regional or county boundaries. Rule 5 allows them to cross those boundaries in order to avoid excessive discrepancies. One of the difficulties in the case of Scotland, and equally one of the charms of Scotland, is its enormously different geographical bases. Clearly in those situations there will be disparities of constituency size.
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for giving way. I pointed out the disparities of geography and sparse population. The point which my noble friend made is that the cases which he mentioned arose because the boundary commission had felt obliged to recognise the boundaries of local government. There are no counties in Scotland but the equivalent of regions, so the boundaries concerned are regional boundaries, and sometimes district boundaries. As I understand it, in the case of Scotland, in the wording the commission is asked to have regard to local government boundaries. If my noble friend cannot reply now, perhaps at Committee stage we can look into how much that requires the boundary commission to follow local government boundaries. I think that a lot of the anomalies pointed out by my noble friend would not
338
cause difficulties if the commission did not feel virtually obliged to follow local government boundaries.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I was aware that it was my noble friend Lord Campbell who referred to the geographical charms and differences of Scotland, to which I was also going to refer later. Being a prudent fellow, I have done my homework and happen to have with me the rule that my noble friend Lord Mackay is anxious about. I quote rule 5 because it may help my noble friends Lord Mackay and Lord Campbell:
"The electorate of any constituency shall be as near the electoral quota as is practicable having regard to rules 1 to 4; and a Boundary Commission may depart from the strict application of rule 4 if it appears to them that a departure is desirable to avoid an excessive disparity between the electorate of any constituency and the electoral quota, or between the electorate of any constituency and that of neighbouring constituencies in the part of the United Kingdom with which they are concerned."
I hope that that gives both my noble friends the indication that rule 5 permits the boundary commission not to stick rigidly to local or regional boundaries where it thinks fit.
My noble friend Lord Campbell also referred to the difficulties in Scotland because of its geography. It is perfectly true that it is very difficult. He referred to the Western Isles. The size of the electorate of the Western Isles is 23,015 which is pretty small by any standards. As my noble friend quite rightly said, if you happen to be the Member of Parliament for that area you have quite a long haul to get round the constituency because the islands are separated by vast expanses of water. It is difficult to get reasonable parity there.
My noble friend Lord Mackay referred to the need for better sized constituencies and mentioned one or two of them. I have no doubt that the boundary commission will take note of what he has said; but I do not think it would be particularly appropriate for me to get involved in too much individual detail on that basis.
I was grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, for saying that he agreed with so much of the contents of this Bill. However, he said that there had been no consultation. That is perfectly true, because this is not a political Bill as such. If the idea was to get the Bill in time so that the next general election could be brought about on up-to-date figures, it was necessary to have a certain amount of expedition. If we had consulted, not only would it have delayed the process, but it would not have helped it, because it was not a question of any political moment. Time was of the essence, and if we had undertaken to consult there would have been considerable delay. I can assure the noble Lord that as they always have done, the Government will consult the opposition parties before any appointments are made to the commissions.
The noble Lord, Lord Underhill, was also worried about electoral registration. I believe the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, was concerned with proportional representation and not so much with electoral registration. I am bound to tell the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, that we undertake various initiatives to improve the accuracy of electoral registration. This is done by electoral registration

339
officers in local government. The noble Lord mentioned that about 95 per cent. were on the register. He went on to say that very often 5 per cent., if they had been on the register, might have swayed the result of the election. That is perfectly true. But to get 95 per cent. is not bad at all, and it is a very accurate figure. Incidentally, it compares very well with other countries. We are not totally satisfied and this year we intend to spend £617,000 on a registration campaign. We are always looking at ways to try to improve the register, and we send out codes of practice to electoral registration officers.
The noble Lord, Lord Underhill. referred to the Welsh provisions. He said they were unconstitutional. I believe that prompted the noble Baroness, Lady White, to make her intervention. The provisions are not unconstitutional. In my speech, I stressed the difference between proposals and final reports. It is only the proposals which can be published after the Welsh Bill has been read a second time in another place. However, it is perfectly true that by the time it has gone through the process of Parliament, the basis of the Bill may be changed. I repeat that it is only the proposals that can be published after Second Reading has taken place in another place. There is no question of the final report being based upon boundaries not already framed in legislation. The Second Reading will not be conclusive.
The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, said that she thought eight to 12 years was better than the present 10 to 15 years. But she said that it might be difficult if a Member of Parliament felt that he had a constituency for only two Parliaments before finding that the boundaries had been changed. Frankly, that is always a difficulty. Wherever you draw a line there are bound to be arguments in favour and against. One of the advantages of 10 to 15 years is that there is much more continuity; one of the disadvantages is that there is total disparity. That was the reason why, looking back over the history, the three to seven-year period was too short and the 10 to 15-year period too long. We felt it was more appropriate to take the period proposed in the Bill.
The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, also referred to the timetable for the boundary commissions to await representations. The Home Affairs Committee recommended two months instead of one month, and the Government agreed with that. In practice, the commission usually allows two months.
My noble friend Lord Mackay referred to the number of Glasgow seats. Last time the boundary commission did not award an extra seat to Glasgow. The commission proposed one seat below the entitlement. The assistant commissioner adjudged that to be in error and the proposal was revised. Since then the electorate numbers of the Glasgow constituencies have fallen and the review will address that. The example of Glasgow serves to emphasise the justification for the Bill.
I am grateful to your Lordships for the contributions which have been made. On the whole, I think most noble Lords approve the general line of the Bill, which is to allow the next election to be fought on
340
up-to-date figures. That is what lies behind it. A number of your Lordships have been kind enough to give your own views as to what ought to be done in individual circumstances. It is the duty of the boundary commission to take those matters into account, and I am sure that they will do so.
On Question, Bill read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Child Support (Maintenance Assessment Procedure) Regulations 1992
12.40 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Henley)The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Henley) rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 22nd June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move that the draft regulations be approved. These regulations have been considered by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments and have been approved by affirmative resolution in another place. The first child support statutory instrument which is before us today is the Child Support (Maintenance Assessment Procedure) Regulations.
It had been my intention to speak to all four child support regulations at the same time but after representations from my noble kinsman Lord Russell I have agreed to separate the first from the others. However, if the House finds it convenient to speak more generally in the course of the debate on the first, I shall have no particular objection.
It may also be convenient for the House if 1 briefly outline the common purpose which lies behind all four statutory instruments for debate today and then dwell in slightly greater detail on the first set of regulations.
The regulations which we are debating today are the first to be made under the Child Support Act 1991, which provided the framework for the Government's new scheme for the assessment, collection and enforcement of child maintenance. As the House will no doubt be aware, the current system for child maintenance does not work as it should. Not least, it is uncertain and fragmented and as a result only 30 per cent. of lone mothers and 3 per cent. of lone fathers received regular child maintenance in 1989. The White Paper Children Come First, followed by the Child Support Act itself, represents the Government's response to those problems.
Regulations making provision for the collection and enforcement of maintenance will be laid shortly by negative procedure; and further provisions covering the detail of the appeals system, jurisdictional issues, fees and transitional issues will be brought forward later in the year.
I turn now to the maintenance assessment procedure regulations. The majority of these regulations deal with technical and procedural matters such as applications, notifications and terminations. It may therefore be helpful if I highlight only two of the provisions which are likely to be of particular interest to the House this afternoon.
First, Regulations 8 and 9 deal with interim maintenance assessments, which I remind the House are designed to be used only when an absent parent is refusing to provide the information needed to make a full assessment. It is important that interim maintenance assessments should retain their deterrent effect, but the House may wish to be aware that, in response to comments made during the consultation exercise on the content of the child support regulations, we have reduced the level of an interim maintenance assessment and extended the warning period before it can be imposed.
The second area is, I know, of much greater concern to the House. Regulations 34 to 50 provide for a reduction in benefit to be made where a parent with care in receipt of certain benefits fails, without good reason, to comply with obligations to allow maintenance to he recovered from the absent parent.
The House will be aware that there was much discussion of this issue during the passage of the Child Support Bill, that the Government responded constructively to address the legitimate concerns expressed then and that they built in a number of safeguards to protect the position of the parent with care. We made provision in the Child Support Act to deal with cases where there would be a risk of harm or undue distress either to the parent or to any child living with her. The provision gives scope to enable each case to be looked at individually. If there are reasonable grounds for believing that co-operation would lead to harm or undue distress, then the requirement to co-operate will be waived.
The parent with care will have a six-week period after the Child Support Agency has first contacted her about non-co-operation: she will have six weeks to consider her position and make further representations. At the end of that period the case will go to a child support officer for further consideration, and the child support officer will give the parent with care a further two weeks in which either to comply or to make representations. Only after that can a reduced benefit direction be issued.
As my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor said, when the Child Support Act passed through this House, we were minded then to set the deduction at 20 per cent. of benefit for 26 weeks and 10 per cent. for a further 52 weeks. That is what the regulations should do. I should also remind the House and stress that the deduction can only be made once. There is no question of that benefit's sanction being reimposed at the end of the period if the parent with care still refuses to co-operate.
As regards the evidence required to support a claim that distress or hardship would result, I remind the House that it has been made clear on a number of occasions that, while corroboration will be welcomed, uncorroborated evidence of a parent will be accepted unless there are strong reasons not to do so.
I accept that this is a difficult area. I can assure the House that we shall be monitoring these cases most carefully to see how the provisions work in practice.
However, it remains true that both parents have responsibilities to their children. An absent parent should not be able to refuse to pay maintenance for his
342
child. In the same way, a parent with care should not without good cause be able to refuse to co-operate in obtaining maintenance for her child, and thereby pass all the responsibility over to taxpayers, many of whom have children of their own to bring up. For that reason, this is a necessary and important measure.
I commend these regulations to the House.
Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 22nd June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Henley.)
12.45 p.m.
Lord Carter: My Lords, the House will be extremely grateful to the Minister for explaining these complicated regulations. We have still a great deal of business to get through today and I therefore accept the noble Lord's invitation to make an en bloc speech and deal with all the regulations, intervening extremely briefly only if I have to when he proceeds to the next regulations. I do not propose to go through each regulation in detail. I should just like to deal with particular matters of concern or where there is some doubt over the exact implication or operation of the regulations.
The first point—this will not surprise the Minister—is one which exercised this House and another place very much indeed during the passage of the Bill. It covers the situation where the parent with care does not wish to name the absent parent. Are we to understand now that this is a matter to be left entirely to the discretion of the child support officer? What is the guidance that will be given to the CSOs? Will that guidance be published? Will it be published in draft so that all those interested in the matter will have a chance to comment?
Can the Minister also tell the House the rights of appeal which the lone parent will have when the CSO, in a sense, has ruled against him or her? Are there grounds for refusal to reveal the name of the absent parent besides the fear of violence or harassment? Will other grounds be accepted?
The Minister will remember the debate about the formula for assessing child maintenance. The algebra in Schedule 1 of the Bill has now been turned into figures. We welcome the Government's change of heart regarding the original proposal for a reduction in the amount of maintenance assessment when the child or children reach the age of 11.
Obviously—I am sure that the Minister expected to hear this—the major criticism of the regulations, as it was in the Bill itself, concerns the benefit penalty. We understand that over 100 organisations provided evidence during the consultation process in the drafting of these regulations. I believe that that evidence is not available en bloc but is still in the department. If we wish to find out what the organisations said, we shall have to approach them individually.
Can the Minister say how many of the organisations consulted in the consultation period supported the concept of the benefit penalty? Perhaps I may also ask a question which has been asked many times before in this House: how can the welfare of the

343
child be paramount if the benefits are reduced via the penalty system? This does not hurt the parent; it hurts the child. So who is being punished?
There is also concern over the size and length of the benefit reduction. It is felt that it is harsh and must therefore have a negative effect on the welfare of children in one-parent families. Also the reduction seems to fail to incorporate the safeguards which exist within the comparable voluntary unemployment deduction for lessening the effects of the deduction where that is necessitated by the circumstances of the claimant. The Minister will know that the voluntary unemployment deduction ranges from one day to 26 weeks, whereas the deduction under the Child Support Act runs for a fixed length—a fifth over 26 weeks and then 10 per cent. for a further 52 weeks. The voluntary unemployment deduction, which I think can be compared because it is a benefit penalty, also contains provision for the deduction to be halved when a member of the family is seriously ill or pregnant. No such provision exists within the maintenance deduction. I am sure that the House will be grateful if the Minister can explain in a little more detail why there is that difference.
Another problem relates to second families on low income. Will the majority of any increase in the income of the second family be diverted to the parent with care? What are the safeguards in the regulations to prevent the two families being forced into poverty? What is to stop some lone parents being worse off through the loss of certain benefits when maintenance is paid?
It has been pointed out by the Child Poverty Action Group that some lone parents may be lifted off income support and will he worse off when the ex-partner agrees to pay maintenance. The group cites the case of a mother with four school-aged children who is £20 a week worse off due to the loss of free school meals after her ex-partner agreed to pay maintenance.
On the basis of receiving maintenance, other lone parents may decide that they can now find some paid employment. They can of course claim family credit if they are working at least 16 hours a week. As well as the loss of benefits which are passported by income support, there are other ways in which that group may be worse off than on income support. We know that the take-up of family credit is low, about 50 per cent., compared with the take-up of income support for lone parents. Family credit does not cover mortgage payments. A number of women remain in the family home to avoid disruption to the children. If the absent parent fails to pay maintenance and the amount of family credit payable is fixed for a six-month period, no mechanism is currently available to make up the shortfall if the maintenance agreed is not received. The Minister will know that the CPAG has pressed the Government to guarantee payment in such cases. It will be helpful if he can comment on that.
Shared care is a complicated area. There are complicated rules to deal with the situation of care which is shared between the parent with care and the absent parent. However, there is a feeling that the rules are inadequate. Parents who care for children for
344
less than two nights a week on average will not be recognised as doing so by the formula. I am advised that an absent parent could look after children throughout the school holidays yet have to continue to pay full maintenance to the other parent. In the same way, no account will be taken if an absent parent cares for the children every other weekend. That anomaly needs to be addressed. It could lead to disruption of the arrangements for the children; and the children will suffer enough anyway as a result of the family circumstances.
Also how will the income of the absent parent be calculated if he or she is self-employed, with a variable weekly or monthly income?
Those are all important points of detail. I do not wish to detain the House because there is much business to be dealt with. I do not propose to go over again the debate that we had concerning the very wide regulation-making powers. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, is not present. I am sure that the Minister is pleased because the noble and learned Lord would have had much to say about the fact that some regulations which are retrospective amend the Act. I do not need to mention the phrase "Henry VIII" for the Minister to know what I refer to. We protested about the Henry VIII clauses when the Act was discussed. Some of our worst fears have come true.
As we know, the regulations concern some of the poorest people in society. I am sure that the Minister is aware of the publication only yesterday of official figures which indicate that one in four children is living in poverty, with a higher proportion in the lone parent families. The poorest families have suffered a 6 per cent. cut in real income since 1979. In 1979,5 million people were living below half average income; in 1989,12 million were living below half average income. Will the Minister confirm whether those figures were available before 9th April, the date of the general election, but were held back? Will he comment on the fact that when the Government can hold the figures back no longer they choose to publish them on the eve of the parliamentary Recess?
Nothing in the regulations causes me to alter the view that I expressed consistently when the Act was before us. I have always believed that it was designed as much with the saving of public expenditure in mind as looking after the welfare of the lone parent family and children and parents with the care of their children. Despite the improvements that the Government have made during the process of consultation, which we welcome, nothing in the regulations suggests that I was wrong in that original belief.
Earl Russell: My Lords, first, I refer to the good news. I thank my noble kinsman and his department for the care and courtesy that they have put into the process of consultation over the draft of the regulations. It was welcome. It has resulted in some improvements. However, the regulations before us are so long and complex that I was going to describe them as a mini-Bill but decided that I had to delete the adjectival qualification. Were we treating the matter as

345
a Second Reading to be followed by a Committee and Report stage, we would by no means have too much time to consider the business in the regulations.
I also wish to thank my noble kinsman for the care and courtesy that he has put into correspondence over the past few days which has saved the time of the House on several points that we need not now discuss.
I am pleased that the regulations are under the affirmative procedure. Some noble Lords who have read the Minute may have noticed that I have tabled a Prayer about other regulations under the negative procedure. I have been told that we do not have time to debate that before the Recess and that after the Recess—because judicial sitting days count as praying days—I shall be out of time. Therefore were the regulations not under the affirmative procedure we might not have had a debate. I wish to express my gratitude to those noble Lords, most notably the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, who have pressed for the affirmative procedure.
I wish too to draw my noble kinsman's attention to the number of reports that we have received of officers jumping the gun and attempting to disentitle mothers from benefits before the regulations are in force. I have received such reports from the National Council for One Parent Families, from the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux and from Gingerbread. They all say exactly the same. Gingerbread reports 66 cases in the past three months. The greatest dismay comes from the National Council for One Parent Families, which met the chairman of the Benefits Agency in March on that very point. It was offered assurances, which it welcomed, that that would not occur again. I has. I shall be grateful if my noble kinsman will undertake to look into the matter and to ensure that the regulations will not be enforced until their commencement.
My noble kinsman has told us many times that the Department of Social Security deals with matters of principle in the Act and with minor matters in regulations. I am occasionally somewhat surprised by the definition of "minor matters". I wonder about the definition of major matters. I am reminded of my favourite quotation from Edward Gibbon, which states that the graver charges against the supreme Pontiff were dropped and they persisted only with the charges of murder, heresy, rape, arson, piracy, sodomy and incest. I have always wondered what Gibbon meant by the graver charges. I wonder what the Department of Social Security means by major matters.
As I understand it, disentitlement to benefit is a penalty on a level with loss of liberty. We would take a dim view of a Bill which established a power of imprisonment and left the length of imprisonment to he fixed by the Secretary of State by regulation. I know that the principle of disentitlement has been discussed by the House. But the amount of disentitlement is now before us for the first time. I believe that of the two choices I would probably prefer imprisonment, although my noble friend Lord Harris of Greenwich would no doubt tell me that I would be wise to find out first in which prison I was to be incarcerated. If I were in prison I would have three
346
meals a day and a roof over my head. With disentitlement to benefit one cannot always be sure of that.
Nevertheless, I concede that these regulations contain some minor matters, and I shall mention one of them in passing. Schedule 1, paragraph 3, relates to full-time education being defined by the number of hours of formal instruction. Where sixth forms are now developing, especially in the humanities, people are given books to read and told to go away and write essays. The department cannot do it that way. I have no objection to its aims; but what it is attempting will not work. I shall ask once again why disability working allowance is a prescribed benefit for the purposes of these regulations. I know that my noble kinsman has explained that before, but I have not understood him. Maybe I am stupid; but I should like to try again.
The amount of disentitlement is 20 per cent. of benefit for 26 weeks, followed by 10 per cent. for 52 weeks. I shall take the rates for those under the age of 25 because often single mothers are young. According to my calculations, what is left will come to £26.72 for 26 weeks, and £30.08 for 52 weeks. I wish to ask my noble kinsman another question and, if I may impersonate Winnie the Pooh, an answer is required. Does he believe that the single mother is capable of living on that amount and that she can do so without harming the health of the child?
I am also anxious about the duration of the disentitlement. Hardship is cumulative; shoes wear out, coats become threadbare, socks get holes in them, leaks in the roof become more serious, and so forth. Therefore, a long-lasting disentitlement grows progressively more severe. In that context, I ask my noble kinsman whether mothers who have been disentitled to benefit are construed to be too poor to have loans from the Social Fund. I have previously asked my noble kinsman whether he can explain why it is right that people should be too poor to be helped by the social security system. I ask him again. If such people are not construed to be too poor to be helped by the Social Fund, does he believe that they could carry the burden of repayment?
One aspect has changed since we debated this matter; it is the publication of the excellent Government White Paper, The Health of the Nation. I have studied the excellent section in the White Paper of the link between health and diet. I find it thoroughly convincing and wonder whether government policies are in conflict with each other. In future, will my noble kinsman's department when considering income support levels consult the Department of Health about the cost of an adequate diet? Will he refer the amount of money that mothers are receiving under this regulation to the Department of Health's committee on the medical aspects of food policy; known, perhaps appropriately, as COMA?
But if my noble kinsman assures me that single mothers can survive on £26.72 per week, that will not necessarily protect him against the charge of using starvation as an instrument of policy. He is familiar with the problems of deductions from social security benefit; Social Fund loans, gas, water and electricity,

347
over-payments and so forth. I have done my sums on the subject and I shall go into them afterwards if my noble kinsman wishes. I have calculated that with maximum deductions, benefit could be reduced to as little as £13.30 per week. I do not believe that my noble kinsman will say that a woman can live on that. For the sake of clarification, will he say whether other deductions affecting a single mother disentitled to 20 per cent. of her benefit, which are normally assessed as a percentage, will be assessed as a percentage of the full benefit or the reduced benefit? That could be a vital issue.
I welcomed what my noble kinsman said about the absence of double jeopardy—I am glad of that. I also welcome the concession made on Third Reading of the Bill about cases in which enforcement might cause harm and undue distress to the mother. People outside this Chamber are worried because that is discretionary. I understand why it is of the essence of the concession and of its value that it has to be discretionary. However, will he confirm that he will publish that concession in the guidance and stress that most strongly? For many centuries this has been an area in which some of those involved in enforcement have been zealots and those zealots need controlling.
My noble kinsman said that disentitlement will not occur without good reason. I accept that it will not happen without what the Department of Social Security believes to be good reason. But the Department of Social Security does not know or understand the secrets of everybody's marriage—I do not believe that even Dr. Kinsey did so. In many cases people may feel a justified anxiety about contact with their former partner for reasons which are too much of the atmosphere to be capable of being explained to a child support officer. I believe that we have an issue which must be regarded as being covered by the principle of subsidiarity. My noble kinsman should be ready to find single mothers who react to these investigations in very much the spirit in which the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, would react to a directive from Brussels—they would feel that it was not proper.
There is an important underlying disagreement between us. The department will say that it does not intend to produce such hardship because its intention is to achieve compliance and not to inflict the penalty. The department believes that women will act for rational economic motives and therefore faced with the threat of penalty will name the father. But love and reproduction are not entirely rational areas. I do not believe that the department has at all taken on board the intensity of women's resistance to such personal investigations. Compliance has been attempted on and off for six centuries, even to the point of withdrawing the midwife in the middle of labour if the mother would not name the father. I do not believe that cruelty can go much further than that; but it still did not produce compliance.
I believe that these regulations will fail as such attempts have always failed in the past. I do not usually go in for prophecy. If my noble kinsman asks me why I hold that belief, I shall reply,"Six centuries
348
of human experience". What does my noble kinsman have to set against that? Why does he feel that human nature has changed? I used to believe that it was part of Conservative philosophy that government could not change human nature. If that has ceased to be part of Conservative philosophy, I should like to know when, why and under what circumstances.
My Lords, I am normally allergic to the more militant forms of feminist. I do not like being disliked for something which I cannot help and of which, in any case, I am not ashamed. But there are some moments when I see what the world would look like if I were a militant feminist. This is one of them and I do not like it!
Lord Rix: My Lords, I rise today to speak on behalf of disabled children who certainly have had six centuries in regard to disregard behind them. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Henley, for agreeing to the widening of the debate at this stage.
I know that MENCAP, Barnardos and the Spastics Society made strong representations during the passage of the original Bill with regard to the process for maintenance payments for disabled children. The organisations argued for the additional costs related to bringing up a disabled child to be reflected in the formula which will now be used for the calculation of maintenance in ordinary circumstances. There were good reasons for that. First, the formula had been designed to make the amount a lone parent received in maintenance more predictable and therefore able to be decided more quickly. Secondly, it removed the stigma, cost and unpredictability of the court process.
Those reasons hold good for families with disabled children just as much as others. However, the conclusion was that for full assessment of the maintenance needed for a disabled child the courts would remain the decision-making body. I believe that going to the courts could well be an obstacle to many uncertain lone parents with a disabled child truly benefiting from the child support system that the Government wish to see. There is little evidence that court maintenance awards offer any consistency or easy access for parents. There can be no guarantees that proper account will he taken of the child's extra costs associated with disability.
I seek an assurance that the child support officers will advise parents of the right to have the needs of their child assessed by a court. If that does not happen there is a risk that lone parents of disabled children will not receive an adequate income for care of their children. I therefore ask the Minister to ensure that the objectives of the Child Support Agency are met for families with a disabled child and to look closely at how the interface between the regulations and the decisions of courts on awards to disabled children actually operates in practice. I urge the Government to undertake responsibility for monitoring the relationship between the operation of the formula and court decisions on maintenance for disabled children.
The Lord Bishop of Worcester: My Lords, I speak as chairman of the Children's Society, which has expressed misgivings in regard to the present regulations. I should first like to point out that

349
approximately 70 per cent. of lone parents depend on income support. Under the present requirements of the new legislation they will not gain in any way. For every £1 they receive in child maintenance support, they will lose £1 in the benefit entitlement under the new legislation. It is a form of robbing Peter to pay Paul. I should be grateful if the noble Lord, Lord Henley, would comment on that point and perhaps he could also outline the regulations. They are somewhat complicated. It produces something of a difficulty because parents who are seeking to care for children need every assistance in handling the regulations and in obtaining the benefits that they deserve.
I move on to the matter so elegantly expressed by the noble Earl, Lord Russell, in regard to the difficulty a lone parent may face in not wanting to name the other parent and thereby suffering the possibility that the child support maintenance needed will be reduced. Perhaps the noble Lord, Lord Henley, can advise me on that matter.
It is the view of the Children's Society that the regulations and guidance should contain the explicit welfare principle set out in the Children Act and the Child Support Act—that the good of the child should be foremost in all considerations—and they should determine the carrying out of the duties of the child support officers at all stages in the assessment and enforcement process. After all, the Government White Paper is entitled Children Come First. Perhaps the noble Lord will be able to give me some assurance on that matter when he sums up.
It has been said, and I am sure will be said again by other noble Lords, that the handling of the regulations will require the greatest possible sensitivity in the child support officers. We hope that they will receive special training. The Government said that they seek a better and more secure maintenance for children. That can only be achieved if the lone parent is given a safeguard that if she does not wish to name the true father, money will not be withdrawn from an already inadequate family budget. I seek the assurance of the noble Lord, Lord Henley, on all those matters in regard to these otherwise improved regulations.
1.15 p.m.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, we are almost at the end of the process which started in your Lordships' House with the introduction of the Child Support Bill. Many of us, including the noble Earl, Lord Russell, and my noble friend Lord Carter, stayed here day after clay into the far reaches of the night trying to improve a Bill which I disliked then and, as an Act, I dislike now. But for all our discussions and hours spent in Committee and on Report, we had little effect on government thinking. In my view the effect was little indeed. Even the notorious Clause 8, which penalised women who were in fear for themselves and their children—which your Lordships had the good sense to reject—was reimposed by another place.
As the noble Lord, Lord Henley, will be aware from my previous speeches in this House, I believe that these regulations, and indeed the Act, have nothing to do with child support; they have everything to do with saving the Treasury £400 million. That was the
350
position I and other people expressed when the Bill was first introduced into the House and the same position applies today. The Act is no better than it was when it was first introduced. The White Paper which preceded the Child Support Bill was entitled Children Come First. That was indeed a misnomer. It should have been The Treasury comes First. There is no doubt that the Act is not concerned with children; the regulations are not concerned with children. It can be shown that it is concerned with saving Treasury money.
Seventy five per cent. of the recipients of maintenance live on social benefits. There is no benefit under the regulations or the Act for children. For every £1 of increased maintenance there will be a £1 reduction in benefit. So there is no benefit to children or mothers in any way from these regulations or the Act from which they flow. As has already been mentioned by my noble friend, and in particular by the noble Earl, Lord Russell, what about the women who out of fear are not going to name the father? The noble Earl has done some calculations as to how adversely that will affect women and their families. It will amount to £8.49 per week for 26 weeks and half of that sum for a further 52 weeks. What hardship that means to poor people.
But let us look at the matter in another way. I too have done a calculation. I have totalled up the amount which a mother or a family will lose over that period. It amounts to £442. That is a fine of £442 being visited on the woman and child because out of fear or for some other good reason she refuses to name the father. What kind of government are they who impose such a fine on poor women and children? It is called the Child Support Act. How are the children going to be supported when the mother has to pay a fine of £442, even though it may be paid over a period of 18 months? Where are the benefits to the children out of that? Yet, as I have said, these regulations are called the child support regulations. That is a misnomer. The children will gain no support from them at all. Indeed, in most cases there will be no additional financial support and, as we have seen in some cases, there will be a substantial reduction in support. For many there will be a reduction in their quality of life as a result of the stresses and strains that the Child Support Act and these regulations will engender. There is the possibility that they will hinder or prevent reconciliation that might otherwise take place.
The Tory Party is always prating on about the family. But Tory Party family policy is a shambles and a disgrace. Virtually everything it has done, including the Act and these regulations, militates against family life and reconciliation. As I have said, these regulations are no exception. It is about time that this Government put the family first, lived up to their slogan and really did something for the family instead of doing things which split families and make things difficult for them.
Family credits and the situation if the absent parent fails to pay have already been mentioned. But surely under those circumstances, if the Government really believe that assistance should be given and they want to help single parent families, that is a matter which

351
they should grasp and give assurances about today. If they really want to help the family that is one way in which they can do so; namely, by guaranteeing payment in cases where the maintenance is not paid. There is nothing in these regulations to put that right. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Henley, can give us some assurances that in due course that matter in particular will be put right.
This legislation has been rushed at every stage. Even at the last moment when there was plenty of time available the Government rushed the Bill through before the parliamentary Recess in 1991. There would have been plenty of time available properly to discuss everything afterwards. But the Government wanted to get the Child Support Agency on the stocks before 1993.
These regulations are very complicated. One might say that they are a bureaucrat's dream but a citizen's nightmare. How are ordinary people to understand their rights under the regulations? They will need an army of lawyers to advise them. Again in rushing things through the Government allowed the House of Commons only nine days in which to consider four sets of complicated regulations. Yet this morning we are supposed to agree them without amendment. The fact is that we cannot amend them.
I believe that the Act and these regulations will not only cause hardship but very much resentment. It may very well be that in the course of time the Government will find to their cost that what they have introduced by this Act and these regulations is another poll tax fiasco.
Lord McGregor of Durris: My Lords, like the noble Lord, I disliked this legislation from the beginning. My dislike has hardly been modified by the marginal improvement represented in these regulations. Also like the noble Lord, I would like to add my voice to the complaints about the way in which this legislation has been managed by the Government. Not only did the other place have only nine days in which to consider getting on for 100 pages of regulations, but at the time of its debate the Members of another place did not have the 4th Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments. We at least have had the benefit of that helpful document in the three bare weeks which we have had to consider the regulations. As many noble Lords have said, in the earlier stages of the passing of the legislation we had only a very short time to consider the regulations which are the content of the Act. To be asked as we now are to consider them on the last day before the Recess makes a mockery of parliamentary criticism of legislation.
Further than that, I understand that there were 100 consultation papers submitted to the Government, none of which has been published. Anyone interested in finding out what the voluntary bodies working in this field had to say about the regulations has had, as I did, to scurry round to try to collect their submissions. The Government treated in exactly the same way the research on which in some measure their original White Paper was based; that is the work done at York University by Bradshaw and Millar. The
352
Government declined to publish that work, although they had it, until after parliamentary discussion of the Bill was completed.
I believe that the House has been treated in a shabby manner as regards enabling it to discuss a very important measure. As regards what my noble friend Lord Russell said about the reduced benefit direction and the points made in different ways by others who contributed to the debate, I wish to draw the Minister's attention to what a very large number of people who have discussed these regulations both outside and in the other place see as a central issue. It centres upon a conflict of values.
There is, first, the value to which everyone who has taken part in discussions on this legislation assents fully—the value that fathers should contribute to the maintenance of their children to the full extent of their capabilities. There is no doubt about that. However, there is then a second value—that in a free society there must be some frontiers of freedom which nobody should be permitted to cross. Those include the absolute right of mothers to preserve the privacy of their sexual relationships in so far as such relationships do not involve unlawful practices. Here, however, we have legislation that permits—no, requires—state servants to investigate the nature of sexual relationships in circumstances to which, in my opinion, no civilised society should subject a mother.
Admittedly, the regulations have been modified to some degree in that it was said in another place and by the Minister in his opening remarks that the Government will accept the uncorroborated evidence of parents unless there are strong reasons not to do so. I hope that the Minister will tell us what such reasons would be and that he will give us some information about the manner of the training in this area that is to be provided for child support officers. I hope that he will also explain something that puzzles me—if this principle has now been accepted, could it not have been incorporated into the regulations themselves?
We can only hope that the Government will now act on the principle that the protection of the taxpayer ought not to be the overriding value of the Administration in this particular field of social policy. I hope that the Minister will be willing to confirm that. The intrusion of public policy considerations into the realm of private life which is represented by this legislation also seriously affects legal arrangements, as many lawyers have pointed out, including the Law Society, which stated that the principle of,
"the clean break is now and will in future be undermined by the provisions of this Act".
This is neither the time nor the place to discuss financial settlements after divorce and similar considerations, but it underlines the point that, as I understand it, at no point when this legislation as a whole was being considered and discussed in this House was the judiciary consulted. In the working out of these regulations, we now face the possibility of a considerable conflict between principles laid down by the courts for dealing with the financial and property consequences of broken marriages and the administrative principles that will be developed by the Child Support Agency.

353
There is a further legal consideration. Despite many appeals during the passage of the legislation, the Government have refused a right of appeal to the courts on the decisions of the Child Support Agency. Any appeals will not go to the courts but to a tribunal. One characteristic of tribunals is that legal aid is not available. So here we have a situation in which officials can determine the situation of the adult members of broken homes. As many of your Lordships have already said, this is a most sensitive area which could have incalculable consequences for the future of the families involved, yet there is no appeal in the system which carries with it the assurance that the appellant can be legally represented in circumstances in which great complexities may very well be involved.
I hope that the Minister can give us some assurances about how the gap caused by the absence of legal aid will be dealt with in circumstances in which, as has been emphasised many times, those of our fellow citizens who are involved are among the very poorest members of the community and are therefore the most in need of assistance.
Finally, several of your Lordships have drawn attention to the draconian penal provisions in the legislation. I refer to the 20 per cent. reduction in entitlement. Looking at the matter in a much shorter historical perspective than that employed by my noble friend, what that boils down to in practice is the reintroduction of the punitive elements of the old poor law which we thought had disappeared in 1948. That, however, re-emerges in this legislation, and re-emerges against a background in which such penal provisions have historically' never worked (I am thinking only of the past 100 years) and have ultimately had to be got rid of as a result of protests against the uncivilised treatment of citizens by officials which such provisions necessarily involve.
That point also brings us back to one of the major recommendations of the Committee on One-Parent Families which reported in 1974. It drew attention to the fact that throughout the whole of the 19th century and up to 1948 the poor law had been a form of family law which applied to the very poor. It recommended the abolition of a legal system which provided a different series of family laws for different social classes. Under the judiciary, and under the very slow developments which the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack has frequently told the House are leading us to a family court, the penal provisions disappeared and the population as a whole became subject to a single law to regulate their family relationships.
This legislation is putting us right back by 50 years into a world which we thought had gone for ever. I very much hope that the Minister will ask the officials—indeed, instruct the officials—who are constituting the new agency to consider very carefully the implications of the administrative decisions that they will be taking.
I wish to make one last point. All discussion of this legislation has pointed to the way in which its treatment of second families and the treatment under the regulations of second families is in direct conflict with one of the central provisions of the admirable
354
Children Act. These regulations undoubtedly make—the voluntary bodies which deal with these families on the ground have all made this point—second families less eligible than first families.
It may be worth while for those who are to administer the new system just to reflect on a comment by the old National Assistance Board in 1953 on the central issue with which the regulations are concerned. The National Assistance Board wrote in its annual report for 1953:
"if the husband's earnings or other resources are not enough to maintain besides himself both his wife with her children, if any, and the paramour with her children, if any, the defect has got to be met at one point or other by assistance. The board are then faced with the delicate task of deciding whether the assistance is to be given to the wife or to the paramour. Respect for the marriage tie suggests that it is the legal wife who should be the prior charge on the husband's income, but important practical considerations, not least the avoidance of unnecessary expenditure of public moneys, lead inescapably to the other view. Extracting money from husbands to maintain wives from whom they are separated is at best an uncertain business. It is easier to enforce the maintenance of those with whom the man is living than of those from whom he is parted".
I suspect that the new agency will learn that lesson very quickly.
Lord Henley: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, alleges that all this legislation and the regulations before the House today have been brought forward purely—as he put it—to save the Treasury some money. I remind the noble Lord of what I said at the beginning when I introduced the regulations. We do not see it as right that people should be able to avoid their responsibilities and heap them on to the taxpayer or the Treasury.
I remind the noble Lord of who pays for what he referred to as the Treasury. It is taxpayers themselves, many of whom have children. I remind the noble Lord just to bear in mind how much the individual taxpayer pays to support the social security system that we have in this country. On average every taxpayer—every national insurance contributor—is paying something of the order of £10 a day to support the social security system. Those taxpayers—those national insurance contributors—have children as well. It is not purely the interests of some nebulous Treasury; it is the interests of the taxpayer at large that must also be taken into account.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for giving way. I understand perfectly what he has said. The fact of the matter is that the Bill is called the Child Support Bill but it is not going to support children. The noble Lord has, by his opening remarks, confirmed everything that I and other noble Lords have said; that the Bill is about saving the Treasury money. He confirmed that.
Lord Henley: My Lords, obviously it saves money. It saves money for the taxpayer himself. The taxpayer has children. The Bill is also quite clearly designed for the support of children. It is designed to make sure that fathers—I should not use the words "fathers"—it is designed to ensure that absent parents meet their obligations to support their own children. That has to be in the interests of the children. It has to be

355
in the interests of the children to teach them that their fathers or mothers have a responsibility to support them and for them to grow up in that belief.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: Even if they have to starve?
1.45 p.m.
Lord Henley: My Lords, I do not accept that. I do not think that the noble Lord will make much progress by emotive interjections of that sort.
Earl Russell: My Lords, I ask my noble kinsman to think carefully about the concluding quotation used by my noble friend Lord McGregor of Durris. I wonder whether this may perhaps save the Treasury after all.
Lord Henley: My Lords, my noble kinsman, again, again and again, comes forward to the House, as I do not think I need remind your Lordships, by suggesting that any expenditure of social security money that he proposes is always likely to reduce expenditure on social security. I do not accept it now and I have never accepted what my noble kinsman argues.
If we accept that where possible the parent with care is supported by the absent parent, it must be accepted that there has to be a sanction for those who refuse to co-operate unreasonably. Again, I stress the word "unreasonably", as I did in my opening remarks. Despite what has been said today by the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, and others, I do not believe that that sanction at 20 per cent. for 26 weeks and 10 per cent. for a further 52 weeks is unreasonable. It is nothing new in the social security system. Such deductions are made, as noble Lords have reminded us, in the case of voluntary unemployment deduction and such deductions can also be made in the case of income support for those who refuse actively to seek work, in which case they have no entitlement whatsoever to income support and only entitlement to income support under various hardship provisions at a 40 per cent. reduction.
We believe that sufficient discretion is already available. The noble Lord, Lord Carter, and possibly my noble kinsman Lord Russell said that there was no provision to reduce the benefit deduction. We believe that there is already sufficient discretion. There is the position of the child support officer who decides in the particular circumstances of the case whether pursuing maintenance would put the parent or any child living with her at risk of harm or undue distress. If those circumstances apply no reduction will be made. It is important to remember that reduction has occurred only because of the unreasonableness of the refusal to co-operate by the individual parent. I shall come back to those points later on.
I should like to touch on one or two points which have arisen during the debate. First, the noble Lord, Lord McGregor, referred to the concept of "clean break". I think that I must repeat what my noble and learned friend and others said as the Bill went through Parliament in the process of becoming what is now the Child Support Act. The clean break is simply not an
356
issue here. There can be no clean break between parents and children. Clean break is a concept which has a great deal of validity; it is a very valuable concept. But it is something relevant to the position of parents without children, or parents whose children have long since grown up.
Again, in passing, the noble Lord, Lord Carter, referred to the recently published—in fact, published yesterday—Household Below-Average Income Statistics. This is not the time and place to discuss them. However, I should like to make one or two brief comments. I suspect that the noble Lord has not read the HBAI statistics. If he had, I do not think that he would have made the allegations about the poor getting poorer in the way that he did. Certainly, if he looks at the composition of the lowest decile, he will find that some rather extraordinary statistics emerge. For example, on average, expenditure by the lowest decile is greater than expenditure in the decile above it. Moreover, if he takes those within the lowest decile who have negative or zero incomes he will find that, on average—and this is rather difficult to understand—they spend more than the average. The statistics are not quite as simple as the noble Lord would have us believe. In fact, they show that, on average, for the entire population, incomes have increased by over 30 per cent. I see that the noble Lord wishes to intervene. I give way.
Lord Carter: My Lords, I am most grateful. The Minister is quite right, I have obviously not had the chance to study the report in detail. As to the increase in the average income which is about 30 per cent., the noble Lord omitted to mention the increase in income of the top 10 per cent. It is a fact that the lowest decile has had a 6 per cent. reduction in real terms. I happen to have the chart here with me.
Lord Henley: My Lords, there are two ways of looking at the figures; that is, either before or after housing costs. Under one measure there is a reduction of 6 per cent., while under another there is an increase of 2 per cent. I was trying to say that, if you then look at the expenditure of that group you will find some rather odd figures emerging. It does not actually reflect their living standards if they are spending more than the average man, woman or child in the population. That was an aside, and one that is not particularly relevant to the subject that we are discussing today.
There has been some concern about the consultation and the number of different organisations that responded to it. I have to say that it is entirely a matter for the 100 or so organisations that replied as to whether they wish to make their replies public. It is a decision for them; it is not a decision for us. I have to repeat, as my honourable friend said in another place, that we have no intention of publishing those particular responses.
The noble Lords, Lord Stoddart and Lord McGregor, also made complaints about the timing of the regulations. They said that the process has been something of a rush job. However, I have to stress that the regulations were laid on 22nd June, so there has been ample time, especially for noble Lords in this

357
House to consider their views before debate. That is not unreasonable. Of course, I understand that there were complaints in another place, but that is a matter for them. I understand that those in another place gave their assent to the regulations.
My noble kinsman made a very worrying allegation that staff are jumping the gun and that they are already forcing women to disclose the name of the absent parent before the regulations come into force in April 1993. We are aware of those suggestions. Indeed, the noble Earl stressed that representations had been made to the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. I must stress that the guidance given to staff is clear: there is no requirement on women to disclose the name of the father before the regulations come into effect. I give the noble Earl an assurance that the provision will not come into force before April of next year. We shall certainly take steps to reinforce the guidance to staff. Moreover, if the noble Earl would like me to look into any individual cases of which he has genuine evidence, I shall certainly do so.
My noble kinsman also said that civil servants and the Department of Social Security simply cannot be expected always to understand why a parent will not wish to name the father. To some extent, I believe that that was one of the concerns expressed by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester who said that these were difficult matters into which we should be very wary of entering. Obviously we recognise that this is a very sensitive and delicate area for many people. Our aim, so far as possible, is to ensure that, where a parent has good reasons not to name, such reasons will be recognised and there will be no reduction of benefit. Parents will have ample opportunity to put their case forward. We shall ensure that the Child Support Agency staff are trained to recognise and deal sensitively and carefully with such cases. The parent with care will have an opportunity to explain her case when she is first contacted by the Child Support Agency. If needed, there will then be a cooling-off period in which she can make her case to an official acting on behalf of the Secretary of State. After that, she can make further representations if her case is passed on to a child support officer. Representations can be made orally or in writing. The parent with care can be accompanied by a friend, a neighbour or by some representative of any particular welfare organisation.
The noble Lord, Lord Carter, asked whether the guidelines would be published. I believe that the noble Lord, Lord McGregor, said that that would be more properly included in the regulations. We do not accept that the guidance should be in the regulations. Obviously, the staff will be given the guidance and that guidance will stress that it is the interests of the children and the parent with care that are paramount. One must be aware of the dangers that, if any guidance were published, it would certainly have the possible effect of assisting absent parents to evade their responsibilities.
I move on now to rights of appeal. As noble Lords will remember, Section 46(7) of the Child Support Act gives the parent with care the right of appeal if a benefit deduction is made to a child support appeal
358
tribunal against the issue of a reduced benefit direction. The noble Lord, Lord McGregor, asked that we should go further and that this should be an appeal to the courts. Obviously, one can appeal from social security commissioners—and this is the same sort of animal—to the courts on a point of law. However, I must stress that it is an appeal to an independent tribunal. The child support appeal tribunals, just as with other social security appeal tribunals, are not composed of officials from my department. They are independent tribunals operated by legally qualified people and set up by my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor. I see the noble Lord, Lord McGregor, wishes to intervene. I give way.
Lord McGregor of Durris: My Lords, I am most obliged to the Minister for giving way. My point was simply that the appeal as it stands under the regulations is to a body for which the appellant cannot obtain legal aid.
Lord Henley: My Lords, that is the case with a great many different appeal tribunals—whether they be employment appeal tribunals or social security appeal tribunals. It is really a much wider question as to whether one should extend legal aid, and all the inherent cost, to the tribunals. The original purpose of setting up tribunals was to create some more informal forum whereby matters could he resolved. The necessity for legally qualified representation was, therefore, much less. But, as I said, obviously there is appeal on a point of law to the Court of Appeal where no doubt legal aid would be possible.
My noble kinsman asked about the reduced benefit direction applying to standard deductions from income support. The parent with care's income support may be reduced under a reduced benefit direction if that parent has unreasonably refused to co-operate. At the same time, it might be possible that standard deductions are being made for such items as fuel and housing costs. The overall ceiling of 15 per cent. will continue to be based on the full rate of income support for the over-25 personal allowance. It needs to be borne in mind that those standard deductions, after paying off debts to third parties, are made to safeguard the interests of income support beneficiaries.
The noble Lord, Lord Carter, asked about shared care. He will be aware that the normal maintenance is designed to cater for the most common cases where the child lives with one parent and the absent parent does not live with the child. We recognise that there will be other circumstances. They are provided for in the special cases part of the regulations which modify the application of the formula in such cases. We are aware that there is a feeling that where a child spends a significant amount of time with the absent parent, some recognition of that should be made in the absent parent's maintenance liability. We considered carefully where the balance should be struck. In the end, we concluded that it would be reasonable for the absent parent's liability to be adjusted if, averaged over the year, he provides overnight care for at least two nights per week. Such a level of care would mean

359
that the absent parent would be likely to incur more significant financial commitments—for example, for accommodation—and that is therefore the right level at which to start making a formal recognition of the substantial share of the responsibility.
Lord Carter: My Lords, two nights a week over a year amounts to 104 nights. The absent parent would have to have the child for one-third of the year before there would be any change. Is that right?
Lord Henley: My Lords, yes, as I said, two nights a week averaged over the year. One has to draw the line somewhere. Difficult decisions have to be made. On balance, we believed that that was about the right level at which to make changes.
The noble Lord was also worried that some parents might be worse off with child support if floated off income support. The noble Lord will be aware that the general rule is that anyone who loses income support, for whatever reason, loses the automatic entitlement to free school meals and help with NHS charges. It would be wrong to make an exception for cases where a person lost entitlement merely because they began to receive maintenance or increased maintenance. They obviously still have a chance of obtaining some help with NHS prescriptions and the various schemes it operates on the grounds of low income. However, I accept that that is not true for some of the other passported benefits; for example, the free school meals that the noble Lord mentioned.
We believe that most parents who come off income support because of maintenance will be better off. That will be due to the payment of the maintenance itself. It should be more regular and reliable, and, what is important, it will be at a higher level than at present. In addition, for those parents claiming in-work benefits, such as family credit, there is a £15 maintenance disregard which will be of considerable help. The noble Lords, Lord Carter and Lord Stoddart, also suggested that second families might be made poorer. We have made clear our belief that parents should pay maintenance when they can afford to do so. It is also important to ensure that the absent parent retains an incentive to work to increase his or her income. We have therefore built in a special provision to ensure that an absent parent will always be left with more money than he or she would have were he or she on income support. That is what is called the protected income. Its purpose is to protect the position of the absent parent.
That brings me to the point that the noble Lord, Lord Carter, made—whether the new partner's income will be taken into account for child maintenance. It will not be used in the assessment of maintenance itself, but the partner's income can be relevant to the protected income which, as I have stressed, is designed to ensure that income will be kept above income support levels.
My noble kinsman also asked why the disability working allowance was to be included. We feel—my noble and learned friend made this clear at earlier stages when this matter was discussed—that disabled
360
parents have the same responsibilities to maintain their children as any other parents, and should be expected so to do.
The noble Lord, Lord Rix, was worried about the additional costs of disability in the formula. As was said during the Bill's passage, we looked at that issue carefully. Officials from my department met representatives of many of the disability organisations to discuss those issues. We came to the conclusion that because the costs of disability vary enormously, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to meet all disability needs within the formula. The best way to ensure that maintenance takes account of disability is to obtain a discretionary additional award through the courts which will be able to look at the circumstances of each case. That is provided for in the Act. I give the noble Lord the assurance that that is a matter that will be monitored closely by my department.
Child support will be withdrawn pound-for-pound from income support and the right reverend Prelate asked us to look at some alternative. The only alternative would be a maintenance disregard. We do not believe that a maintenance disregard in income support is necessarily in the best interests of lone parents and their children. Most lone parents want to provide a better standard of living for their children by going to work now, or at some time in the future. Therefore, the recent introduction of a £15 maintenance disregard in family credit, housing benefit, community charge benefit and disability working allowance and the reduction in hours on family credit will make it easier for them to do just that. When they are ready to go to work it will enable them to choose hours which fit conveniently with their care responsibilities. They will be able to receive maintenance in addition to their earnings.
Disregard of maintenance in income support will do nothing to help those parents realise their ambitions for themselves. It will do the opposite. It would put a barrier in their way, and parents would have to earn more to be as well off in work as on income support. The payment of maintenance, as I have argued, is of benefit to children and to those providing care, despite what the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, said.
These regulations are the next step towards the introduction of a new scheme which will provide a fair and consistent method of assessing an absent parent's liability for maintenance and putting in place the procedures which will allow the system to work. They also contain provision for ensuring that parents with care cannot simply pass responsibility for their children's maintenance on to the taxpayer without good reason for doing so, and they put in place a wide range of safeguards to protect the position of parents with care who will suffer harm or undue distress if an obligation to co-operate with the Child Support Agency is pursued. I commend the regulations to the House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Child Support (Arrears, Interest and Adjustment of Maintenance Assessments) Regulations 1992
2.8 p.m.
Lord Henley Lord Henley rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 22nd June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving these regulations I intend to speak to all three at the same time. The three remaining statutory instruments deal with the maintenance assessment formula, special cases and the information to which the child support agency will have access and of which it will be able to dispose and a number of provisions dealing with arrears of maintenance.
With permission, I propose to introduce the debate by mentioning briefly the key intention of each of the three statutory instruments. The Child Support (Maintenance Assessment and Special Cases) Regulations cover the workings of the formula and contain detailed specifications of the values to be used in the formula calculations.
As the House will recall, these specifications are largely based on those which apply in income support. The House will, I am sure, be interested in a number of these provisions, but perhaps in particular the provisions of Regulation 28 which allows for a contribution to maintenance to be made by certain absent parents in receipt of income support.
We think it is important that absent parents, even when they are in receipt of income support, should make some contribution towards meeting their liability and become accustomed to contributing to the maintenance of their children. Equally, however, we recognise the validity of concerns expressed about the position of particularly vulnerable groups and we have extended the categories of those exempt from this contribution. The effect is that it will only be taken from those who are over 18, fit and without children living with them.
Turning to the Child Support (Information, Evidence and Disclosure) Regulations, these regulations have been carefully framed so as to ensure that the purposes for which information may be sought are explicitly listed and for the information to be collected as the minimum required to assess and collect the absent parents' liability. I hope that the House will be reassured by the limited circumstances in which such information will be available for disclosure to a third party.
Finally, the Child Support (Arrears, Interest and Adjustment of Maintenance Assessments) Regulations, in addition to covering a number of
362
technical matters, include provisions for interest to be charged on outstanding arrears, should full payment not be forthcoming from the absent parents.
These regulations provide much of the detail of our new scheme which is designed to ensure that parents make full and proper financial provision for their children. I commend the regulations to the House. I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 22nd June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Henley.)
Lord Carter: My Lords, I discussed all the points that I wished to raise in my first speech and I do not propose to make a long speech now. There was one point which comes up under the Child Support (Maintenance Assessment and Special Cases) Regulations which I asked about first time round. I believe that the Minister did not answer it. It concerned the calculations of the earnings of the self-employed. I have looked at the regulations and believe that the child support officer will have fun if, for example, the absent parent is on the lump, in the building trade or something similar. There is reference to a balance sheet and profit and loss account to find out the earnings. What will happen if the self-employed person does not have such information and the child support officer has to make the best guess he can?
The other point of detail is on page 25 of the regulations, Regulation 26 in Part V. It concerns someone performing a service without receiving remuneration and who performed the service in order to reduce his income under the Act. The child support officer then has to make a calculation of the income that he has forgone. How is this supposed to be done? What on earth is the child support officer meant to do to work out the income that the person would have had? In effect, he has performed a free service but now to be included in his income is the amount that he would have received if he had not provided the service free. I find that hard to follow.
Earl Russell: My Lords, I must apologise to the House for intervening once again but it was not I who put so many regulations on the Order Paper all in one day. I am concerned about the effect of the regulations on the absent parent. A case has been brought to my attention by a citizens advice bureau in north London, again involving jumping the gun. It is of an absent parent already paying £180 a month being asked for a further contribution which reduces him to £37.16 a week on which to live. That is the kind of regulation which among single fathers has always tended to produce non-compliance.
The young man who got a girl into trouble and took the Queen's shilling is a familiar literary figure. I know that the Queen's shilling is in rather short supply these days. It seems to be subject to measures to control the money supply. However, young men in this situation still have Options for Change. I remind my noble kinsman about the prospects of free movement within the European Community. I ask him whether single fathers may be quite as easy to trace as he thinks.

363
I am also concerned about the housing costs of the absent parent in the event of remarriage. The amount of allowable housing costs for the absent parent drops sharply in the event of remarriage, even if there is no change in the actual accommodation. That is something which the second spouse might misunderstand, which will again tend to bring these regulations into disrepute. I shall not develop the point about the absent parent on income support having to contribute. At Report Stage of a Bill I divided the House on that subject at 10 minutes to 12 at night. I say now only that I am glad I did so.
I ask my noble kinsman to look at an exchange that took place in Committee on the Civil Service (Management Functions) Bill concerning the accountability of agencies to Parliament. As regards that matter, I believe there are general questions that have not yet been addressed. We have had little, if any, trouble with the benefits agency in that area, and I am grateful to my noble kinsman and to the benefits agency for that. However, it is not always possible, when dealing with a parliamentary agency, to obtain accurate records of exactly what has been done. It is vital to the monitoring of what happens under these regulations that we should obtain accurate records. I hope that I may ask my noble kinsman for co-operation in the matter.
As regards the effect of the regulations on students, I believe my noble friend Lord Addington wishes to say a few words. I shall not add to what my noble friend Lord McGregor of Durris had to say about disclosure save to draw the attention of my noble kinsman to what has been said by the Law Society. The Government have greatly underestimated the amount of work that the agency will have to undertake. That is a useful and I think exact statement. It is relevant to the argument about costs because if there is much more work than my noble kinsman foresaw, there will be much greater costs than he foresaw.
I note my noble kinsman said that he would never accept what I said on this subject. I cannot resist asking him,"What, never"? I hope he will go as far as the necessary qualification. I would be more convinced by his resistance in this area if he had more often calculated the net costs of the measures that he is introducing. If then he told me that I had miscalculated, I would be a great deal easier to persuade than if he made no attempt to argue the question.
My noble kinsman may perhaps be aware that this measure has led the Law Society to submit a memorandum to the Government expressing anxiety about the proliferation of Henry VIII clauses, and of changes in the law under them. We have several changes in the law under Henry VIII clauses in these regulations. I shall take one from the arrears regulations—that is, Regulation 12(2) (a). With the leave of the House, I wish to quote a few words from that regulation. It states:
"Section 18(6) of the Act shall have effect as if for 'the refusal, assessment or cancellation in question' there is substituted `the adjustment of the amount payable under
364
regulation 10 of the Child Support (Arrears, Interest and Adjustment of Maintenance Assessments) Regulations 1992'".
It is not a particularly heinous change in the law but it is a change in the law. It is something that should have been drawn to our attention so that we could consider it. I hope the committee on the scrutiny of delegated legislation will bring that matter to our attention. It reminds me a little of the famous case of Chief Justice Beresford when he said,"He that drew the statute meant to put it in the statute and only left it out through inadvertence. It shall therefore be construed to be in the statute". That is a method of legislation in which Parliament has never had confidence. I think we must all see why.
We are left considering who will be better off under these regulations. The caring parent will not be better off because the payment will simply be deducted from income support. If the caring parent leaves income support, he also loses passported benefits. I have heard of one case of a family with four children who are £20 a week worse off for losing school meals. The absent parent will not be better off and the Government, because they are undertaking a Sisyphean job of work, will not be better off, either. I cannot help wondering whether the only long-term effect of these regulations will be declining respect for the law. That, I hope, we would all deplore.
2.15 p.m.
Lord Addington: My Lords, I wish to comment briefly on the effect of these regulations on students. Effectively, a student who receives only a grant and a student loan and who happens to be a parent does not have to provide income for the child at that time. However, the minute that student obtains other income, he will be assessed in terms of providing extra support for the child, taking into account the income he receives from the student loan and the grant.
It is almost inevitable that every student will now fall into that category because there are no benefits available to them during the summer vacation. Also, we must bear in mind the fact that the grant and the loan are regarded as the bare essentials on which the student can live. That is not an undisputed point. Many people would say that under current circumstances in many parts of the country the grant, including the parental contribution and the loan, is not enough to live on. Therefore all students are forced to work at some stage.
We have a situation in which the Government say that if one is on the basic minimum income one does not have to pay out, but they will never allow one to be on the basic minimum. They will take into account income up to the basic minimum and will then start to assess the individual on any additional income. I suggest that any student finding himself in that position would probably be unable to continue to be a student due to financial considerations, because he will be called upon to make contributions to the mother and child—which I do not dispute he ought to do—to an extent which will mean that he is unable to continue with his studies.
Something else must be done because we are effectively saying that by assessing them harshly now

365
we will restrict the economic bargaining power of such individuals by restricting their training. That means that in future they will probably not be able to provide as high a level of income for the child. I ask the Government to give some thought to that aspect of the matter and to try to arrange matters a little better. It is nonsensical to say that someone must work but if he does work a certain amount of income will be taken away from him. Indeed, the reasoning is difficult to explain because it chases itself around in a circle.
Lord Henley: My Lords, there are one or two detailed points to which I should like to respond. The noble Lord, Lord Carter, complained that the regulations relating to the self-employed and calculation of their income were too complicated. The regulations closely follow similar rules which exist for family credit. Therefore we have some experience of them. I accept that they can be necessarily very, very complicated. But if the noble Lord would like me to write to him with further details I should be delighted to do so. It is certainly a matter we shall continue to monitor throughout the social security system.
The noble Lord also raised a rather complicated question about the calculation of income for someone providing a free service under Regulation 26. I think that the noble Lord would probably be happier if I said that I would write to him on that point. I would rather not respond in such detail from the Dispatch Box.
The noble Lord, Lord Addington, raised the problem of a student living, as he quite rightly put it, purely on his grant and loan and not paying any maintenance. As soon as he has some income he may be able to afford some child maintenance, as the noble Lord rightly said. We believe that if he can, then so he should. We can see no reason at all why students should be made an exception. In this situation we need to look at all a student's income, including his grant and loan. I should like to point out to the noble Lord that we have taken proper account of the nature of a student's income in the assessment of maintenance. For instance, there are disregards on parts of a student's income, and in particular £10 a week is disregarded from any student loan he may have. The amount of maintenance a student will have to pay will obviously vary according to whatever other income he may have, his housing costs and so on. A student who has a large private income may well be able to afford to pay more.
Earl Russell: My Lords, if that makes the student withdraw from his course, might the caring parent legitimately hold the view that it is killing the gander that lays the golden eggs?
Lord Henley: My Lords, I do not think that it would necessarily cause the student to withdraw from his course. I was going on to say that if a student has a large private income he might well be able to afford to pay a substantial amount of maintenance.
Lord Addington: My Lords, it is not so much a question of if they can pay they should but the way in which the Government are taking into account the smaller amounts. Could we not have some income
366
threshold? That would be so much more sensible than merely saying that everything up to that point will be taken into account if one covers the basic minimum living requirements. It is not a matter of principle but of some of the details. Could the regulations not be applied on a more coherent basis?
Lord Henley: My Lords, there is room. We take into account the income of the individual student. All we are saying is that we will not bother if he is purely on a grant or loan; if he has other income we will look at that income and the grant or loan. I see nothing wrong with that, but obviously we will have to agree to differ.
My noble kinsman suggested that there was already one absent parent paying some £180 per week and being asked to pay more, reducing his net income to £37 per week. The formula is very carefully devised to be fair to both parties. The absent parent will be asked to pay more only if the formula shows that he can afford it. The protected income calculation will ensure that he does not fall below the income support levels plus an extra incentive. Therefore, if he is on income support of £42 or whatever he should not be falling below that figure. If my noble kinsman would like to draw attention to a specific case where he says those requirements are not being met I am prepared to look into it.
My noble kinsman also asked about the allowance for housing costs on remarriage. As he suggested, it will certainly be very hard for the second partner to understand. Just as we will not take into account any income from the new partner in calculating how much the absent parent should pay in maintenance, so we do not allow the new partner's share of housing costs. If we did allow her housing costs we should be putting her costs before those of the absent parent's child. The calculation of protected income will ensure that second families are able to meet their basic living costs.
I accept the case for full accountability of the Child Support Agency. Full records will be kept of all decisions and answers to questions from Members of both this House and another place will he available.
My noble kinsman asked whether I would withdraw my use of the word "never" in terms of agreeing with him. My noble kinsman intervened at Question Time to support me not so long ago, and I accept that there are some rare occasions when the noble Earl and I may be at one.
The three statutory instruments we have just discussed fill in the detail of a number of important features of the new scheme for dealing with child support. I commend them to the House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Council Tax Benefit (General) Regulations 1992
2.28 p.m.
Lord Henley Lord Henley rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 18th June be approved [3rd Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the council tax benefit regulations provide for rebates of up to 100 per cent. of council tax liability and will do so by reflecting both the liability and discount arrangements of the council tax itself. Further, as my right honourable friend the former Secretary of State for Social Security announced last November, the additional amounts included in the income-related benefits to help towards the 20 per cent. minimum contribution towards the community charge will not be clawed back on the introduction of the new tax. That decision will help some eight million people and by April next year income-related benefits will be nearly £700 million more than would have been required to compensate customers for inflation since 1989. Taken together these regulations provide a generous system which will help people on low incomes pay their council tax. Billing and levying authorities will be responsible for administering the benefit which will usually be awarded by rebating the liable person's council tax bill.
The regulations provide for two distinct types of benefit. First, main council tax benefits will help persons on low incomes. Secondly, the alternative benefit, or second adult rebates, will provide help to a liable person where other residents who are living in their home on a non-commercial basis are on a low income.
In framing these regulations the Government's aim has been to maintain alignment with the other income-related benefits, wherever practicable. This benefit scheme therefore builds on the reformed system of income-related benefits which the Government introduced in 1988.
For that reason, I do not intend to speak at length about the detailed workings of main council tax benefit, knowing that the House has, on many occasions in recent years, given detailed consideration to the structure of income-related benefits. However, it may be helpful if I summarise briefly the main similarities and differences between the new benefit scheme and the existing ones.
First, the treatment of capital and income will follow the current procedures under community charge benefit and housing benefit. The upper capital limit will be £16,000 and the first £3,000 of a person's capital will be disregarded completely. The assessment of income under council tax benefit will also follow the normal rules in the other income-related benefits and will include tariff income on any capital between £3,000 and £16,000.
A person's personal circumstances will be taken into account, using the same applicable amounts, made up of personal allowances and premiums, as are now used in housing benefit and community charge benefit.
Main council tax benefit will assume that non-dependants make a contribution to a customer's council tax. This will take the form of flat-rate deductions from maximum benefit, as is the case under housing benefit. However, in calculating non-dependant deductions, any income from disability living allowance and attendance allowance
368
received by the non-dependant will be disregarded, and no non-dependant deductions will be made in respect of non-dependants who are in receipt of income support.
Council tax benefit differs from its predecessor in two respects. First, those with income at or below income support levels will be able to get help with up to 100 per cent. of their council tax bill, and there will be no minimum contribution to the council tax. Secondly, for those with higher incomes, benefit will be withdrawn on the basis of a 20 per cent. taper. The House discussed the size of the taper on a number of occasions during the passage of the Local Government Finance Act. I have to say that the Government considered the issue very carefully and concluded that a 20 per cent. benefit taper for council tax benefit, together with a maximum 100 per cent. rebate, will ensure that most help is focused on those with incomes just above income support levels, while those with higher incomes will receive slightly less help.
I now turn to an important innovation in the council tax benefit scheme; that is, the alternative maximum council tax benefit, or second adult rebates. The House will be aware that the council tax includes a system of discounts, which help people who live alone, including, for example, widowed mothers with children. The discount system will also help certain other groups, including persons who are severely mentally impaired and who currently are exempt from the community charge. Second adult rebates will ensure that persons who would otherwise have qualified for a discount will not be unduly penalised by the presence in their household of a person on low income.
A maximum 25 per cent. rebate will be awarded in respect of a second adult or second adults on income support. Lower levels of rebate will apply in respect of second adults with incomes above prescribed levels.
In commending these regulations to the House, I should like to make clear that they were subject to both formal and informal consultations with the local authority associations. During those consultations many helpful comments and suggestions were made by the associations and a number of them are reflected in the final regulations before the House.
I trust that the House will welcome the regulations as offering a comprehensive system of support, which will help around five million people on low incomes pay their council tax. They offer particular help to those on income support who will gain not only from the introduction of a maximum 100 per cent. benefit but also from our decision not to claw back the amount previously included in income support rates to meet the minimum contribution to the community charge. Help will also be extended to those who, though not on low income themselves, are sharing their household with others of limited means.
I am also certain that, by aligning this new benefit scheme as far as is possible with the existing income-related benefits administered by local authorities, implementing the council tax will be eased. I commend the regulations to the House.
Moved, That the the draft regulations laid before the House on 18th June be approved [3rd Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Henley.)
Lord Carter: My Lords, once again the House will be grateful to the Minister for so clearly explaining these rather complicated regulations. Perhaps I may make one comment which also applies to the child support regulations that we have been discussing. A large number of corrections have had to be made and inserted into the regulations. The Minister is always telling us about the £70 billions spent on social security. Could that sum cover payment for a few more proof readers?
We are told that the council tax is simpler than the poll tax. It probably would have been if it were a property tax in the sense that that is normally understood. But the complications of the council tax mean quite naturally that we must have a complicated system of council tax benefit. My first question is an obvious one. If the benefit is to work properly, there will need to be some form of register in order to know who is liable and who is not. If there is no register, how will the Government assess entitlement to the benefit for the single person discount or the second adult discount? I believe that we have been told in another place that there will be no register. Perhaps the Minister will clarify that point.
We are all pleased that the Government do not propose to claw back the 20 per cent. allowance in the community charge benefit from social security benefits. As the Minister correctly stated, that provision affects 8 million people. Is the claw-back amount to be fully protected within the benefit system? Is it an absolute amount of money which is to be frozen or is it a percentage? There are ominous reports of reductions in social security benefits which may be considered as part of the public expenditure round. One hopes that such reports are unfounded. However, what will the Secretary of State have to do if he wishes to claw back all or part of the amount to which the Minister has referred? Is that amount fully protected within the regulations or could the Minister reduce it as part of the public expenditure round?
Ninety-five per cent. of the cost of the benefit is reimbursed to local authorities from the Government. The remainder has to come from the revenue support grant. Why is there not 100 per cent. reimbursement? Is there an obvious reason why 95 per cent. comes from the Government and the remainder from the revenue support grant?
With regard to reimbursement, Mr. Alistair Burt, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, stated in the Official Report of another place at col.792 on 30th June:
"The subsidy arrangements for the council tax benefit have yet to be finally determined, but I envisage that they will closely follow the current arrangements".
That implies that the 95 per cent. reimbursement arrangement will continue. There was no reference in the debate in another place to different subsidy arrangements where benefit payments are backdated. Those attract only a 25 per cent. subsidy.
Local authorities can use their powers to back-date benefit where the claimant has shown "good cause for
370
a late claim". That provision is continued for council tax benefit in the regulations. Are the back-dated claims still to remain at a level of 25 per cent. reimbursement rather than 95 per cent.? If so, what is the reason for the lower rate? Will the Minister be kind enough to clear up a technical point? There is to be an arrangement from 1st April next year which allows 56 days for late claims which will he considered as though they had been made on 1st April. One assumes that those claims within the 56 days will be included in the 95 per cent. level of reimbursement and not the 25 per cent.
I have referred to the provision relating to a "good cause for a late claim". It allows for claims to be backdated where the claimant may have been misled by incorrect or misleading advice from officials and therefore delayed in making a claim. It is sad to say that the wrong advice from the Benefits Agency itself can constitute good cause. One indication of accuracy of advice is a survey undertaken by Chester Welfare Rights Forum. It suggested that completely incorrect advice had been given by the disability telephone advice line in 25 per cent. of the inquiries and was partially incorrect or incomplete in a further 50 per cent. Advice was correct in only one in four inquiries.
In effect a lower subsidy for the backdated benefit claim penalises local authorities for the mistakes of other agencies. It would be interesting to hear from the Minister whether there is any allowance in the calculation of either the 95 per cent. or the 25 per cent. reimbursement for the reasons for the late claims; and if it is shown that there is a good cause for the late claim that claimants will receive the full amount of reimbursement.
The Minster referred to the taper and I expect that he hoped that we would not go into the matter in detail. However, we must face the fact that we still have a system under which, because of the operation of various tapers, the poorest people face a marginal tax rate of up to 96 pence in the pound. Indeed, a Parliamentary Answer in col.95 of the Official Report of 5th November 1991 showed that 50,000 families with children face marginal tax rates of more than 90 per cent. Clearly that acts as an enormous disincentive to take on more paid work.
Unfortunately, the Government's decision to introduce the 20 per cent. taper on this benefit will have an effect broadly similar to the 15 per cent. taper on the 80 per cent. rebate under the community charge benefit. The impact that the steeper taper will have on people whose income increases is serious. I am indebted to the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux for providing me with an example showing that a low paid tenant with children receiving a £10 pay rise would lose more than £9 of that in one way or another as a result of the reduction of benefits, and so forth. Taking account of all the work that the Government have put into the benefits and the amount of money that they are spending, are they satisfied that the poorest families in the country are facing a marginal tax rate in excess of 90 pence in the pound?
The other area of anxiety relates to people aged between 18 and 24. Where an adult aged 18 or more

371
is liable for the council tax, there will be no variation in the size of the Bill according to age. However, if the liable adult is in receipt of a low income and claims a rebate, the size of that rebate will be lower for those aged between 18 and 24. That is because benefit for people in that age group is lower than for people over the age of 25.
Young people have to face living expenses identical to those people who are aged over 25. However, in many cases they are likely to be earning below average wages because of their age and will therefore be more dependent than older people on the rebate system. The curious effect of that is that the regulation may act as a disincentive for them to seek work. If young people are in receipt of income support, they will receive a 100 per cent. rebate for the council tax. Only when they move into work and their income rises above income support levels do they find that because of the lower applicable amount they are faced with higher council tax bills than people aged over 25 on identical incomes. In practice therefore the effect of the lower benefit rate for council tax may be to discourage young people from taking on low paid work.
Yet another area of major interest is the single person discount. Single people will qualify for a 25 per cent. discount. However, the second adult, if on low income, will also entitle the liable person to receive a 25 per cent. rebate. Presumably in order to claim that, the liable person will have to obtain highly detailed information so that decisions can be made regarding personal rebates, the second adult rebate and so forth. What will happen if the second person refuses to provide the information? We must assume that liable adults have no recourse and will therefore have to pay the full amount of the council tax. Furthermore, what will happen as the incomes of liable adults and the second persons change? Will there be a continuous recalculation of their benefit levels? Will the effect on the register—or the non-existent register—be continually amended?
We all know that a council tax is neither fish, fowl nor good red herring. It is neither a property tax nor a poll tax but has tried to incorporate elements of both. As a result, we have these extremely complicated regulations. Despite what the Minster said, I fear that they will lead to considerable administrative upheaval, and to considerable cost for local authorities. I am afraid that as always under this Government the sufferers will be the poorest people in society.
2.45 p.m.
Earl Russell: My Lords, by now we understand well enough why it is not a good idea to take contentious business on the day the House rises for the Recess. I hope that that may be taken into account in the future and I shall try to take it into account now.
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Carter, in regard to tapers. The point applies to those who are already in work on low wages as well as to those who have been out of work. Someone in part-time work who receives a £10 rise may find that between tax, national insurance, family credit, community charge or council tax benefit and housing benefit they are losing £9.60.
372
We on these Benches take incentives to work seriously. But we believe that for incentives to work there needs to be a supply of carrots as well as sticks. In the administration of the council tax tapers there is a considerable shortage of carrots. I suggest that the Government try to plant some.
We are also concerned in regard to the treatment of students. I know that serious attempts have been made to get the position right. Personally students are invisible. The problem arises when students share a dwelling with non-students. Non-students coming into a dwelling bring the council tax, like the plague, with them. That means that they must pay for the dwelling without receiving any benefit. I understand and am grateful that they receive the second adult rebate. But I would agree with the comment of the citizens advice bureau that the second adult rebate is likely to prove one of the most obscure parts of the council tax system. It will not always be understood. We will find that people are assessed to pay without any reference to their ability to pay. There is also the specific problem of a couple one of whom is a student and the other is not. There we have neither exemption nor benefit. That will produce an injustice.
I prepared for today a major speech on the lower rate of benefit for young people. The House may be delighted to hear that I shall not now deliver it. There is a communication block and a tired House is not the best place to overcome a communication block. However, I should like to give my noble kinsman notice that if, as I hope, we have an opportunity to debate the British Youth Council Report in the autumn, I shall return to the matter to discover why he thinks the fact that young people have lower earnings is a reason that they should receive lower benefits. At present I can make neither head nor tail of that.
Lord Henley: My Lords, I shall deal with some of the points made in the course of the debate. First, I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Carter, welcomed the fact that the extra amounts allowed in the income support would not be clawed back. I repeat the assurance given by my right honourable friend the former Secretary of State that they will not be clawed back, but obviously the amounts included in income related benefits form part of the benefit levels which must be considered each year for uprating in the usual way. They will continue to be treated as part of any uprating.
The noble Lord also asked why 95 per cent. of council tax benefit was paid by the Department of Social Security and why the remaining 5.5 per cent. was fed into the rate support grant. Subsidy arrangements have not been finally determined. I understand that it is intended that they should follow broadly the arrangements currently applying for community charge benefit. Under the current subsidy arrangements for community charge benefit local authorities receive 95 per cent. subsidy for the bulk of their benefit expenditure and lower rates of subsidy within certain incentive areas, of which backdating is one.
I should also mention that the remainder, equivalent to 5.5 per cent. of total benefit expenditure, is also taken into account in the local government

373
settlement. The additional 0.5 per cent. is in recognition of some unavoidable expenditure within the incentive areas. The rate of subsidy paid on backdated amounts is, for example,25 per cent., as the noble Lord, Lord Carter, said. Since the early 1970s it has been a fundamental principle that local authorities should hold a financial stake in the efficient running of the rebate and allowance schemes. Until 1988 cases not on supplementary benefit were only directly subsidised at 90 per cent. The Government continue to believe that a balance between direct and indirect subsidy is the proper way to safeguard the huge sums of public money involved.
The noble Lord asked at what level benefit awarded under the 56-day rule for claims will be reimbursed: the answer is 95 per cent. I do not accept the arguments that the taper reflects what noble Lords refer to as high, marginal tax rates. All claimants will be better off even though on some occasions they may be better off by only a fairly small amount. The decision to have a 20 per cent. taper strikes the right balance between ensuring that those with incomes just above income support levels receive substantial help while those with higher incomes receive less. That is certainly consistent with the Government's policy of focusing benefit to help those on the lowest incomes. I can assure the noble Lord that even should the taper have been set at 15 per cent. rather than 20 per cent., those very high marginal rates would still only be reduced from 97 per cent. to 96 per cent. and would only apply to someone in receipt of council tax benefit, housing benefit and family credit.
The noble Lord again claimed that the council tax will create the need for a register. There will be no need for a register for all adults and such claims are entirely mistaken. In reality, for the majority of cases the only information required will be whether there is more than one adult resident in any property. I welcome the fact that my noble kinsman decided that today was not the occasion to debate our general policy on lower rates of benefit for the under-25s. I shall respond briefly by taking one small point. To extend the adult rate to the under-25s in housing benefit and council tax benefit would cost about £30 million at 1991–92 prices and benefit levels. I believe that to be a significant amount of money. Pressure would then build up to extend it even further to all under-25s on income support at a cost of about £300 million.
Equalising benefit rates (purely housing benefit and council tax benefit) would not help those simply on income support who will gain from the 100 per cent. rebates and from the decision not to claw back the amounts that I mentioned earlier. It will not help under-25 year-old couples or under-25 lone parents who are already entitled to the adult personal allowance. Rather, equalisation would simply help those single, under-25 householders without children whose income is above income support levels. That group of clients does not have as high a priority as others in the Government's thinking. It is also worth pointing out that if the under-25s live alone they will be entitled to the full personal discount of 25 per cent. of their council tax liability like everyone else.
374
The noble Lord, Lord Carter, asked what would happen to the second adult rebates if the second adult would not provide the information. It is the liable person who has to report changes in circumstances concerning the second adult's income. Similar arrangements already exist for non-dependent deductions in housing benefit which local authorities have operated without any problems for many years. There is no reason to doubt their ability to make second adult rebates work. My noble kinsman also asked whether non-student partners of students can claim benefit. In the case of couples where one partner is not a student, the non-student partner will be able to claim council tax benefit as a couple in the normal way. That follows the arrangements which already apply in housing benefit. In these cases the income of both partners will be taken into account and assessed from the applicable amounts appropriate for a couple in their circumstances.
The regulations will be made as soon as they have been approved by Parliament although most of the provisions will not come into effect until April of next year. During the next nine months the authorities will be implementing the benefits scheme. We have certainly built on past benefits schemes and kept changes to the absolute minimum. I am sure that the House will welcome these arrangements and regulations which help around five million council taxpayers at an estimated overall cost of £1 billion. I commend the regulations to the House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Horticultural Development Council (Amendment) Order 1992
2.55 p.m.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Earl Howe)The Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Earl Howe) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee]. The noble Earl said: My Lords, the order is being presented in accordance with the requirements of the Industrial Organisation and Development Act 1947. A brief history of the Horticultural Development Council and the circumstances which have led to the draft amendment order may be helpful. The HDC was set up in July 1986 with the primary function of commissioning research and development in horticulture on behalf of the industry. It has power to raise a levy for that purpose from growers of horticultural produce, excluding apples, pears and hops. All growers in Great Britain with annual sales of produce in excess of £25,000 are liable to pay the levy. Mushroom growers whose annual purchases of mushroom spawn exceed 700 litres are also liable.
The current levy rate on growers, other than mushroom growers, is set at 0.5 per cent. of sale value and on mushroom growers at 7p per litre of spawn purchased. Annual revenue from the levy for 1991–92 was about £2.2 million and the council has so far commissioned over 150 projects. The council was last reviewed, as required by the enabling legislation, in

375
July 1989 when there was a positive poll of growers in support of the council continuing. It will be subject to a further statutory review in July 1994.
I turn now to the circumstances which have led us to propose the order before the House today. The HDC is currently required to consist of 22 members appointed by Ministers: 16 representing growers in the industry, two independents, two representing employees in the industry, and two members with wholesale and retail marketing and distribution expertise. Following representations from the chairman of the HDC, Ministers accepted advice that the council has proved too unwieldy in its present form and would benefit from a reduction in its overall size from the current 22 members to 14. The reduction would he achieved by reducing employee, marketing and distribution, and independent representation from two members to one member in each category. The grower members would reduce from 16 to 11.
As required by the enabling legislation, these proposals for a tighter structure for the council were put to the full range of representative organisations in Great Britain for them to consider. The clear message we received from them is that there is general support among the industry for the principle of reducing the overall size and structure of the council to enable it to operate more effectively and in a more efficient and business-like fashion. Ministers are confident that the slight reservations expressed by some groups about adequate representation for all sectors of the industry across the whole spectrum, from production to marketing and retailing, can be resolved by careful selection of the right incumbent for the post. In other words, the onus will be squarely with the nominating bodies to identify candidates not only with a good knowledge of their particular sector of the industry—this has been the main consideration up to now—but with proven entrepreneurial flair and long-term vision for the industry.
I firmly believe that these proposals represent a worthwhile reduction in the size of the council which will improve efficiency and ensure a better balance of view in setting work priorities for the council. There is considerable scope for reducing the present trade gap in horticultural produce. These changes should enable the council to focus its research more directly towards the needs of the industry so that it can compete more effectively in domestic and international markets.
Turning to the order before us, the main amendments now proposed are short and straightforward. Article 3 reduces the total membership of the HDC from 22 to 14. As I said, this is achieved by reducing the number of grower members from 16 to 11; the number of marketing and distribution members from two to one; the number of employee members from two to one; and the independent members from two to one also. Article 4, as a consequence of the foregoing amendment, proportionately reduces the number of council members constituting a quorum from a minimum of eight to a minimum of five.
I should draw your Lordships' attention to the timing of the order. It is proposed that it should come
376
into force the day after it is made to allow arrangements for the appointment of the 14 members of the council to be set in hand to ensure that the new-look council is in place for 1st August this year. It only remains for me now to commend the order to the House.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Earl Howe.)
Lord Carter: My Lords, the House will be extremely grateful to the Minister for explaining the order. After two and a half hours on social security I hope he will not mind if I try not to take on board the concept of litres of mushroom spawn.
We welcome the order. On a personal note, I regret that in agriculture we have not used more the Industrial Organisation and Development Act 1947 to try to set up development councils in more sectors of the industry where I believe they would have worked well. The noble Earl referred to the entrepreneurial flair of those who will be on the amended council. That factor is evident in horticulture, which has had to manage with hardly any subsidies at all. Entrepreneurial flair is certainly present. The HDC does an excellent job. With this tighter and leaner organisation I am sure that it will now do even better. I am extremely pleased on behalf of this side of the House to support the order.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Data Protection (Regulation of Financial Services etc.) (Subject Access Exemption) (Amendment) Order 1992
3.1 p.m.
Earl Ferrers Earl Ferrers rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 22nd June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Earl said: My Lords, the purpose of the Data Protection Act 1984 is to regulate how personal data which are held on computer are used. It sets out the principles of good data handling practice with which data users must comply. In particular, it gives people the right to find out if a data user holds any information about them and, if so, what.
The order restricts a person's right of access to data about him held by a new regulator—the Taurus operator. Taurus is the Stock Exchange's paperless share transfer system. It will do away with share certificates and with long delays in transferring stock from one person to another.
Many of your Lordships may remember the difficulties which were caused by backlogs of paperwork just before the stock market crash of 1987. Taurus is a computerised system, and it is one of the Stock Exchange's new innovations. The transfer of the ownership of shares will not now have to depend on the physical movement of stock transfer forms and of certificates. Electronic messages will replace both share certificates and transfer forms. There is to be a

377
Taurus operator. This will be the Stock Exchange. The operator will have the responsibility of vetting and admitting the participants in Taurus, which will be banks, brokers and other financial intermediaries.
The operator—the Stock Exchange—will have to keep data on those who apply to use Taurus, including information about their financial standing and technical competence and about whether their directors and employees are fit and proper people to use the system. The Stock Exchange will also have to continue to monitor those who use the system in order to ensure that they are continuing to abide by the regulations and the rules.
The order before your Lordships today prevents those who use the system from gaining access to some data about them which are held by the operator—the Stock Exchange. The data which are held by the Taurus operator may well include information about suspected dishonesty, incompetence or malpractice. If a person were to have access to this kind of data, it might allow him to cover his tracks or otherwise to thwart an investigation.
The Stock Exchange has already started consulta-tion on the draft rules which it will use to assess those who wish to use the system. Once the comments have been received and considered, the Stock Exchange will ask Treasury Ministers to approve the rules, as is required by the regulations.
The order is a small one but it is a necessary part of regulating the paperless share transfer system once it comes into operation. The Data Protection Registrar has been consulted, as is required by the Act, and he is content. I thought that noble Lords would not willingly wish to be wearied with technicalities from me on the last day of term and so be further delayed from attaching themselves to their buckets and spades. Therefore, with this more truncated exposition of the order than I would normally wish to give, and solely in deference to your Lordships' understandable intellectual preferences, I commend the order to the House.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 22nd June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Earl Ferrers.)
Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for his full explanation of the order. I think that the question of the buckets and spades is less important than finding where to use them nowadays along our coastline.
In general, we are broadly in favour of the order, although there are certain misgivings which were raised in another place; namely, that the freedom of the individual could be restricted because of the lack of staff and resources at the office of the Data Protection Register. Of course that office is supposed to act as consultant and investigator of complaints raised by the public.
In another place, the Minister, Mr. Peter Lloyd, said that it was thought that there were enough resources at the office for the task to be completed. Despite the Minister's statement, which was really hopeful rather than authoritative, I feel that we should have the assurance from the Government that they are aware that there could be a stage where a shortfall of
378
staff could cause problems and that the individual could then be restricted in his ability to find out exactly where he stood in particular instances. But I do not know whether the Minister can answer at this point. I do not really expect him to. However, it must be stressed again that because of the new system, staff shortages or lack of staff training, a hold-up could arise and people could be restricted in their inquiries. Having said that, in the knowledge that the Minister will certainly report back on the matter, we certainly give the draft order our approval.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for saying that he is on the whole supportive of the order. Taurus will be operated by the Stock Exchange. Those who are participants in the process will actually he charged a fee and the fee will be governed by the number of people who are involved in operating the system. I have no reason to believe that there will not be sufficient people to do so; indeed, I have every confidence that there will be.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Access to Personal Files (Housing) (Scotland) Regulations 1992
3.8 p.m.
Baroness Trumpington Baroness Trumpington rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 30th June be approved [5th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Strathmore and Kinghorne, I beg to move the above regulations.
I shall try not to detain your Lordships long. However, I cannot resist saying what an unexpected pleasure it is for me to face the noble Lord, Lord Carmichael, for the first time. The Access to Personal Files Act 1987 set the framework for giving members of the public a right to see records held about them by public authorities. The regulations before the House today set out how that right should apply in practice to records held by public sector landlords in Scotland. Briefly, the regulations give public sector tenants the right to see personal information held about them by their landlord on non-computerised files as long as they apply in writing and pay any fee charged by the landlord of up to £10. A similar right already exists when the information is held on computer.
There are some necessary exemptions from the right. The first applies when the information held could identify a third person who is not a member of the tenant's family, or a housing official, or a medical practitioner who has been associated with the tenant's case. In that case, the third person's permission must be sought before access to the information is given. The second exemption is when releasing information could cause serious harm to the physical or mental health of the tenant or some other person. If that seems to be the case, the authority must seek the views of an appropriate medical practitioner before releasing the information. In cases where there is no appropriate medical practitioner, the local authority can itself decide whether serious harm will arise, but

379
that power should be used sparingly. The third exemption is where disclosure would prejudice the prevention or detection of crime or the arrest or prosecution of offenders; and the fourth is where the information is subject to legal professional privilege.
An important provision in the regulations is the power of a tenant to have corrected or erased any information which is inaccurate. Even if the landlord does not agree that the information is inaccurate, a note must be attached to the file giving the tenant's point of view.
Finally, the regulations also give the tenant the power to seek a review of the decision of the public sector landlord not to give access to information or not to correct information which the tenant believes to be inaccurate. Any such review must be carried out either by members of the authority who took no part in making the original decision or by a meeting of the full authority. I hope that that brief summary of the regulations has been of assistance. We shall be issuing full guidance to local authorities about the operation of the powers under the new regulations and plan to publish an advice booklet for the use of the public.
Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 30th June be approved [5th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Baroness Trumpington.)
Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, the House is grateful to the noble Baroness for giving a full explanation of the regulations. I think the pleasure is mine that she has entered into the Scottish field. It might give her an appetite to develop her interest in things Scottish. As with the previous regulations, we are in general agreement and welcome these regulations. The noble Baroness spelt out all the exemptions in some detail. A point was raised in another place upon which we should like an assurance. It related to the serious case of a divorced person trying to use the records to get in touch with an estranged wife or husband. That could be difficult, especially if there was a history of domestic violence.
The Minister in the other place said that that point would be considered. We should like to know whether the Government have had any new thoughts about it. We hope that before the regulations go any further that point will be cleared up. Otherwise, we are happy to accept them.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, I should like the noble Lord to know that I have always been a keen admirer of Scotch whether it is "the" or just Scotch. Was the noble Lord referring to serious harm?
Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, yes.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, the Government have not defined serious harm. The fundamental principle underlying the right of access is that tenants should be able to know what is recorded about them. The restriction is therefore confined to serious harm. I consider that its use should be exceptional rather than the norm. The guidance will provide more information about that issue. That exemption may be relevant, for example, where there is a risk of assault on the applicant's partner or where the giving of
380
details about a former partner's address might put that person at risk. Apart from that, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his welcome for the regulations. I commend them to your Lordships' House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Education (Assisted Places) (Amendment) Regulations 1992
3.15 p.m.
The Minister of State, Department of Education (Baroness Blatch): My Lords, I present to your Lordships for approval the draft Education (Assisted Places) (Amendment) Regulations 1992. I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 6th July be approved [5th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Baroness Blatch.)
The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Cox): My Lords, the Question is, That this Motion be agreed to. As many as are of that opinion, will say "Content"—
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, I apologise to the House for the delay. I had hoped that there would be an explanation from the Minister before I rose to speak.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I am absolutely prepared to give a full explanation; but I checked with the usual channels about half an hour before coming to the Dispatch Box and I was told that it would not be necessary. However, I shall of course give the explanation. I have it with me.
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, perhaps I may say something about the Opposition's views of the regulations and the scheme. The Minister will not be surprised to learn that we on this side of the House oppose not just the order but the whole scheme to which it refers. We have made our opposition clear from the outset. It is a bad scheme; it is wrong in its conception and is a failure in terms of its operation. As such, it is a complete waste of public money. Nearly £80 million went down the drain during 1991–92 to fund the scheme. This sum would be much better spent on countless other high priority needs.
Would it not be better to use the money to expand nursery education, especially in our inner cities? Would this not be a better way of helping to improve educational opportunities for children from low income homes? Would it not be better to use the money to provide an extended school day in our primary and secondary schools in inner cities so that young people could benefit from a variety of extracurricular opportunities that the extra time would allow? This again would enrich opportunities for children from poor families far more than the assisted places scheme.
Would it not be more valuable to dedicate £80 million to providing large numbers of children whose family income is low with opportunities for school visits to places of interest, for school trips or exchanges in Europe, or for environmental studies in the country?

381
Any one of these alternatives would reach far more children and have a better chance of helping many more pupils who come from disadvantaged homes than the nonsense of the assisted places scheme. It is a nonsense because most of the children benefiting from the scheme come from middle class back-grounds. But more than that, it is an underhand way of using taxpayers' money to shore up private schools. Worse still, it removes talented young people from state schools, demoralising teachers in so doing and implying that state schools are inadequate to meet the educational needs of their pupils. That is worse than nonsense; frankly, it is a disgrace.
What saddens me most about the scheme and the annual ritual we now go through in up-rating the parental contributions and amending the regulations in other minor ways, is the unwillingness of the Government to listen to their own advisers. Despite the clearly expressed views of Her Majesty's Inspectorate that it is perfectly possible to cater for very able children in the normal school curriculum, the Government go on implying that it is not and that somehow able pupils will be worse off in state schools than in private ones. Hence the Government's scheme to provide places at lower fees in the private schools.
I should like to know what evidence the Government have that a pupil who is given an assisted place on the scheme does any better than that pupil would do in a state school. Perhaps the Minister would also comment on the findings of the Audit Commission. Like Her Majesty's Inspectorate, it is an organisation which I should have thought the Government would respect. I should have thought that the Government would respond to its findings. Perhaps the noble Baroness would care to comment on what the Government think about the Audit Commission's view that children assisted in private schools do not receive a measurably greater added value from their schooling as a result. That is an important finding since the last time we debated these regulations.
If the Audit Commission is right, we have wasted £500 million of taxpayers' money on the scheme over the past 11 years. Will the Minister agree that the Audit Commission's finding earlier this year that there was an overspend of £3 million on the scheme, even though the target numbers of pupils have not been met, is in itself a severe criticism of the running of the scheme? Was it not unfortunate that halfway through the year the Government had to intervene to remind schools of the ceiling of 12 per cent. in the increases that could be covered? Meanwhile, state schools were being forced to manage on a 7 per cent. increase in their current expenditure. What do the Government intend to do this year to prevent a recurrence of last year's problems? What kind of cap will be provided, and will it be at the current rate of inflation? Will the Minister undertake to examine the huge differentials in the fees charged in private schools?
Will the Minister find out whether value for money is being provided for taxpayers subsidising fees through this scheme in those schools where the fees are three times higher than in some other schools in the scheme? A number of private schools receive over £1
382
million of public money for assisted places and some receive over £1.5 million. So far as I can make out, there is no proper system of accountability and no real checks on whether this is money well spent. It is, as The Times newspaper rightly described it,
"a misuse of public money to subsidise a private industry".
We know private schools are having a hard time in the recession but I thought the Government's view was that the private sector had to stand on its own two feet and operate efficiently in the market place. That is the philosophy the Government apply to firms.
In the debate on these regulations that took place in your Lordships' House last year, I made it clear that the findings of research projects have shown that most of the pupils in the scheme come from homes where the parents have received a relatively privileged education. A majority of the parents have attended either independent or selective schools. I know of no evidence that challenges those findings. Most of the parents are, through this scheme, finding a cheap way into the private sector.
The Independent Schools Information Service admits that only 16 per cent. of pupils in the scheme come from semi-skilled or unskilled backgrounds. Many of the pupils in the scheme have divorced or separated parents. I wish to ask the Minister a direct question on that matter. Does she think it right to continue to assess parental income, where a child is living with a mother, on the basis of the mother's income alone? Should not the child's father's income be taken into account? Fathers ought to be responsible for supporting their children in these circumstances.
It is clear that as only one-third of those on the scheme qualify for full remission of fees, the scheme is not only benefiting what one Conservative politician has described as distressed gentle folk, but it is also providing a way into private schools for the children of people who are on average and above-average incomes. Those people pay reduced fees at the expense of other taxpayers. Parliament is being asked to approve not just continued expenditure on a deeply flawed scheme but also to approve an increase in expenditure from £76 million to £87 million. That is a further £11 million. That represents an increase of 10 per cent. in real terms. We are being asked to approve a scheme that flies in the face of the Government's apparent commitment to improve standards in state schools.
Plenty of talented and able pupils do well in state schools and their very presence in them helps, through the example they provide and the encouragement they can give to their peers by the high standards they set, to raise the overall standards of those schools. Yet the Government wish to continue with this scheme and to increase spending on it which removes these children from maintained schools. The Government are damaging the schools in this respect by siphoning funding away from them to spend on private schools instead. The Government are neglecting the majority of pupils in favour of a misguided scheme that supports a small minority of pupils. In the light of those remarks, it is hard to take seriously the

383
Government's claim that they are committed to improving standards for children and young people as a whole.
Lord Ritchie of Dundee: My Lords, on behalf of these Benches, I should say that we too do not go along with this scheme and that we have always said so. I shall not weary the House by repeating much of what the noble Baroness, Lady Blackstone, has just said as we are in general agreement with her comments. In particular, I do not like the principle whereby the best children are taken from a school. I know from my own long experience that the brightest and best children are important to a school. When they are creamed off, the school, and the other children in particular, suffer greatly. That is a regrettable aspect of the scheme.
I should like to ask the noble Baroness certain questions, of which I should have given her notice. If she cannot answer them immediately, and I think that she probably will not be able to, I should be very grateful if she would write to me.
One point occurs to me, which I have never heard raised before. It arises from the Education Act 1980 when the system was first instituted. It was said, though not in the Act, that this was a scheme whereby bright children from less well-off backgrounds should be enabled to go to high quality independent schools. It has only just occurred to me to wonder who decides which are the bright children? Is it a decision of the headmaster of the schools which they attend? Is it a decision made by the parents? Or is it a totally subjective opinion as to who is bright enough to enjoy the privilege? I feel that I should know the answer to that question but perhaps the noble Baroness will kindly put me right.
I should also like to know what, if any, proportion of children have enjoyed that privilege not so much because they are bright as for certain other specific reasons. For example, some children may be deemed psychologically unfit for the rigours of the state system. They may need a small community and small classes. Have such children ever been able to enjoy the advantages of an assisted place in an independent school?
What about children who obviously need specialist teaching of one sort or another? I am thinking, for example, of a child who is particularly gifted in music. Have such children enjoyed assisted places? Are there examples of their being able to benefit from the scheme? There is also the case of, for example, highly intelligent dyslexic children. Have there been cases of such children being able to enjoy the scheme and, if so, how many?
Finally, I should like to ask the noble Baroness whether she has any information as to whether the benefits are reaching the lowest income families. The noble Baroness, Lady Blackstone, spoke of the places being enjoyed mainly by comparatively well-to-do middle-class families. That idea is current. Is it accurate?
I should be grateful to hear what the Minister has to say in reply to those questions.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, the House has just witnessed possibly the best example of the politics of envy that we have heard in this House for a very long time. The assisted places scheme is now in its 11 th successful year. I can assure all noble Lords that any doubts which they may have about it are not shared by the many parents whose children have benefited and will continue to benefit from it.
There are now 27,600 pupils in the assisted places scheme of whom about two-thirds—66 per cent.—come from families with incomes below £12,500 per annum. The scale for determining the amount of fee remission is intentionally a demanding one and only those families with incomes currently below £8,714, to be uprated to £9,056 by these amendment regulations, qualify for completely free places.
In the current school year 35 per cent. of all assisted pupils are eligible for full remission of fees. That means that this year 35 per cent. of those families are earning below £8,714. It is clear that the scheme is working to the advantage of those families of humble means for whom it is intended and who would never have been given the opportunity to consider a choice of education for their children had it not been for the scheme.
The noble Lord, Lord Ritchie, asked what would happen in the case of a child with expertise in music or in art. I look to the noble Lord to support us in encouraging specialisms in maintained schools as well as in the independent sector when we come to that matter.
Entry into the scheme is by examination. There is an objective assessment of ability in order to qualify for the places. There is also a means test of the income of the family.
The assisted places scheme provides excellent value for money. In the last year for which comparable figures are available—1989–90—the average cost to the taxpayer of each assisted place was £2,364, and the corresponding average cost of a pupil in the maintained sector is estimated to be about £2,135, a difference of only £229. Even this small difference is largely due to the high proportion of sixth form provision which the scheme supports, and that narrows the gap even more. But in any event I ask noble Lords not to lose sight of the fact in considering the costs of this scheme that if there was no assisted places scheme the costs of educating more than 27,600 children would have to be borne by the total costs to be met for education in the maintained sector and all we would be doing would be transferring the costs to provide for that education.
The excellence of the output from the assisted places scheme expenditure is beyond question. Last summer 90 per cent. of A-level entries by assisted places scheme pupils resulted in grades A to C compared with 61 per cent. in all independent schools and 44 per cent. in maintained schools. In addition,92 per cent. of GCSE entries by assisted places scheme pupils resulted in grades A to C compared with 82 per cent. in all independent schools and 47 per cent. in maintained schools. Of that 92 per cent.,45 per cent. achieved grade A and 33 per cent. achieved grade B. What further proof is necessary as to the success of the

385
scheme? Noble Lords opposite believe in equality of opportunity for all pupils. We believe that the assisted places scheme plays a vital part in this process and does so by levelling up rather than down. The assisted places scheme is plainly achieving its objective of opening up some of the best independent schools to children who almost certainly would not otherwise have been able to look to them as an option. That can only be to the advantage of those children and the nation.
The vote on this subject has been taken and the whole of the debate so far is out of order. I hope that the House will now go on to approve the regulations.
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, before the Minister sits down, I should like to say that every other order discussed this afternoon was first introduced by the Minister and the Opposition were then allowed to reply. It is entirely wrong to say that a vote has been taken. I was caught completely unawares by the failure of the Minister to introduce this order, as I think is normal practice. Therefore I hope that she will withdraw the remark that this debate is out of order.
Perhaps I may also ask her whether she would accept that it is the marginal cost that we should be taking into account when comparing the cost of this scheme with the cost of a place in a maintained secondary school. After all, there are a large number of spare places in maintained secondary schools and to talk about a comparison using the full cost is entirely inappropriate. I should also be grateful if she would answer the direct question I put to her about parents.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, before I came into the Chamber to answer the debate I spoke to the noble Baroness's Chief Whip on these matters. The Chief Whip told me I would not be asked for detailed information. The detailed information I have been asked for I have given. The noble Baroness chose not to stand up at the appropriate time when the order was called in the House. It was only after the vote was taken that she chose to rise to the Dispatch Box. I believe I am entirely in order and that the House has been exceptionally indulgent in accepting both the speech of the noble Baroness and my own in reply.
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, I cannot speak for any conversation which went on between the Opposition Chief Whip and either the Minister or anybody else on the Government Benches. All I can say is that this is a complete change from the way in which we debated the order last year. I think it would have been appropriate to inform the Opposition Front Bench spokesman of any intention completely to change the way the order was to be debated.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, with the indulgence of the House I shall make my final comment. I think the fault lies in the communications between the noble Baroness's Chief Whip and the noble Baroness herself, not between myself and the noble Baroness's Chief Whip.
Lord Ritchie of Dundee: My Lords, I do not know whether I am in order in rising. The noble Baroness was pleased to describe what the Opposition Benches had to say as the politics of envy. That is not so. We were making detailed comments on our objections to the scheme. They were not based upon envy but upon our sense of equity and justice.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I believe this is entirely out of order. The debate has finished and the vote has been taken.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

Indonesia: Aid and Human Rights
3.35 p.m.
Lord Rea Lord Rea rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will make development aid and arms sales to Indonesia conditional on the ending of human rights abuses in East Timor to the satisfaction of an international commission of inquiry under the auspices of the United Nations.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I should first like to thank in advance all noble Lords who have put down their names to speak on this last item of business on the last day of term. I shall not have the opportunity to do so after the Minister's reply. I am looking forward with interest to the maiden speech of the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg, whose former constituency is close to my home and includes part of the territory of my medical practice.
Like all noble Lords, I am always disturbed by violations of human rights and particularly by the illegal occupation of territory by another nation using military force. I have always known that the Indonesian occupation of East Timor in December 1975 was followed by a fierce and brutal guerrilla conflict. I became particularly interested in the problem when I was fortunate enough to visit East Timor for all of 24 hours at the invitation of the Indonesian Government while I was a member of an outward delegation for the Inter-Parliamentary Union in March 1989. That visit was arranged to demonstrate the opening up of East Timor to visitors, both Indonesian and foreign.
But in 24 hours, as can be imagined, it was impossible to speak to East Timorese people without Indonesian guides being present—except on one occasion in a prison in Dili, the capital, where one detainee described to us his experience of torture while under interrogation before sentencing. We were not allowed to use the military helicopters, which, incidentally, were conspicuous by their presence, to visit areas such as Viqueque where 131 years after the invasion there had been recent fighting. In particular, we were not able to see or speak to Bishop Belo, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in East Timor, although he had been named on our original programme as a key person whom we would be allowed to interview. Much later, after our return to Britain, we heard that he had been totally unaware of our visit.
There is a twofold reason for raising the matter now. First, there is the killing of around 100—

387
according to all independent witnesses it may be more—unarmed, mainly young civilians outside the Santa Cruz cemetery in Dili on 12th November last year. That event was witnessed by several observers from the outside world. It was filmed and subsequently obtained world-wide publicity. The second reason is that it has now become the stated policy of the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Community that development aid should be conditional upon recipient countries adopting acceptable human rights policies within their own borders. That was mentioned in the Queen's Speech with regard to aid policy:
"[The Government's] objectives will include promoting good government, sensible economic policies and respect for human rights".
Initially, the policy of conditionality of aid was directed at countries of the Eastern bloc. But since the break-up of the Warsaw Pact and the establishment of multi-party democracy in the East, that policy has been applied to other countries as well; notably, in the case of Britain, to Burma, Kenya and Malawi. Also, until recently for many years we operated sanctions against South Africa.
After the Tiananmen episode in China there was a slowing of aid and trade to that country, but regrettably, because of the need to hold a dialogue with China about Hong Kong and because of the huge economic importance of trade with China, that policy has now been relaxed, despite the fact that human rights problems remain and China is still in illegal occupation of Tibet.
Before considering our aid and arms trade policy with Indonesia, I need to give a brief outline of the East Timor problem. We have frequently discussed the matter at Question Time but so far as I am aware a connected account of the East Timor story has not yet found its way into Hansard. I shall therefore now give what must be a grossly truncated account.
Timor is an island some 300 miles long and 60 miles wide. It lies 400 miles north-west of Darwin, Australia, in the Timor Sea. Its original inhabitants are ethnically different from the inner island Indonesians, having much in common with Melanesian people. In the 17th and 18th centuries it was colonised by the Dutch taking the western part and the Portuguese the eastern part of the island. When Indonesia was created from the former Dutch East Indies in 1949 West Timor automatically became part of Indonesia and East Timor continued under direct Portuguese rule for a further 27 years until 1974 when the old Portuguese colonial empire broke up.
Political events were then complex. However, in December 1975 Indonesia illegally invaded East Timor and occupied Dili and other major cities but not without resistance. The short-lived independent government of East Timor, dominated by the Fretilin Party which had declared independence, retreated to the forested mountainous interior and have been waging a guerrilla war against Indonesia ever since. Very few guerrillas are left now but they are still to be found under their leader and have never received outside assistance, obtaining their arms by ambushes and raids on the Indonesian forces.
Indonesia claims that its occupation was legiti-mised by a declaration by a Timorese People's Assembly hurriedly got together by the Indonesians in May 1976, six months after the invasion, while fighting was still continuing. The United Nations has never recognised the legitimacy of that assembly which it considers to have been an unrepresentative body acting under duress. The United Nations Assembly and Security Council resolutions from 1975 to 1982 repeatedly called for the Indonesians to withdraw and allow the East Timorese population to vote freely under international supervision in an act of self-determination regarding their future. That has never been allowed by the Indonesian Government.
Over the past 16 years the war in East Timor has been exceptionally brutal. Actual casualties will never be known accurately, but it is probable that 100,000 civilians have died directly as a result of the conflict and a further 100,000 have died as a result of starvation or disease, forced displacement and the disruption of agriculture, transport and basic services. That figure comes from a total population of 600,000.
During that period about 100,000 Indonesians, mainly from crowded Java, have been settled in the territory and Dili has become largely Indonesian in character. Since the invasion, nearly all East Timorese have at least formally adopted Roman Catholicism, the dominant faith during the Portuguese colonial period. Bishop Belo, whom the British IPU group was not allowed to meet, is a staunch upholder of the rights of the East Timorese people. Because of his prominent position and direct links with the Vatican, he has never been arrested but his residence is closely guarded. There is little doubt that the Catholic Church now forms a rallying point for the East Timorese resistance to Indonesian rule. That is now fully backed by Portugal, which in international law is still the administering power.
That resistance to Indonesian rule has been remarkably consistent even though in the mid-1980s Indonesia switched from direct repression to investment in infrastructure—schools, clinics and roads—in an effort to gain the loyalty of the Timorese. The resistance now appears to have taken on a more political character, relying less on guerrilla fighting, with the result that peaceful demonstrations now take place, in particular when international observers are present. The latest demonstration last November was brutally attacked by the Indonesian forces.
It is possible that greater patience and persuasion, rather than the use of direct military force in 1975, might have resulted in the population of East Timor coming round to the idea of incorporation into Indonesia. However, their treatment as inferior citizens, ruled by a military force carrying out a policy bordering on genocide for the past 16 years, has understandably hardened their resistance. The Santa Cruz massacre was visible but it was only an example of the style of rule that had existed during the previous 16 years.
It must be remembered that immediately after the Suharto regime came into being in 1965 it was responsible for the killing of what is reliably estimated to he 1 million people without trial. They were mainly

389
from Java and merely suspected of being members of the PKI, which is the Indonesian communist party. Human rights abuses have during the years taken place in other parts of Indonesia; in Aceh, in North Sumatra, in the Moluccas and in West Irian, which is the western part of New Guinea. The abuses include disappearances, political killings, extra-judicial executions and unfair political trials. A number of prisoners of conscience are still held, according to Amnesty International.
At this moment the consultative group on Indonesia, consisting of countries which were former members of the intergovernmental group on Indonesia which discussed aid to Indonesia, is meeting in Paris to discuss future aid policies. In view of the record which I have outlined I hope that at that conference Her Majesty's Government will take a firm line on future aid. In a document published this week entitled Indonesia! East Timor: The Suppression of Dissent, Amnesty International gives an outline of the human rights situation to date throughout Indonesia. It makes grim reading.
With regard to arms sales we should take note of a recent vote in the United States House of Representatives to cut 2.3 million dollars from the US military aid budget to Indonesia. I know that this is a difficult area for the Government during a period of recession. Indonesia has been a valuable customer for our arms. When criticised the Government's usual response is that all countries are entitled to purchase arms for their legitimate defence. But Indonesia has no external enemies. Its armed forces exist solely to keep order within its own territories; in other words, to suppress its own people. On the previous occasion when Indonesia fought an external enemy it was Malaysia, which was a member of the Commonwealth, and British troops were involved.
I could go on for an hour giving more details of the case that I have outlined but other noble Lords need time to speak. Indeed, I am sure that they will develop the case more skilfully than I can. I regret having to condemn Indonesia. It is a beautiful country inhabited by friendly, generous and cultured people and it has a number of admirable institutions. However, in order to become a respected member of the international community its government must recognise that in 1992 they must put their house in order. They will not do so unless the rest of the world shows in actions as well as in words that it will not tolerate any further violation of internationally-accepted human rights standards.
Indonesia must conform to the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. It should sign the international covenant on civil and political rights as well as the covenant on torture. It must permit the free and regular monitoring of human rights in Indonesia and East Timor by national and international human rights organisations. Those actions are sorely needed by the people of East Timor and the whole of Indonesia.
3.50 p.m.
Lord Finsberg: My Lords, I hope that I will be forgiven for making a maiden speech so soon after my introduction, although I am perhaps not alone in doing so. First, I wish to put the ordeal behind me and; secondly, the subject of East Timor is of great concern to me. I am sure that the Whole House is grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Rea, for raising the issue.
I should like to tell your Lordships as briefly as I can why I am particularly interested and why I believe the matter is of such importance. For the past five years or more I have had the privilege of leading the United Kingdom's delegations to both the Council of Europe and Western European Union. The subject of East Timor has arisen at both those parliamentary assemblies. Your Lordships may wonder why. In those famous words, Timor is a small country far away. However, as the noble Lord, Lord Rea, said, it was administered by Portugal and Portugal, as Britain's oldest ally, is a member of the Council of Europe and of Western European Union. Our colleagues in those assemblies asked us to debate the issue. It may interest your Lordships if I say a little about what has happened before I come to my final conclusion.
The noble Lord, Lord Rea, rightly pointed out that East Timor was annexed in 1976. Well over one-third of the population have already been murdered—well over one-third! The contrast between the world's immediate reaction to Iraq's annexation of Kuwait and what has happened to East Timor makes us wonder whether there are double standards when a nation is further away and out of the limelight.
The annexation of East Timor was condemned not only by the United Nations but also by the Conference of Non-Aligned Countries, of which Indonesia is a member, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the European Parliament and vast numbers of international parliamentary and religious organisations. The annexation of East Timor is a clear violation of international law and, more particularly, of people's rights to self-determination and independence. Portugal was taking East Timor—slowly, it is true—along the road to independence.
The human rights of the people of East Timor have been appallingly broken. They have not been allowed to decide their own political destiny or to preserve their cultural or linguistic identities. All in all, they have been treated in a way that can do no credit to a nation that wishes to be considered part of the civilised world.
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe asked member states—the Ministers of the 27—to implement an arms embargo in respect of Indonesia until the injustices have been put right. The debate then switched to the Parliamentary Assembly of Western European Union. It so happened that I was presiding over that debate. From the speeches of the Portuguese representatives of all parties, ranging from the communists—who are still somewhat unreconstructed—to the rest, one could not tell their political views. The parliamentary assembly made two

391
requests, in this case to the Ministers of the nine. They asked for an immediate embargo on arms and the suspension of military support for Indonesia.
I believe that the United Kingdom has to be vigilant in upholding human rights. Our record is exceptionally good. On the occasions when we have been taken before the European Court of Human Rights we have at once complied with judgments where they have been against us. As a nation and as individuals we must speak up wherever human rights are violated provided that we are satisfied as to the truth of the allegations. On East Timor no doubt can exist, as the deaths of so many bear witness.
I wish to ask my noble friend Lady Trumpington two questions. I conveyed to her the fact that I wanted to put them. What is the view of Her Majesty's Government as to what can be done practically? What response was given by the Council of Ministers of both the Council of Europe and Western European Union of which the British Ministers are part?
East Timor has been the subject of murder, rape and pillage for well over 15 years. Yugoslavia has been the subject of rape, murder and pillage for some 15 months. We could have saved 90 per cent. of those who have died in Yugoslavia had any one of our civilised Western nations been prepared to take action at once when Yugoslavia, and more particularly, Serbia, decided to do what she did. Let us at least do something for the people of East Timor who, as I know from conversations with them and with Portuguese, feel cut off and ignored by the civilised world. That is a charge which should lie heavily on our consciences.
3.57 p.m.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, when I say that the maiden speech of the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg, was a masterpiece I am not in any way exaggerating. He spoke concisely and with immense knowledge from his membership of the Council of Europe and the Western European Union. Above all, he spoke with great humanity, which is a quality that has always distinguished him throughout the whole of his illustrious career both in another place and in his great services to local government in which in a small way I can remember co-operating with him in the dim and distant past. He may recall that when he acted as the friend of the London taxi drivers in the early 1970s I believe that we shared a platform. We certainly worked together to see that the taxi service, which is one of the prides of London, was properly looked after. I believe that it was partly as a result of his work that we still have the excellent taxi service which we still enjoy.
Now we have seen another side of the noble Lord's work. His widespread knowledge of foreign affairs, and particularly his grasp of the iniquity of the Indonesian violation of human rights in East Timor, is something which must have struck your Lordships with great force. Not only do we forgive him for his promptness in making his maiden speech, but we
392
would have found it hard to forgive if he had withheld from us the benefits of the views which he has just expressed.
The noble Lord, Lord Rea, said that he had visited East Timor for 24 hours, which is more than I can claim. I have in fact asked the Indonesian authorities on a number of occasions whether it would be possible to send a delegation of the Parliamentary Human Rights Group, of which I have the honour to be chairman, to investigate human rights in East Timor. On the first occasion they declined. The second time around, when I made the request in conjunction with Australian parliamentarians led by Tony Lamb, who was then the convener of the East Timor Forum in the Australian Parliament, Mr. Lamb received the answer that it was inappropriate for the Australians to go there at that time and I did not have the courtesy of an answer at all. That is how the Indonesians treat any person they know to be critical of their policies in East Timor. They will not even let people go there to see what is happening—and for obvious reasons.
The noble Lord, Lord Rea, has asked whether the Government will make development aid and arms sales to Indonesia conditional on the ending of human rights abuses in East Timor. One should recognise, as he did, that it is not just in East Timor that the Indonesian armed forces are behaving in a brutal and sadistic manner towards the civilian population that they control. The noble Lord mentioned Acheh, where there are no television cameras or foreign reporters, and which the United Nations Rapporteur on Torture, Professor Kooijmans, was refused permission to enter last November even though he was allowed to go to East Timor at that time.
The noble Lord also mentioned Amnesty International's recent report, which was published on 13th July. It gives examples of extra-judicial killings and disappearances in Acheh which reinforce the many reports that have been published during the past two years by the American human rights organisation, Asia Watch, and by TAPOL, to which we all owe a great debt of gratitude for chronicling the events in East Timor and elsewhere in Indonesia and for enabling us to speak with greater authority than we could if we had to find our information solely in the western press, which so frequently ignores these matters.
We believe that in West Papua also violence against the civilian population is endemic. As the noble Lord, Lord Rea, reminded us, the Indonesian armed forces have a well-documented record of mass murders, torture and arbitrary detentions which extends throughout the whole breadth of the territory but particularly in areas where the Government rule without the consent of the local people, as in East Timor.
The noble Lord has provided us with a well-timed opportunity also to repeat the questions that were put to the Foreign Secretary in a letter signed by Members of both Houses. I should like to remind the noble Baroness, Lady Trumpington, of those questions in the hope that she may be able to give us some replies this afternoon. We asked whether Britain would issue a statement on the occasion of the Consultative Group

393
on Indonesia's meeting in Paris today and tomorrow, emphasising our deep concern about the human rights violations in East Timor. We also asked whether the Government would make known our dissatisfaction with the commission of inquiry set up by Jakarta to inquire into the Santa Cruz massacre and the savage sentences that were meted out to the survivors who were charged with political offences.
We invoked the principle of conditionality, which the noble Lord, Lord Rea, also mentioned, and which has been stated repeatedly by the Foreign Secretary and by the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker. We asked that aid be suspended until those arrested and imprisoned in the wake of the massacre are released and until a genuine inquiry to pin the responsibility for the tragedy on the senior officers responsible is conducted. Finally, we asked for the immediate release of the report by the special representative of the United Nations Secretary-General, Dr. Amos Wako, who went to East Timor to inquire into the circumstances of the massacre.
Jose Ramos Horta, whom several of us saw when he was here in the middle of June, made the allegation, which was not denied, that the Foreign Office had been preventing the EC from issuing any statement on the Santa Cruz massacre and the measures taken to deal with the tragedy. Certainly it was a surprise to some of us that nothing was said on the occasion of the recent summit meeting in Lisbon, which I am quite sure the Portuguese would have liked if it had not been for the resistance of some of her partners.
I drew the attention of the Foreign Secretary to the eye-witness statements published in the Indonesian newspapers themselves but not taken by the commission of inquiry and to the commission's failure to seek evidence from any of the foreign observers, including the Yorkshire Television cameraman, Max Stahl, and several others from various parts of the world, including the United States, or even to ask for a copy of the films taken by Max Stahl of the massacre. Amnesty International described the inquiry as "fatally flawed". A statement was issued by the department on 28th January concerning the preliminary report of the commission of inquiry, but recently it said that it did not intend to make any further statement until the trials were ended. As I understand it, this means the indefinite postponement of any comment, because the Indonesians can string out the trials for as long as another year.
No comment had been made either on the appointment of Brigadier-General Theo Syafei, who took over the East Timor command from the previous officer who was moved as one of the steps taken by the Indonesian authorities in consequence of the massacre. Brigadier-General Syafei is a hard-liner and is worse than his predecessor. He took over command with the declaration that if such an incident were to occur while he was in command,
"the casualties would probably be far higher".
That remark was actually reported in the Indonesian political weekly newspaper Editor of 14th March.
Sidney Jones, the Asia Watch director, in testimony before the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee following a visit she made in February,
394
described the reign of terror imposed by General Syafei. A ban was imposed on the visits of foreign journalists to the territory, which has remained in force since, except for one BBC reporter who was allowed to cover the so-called June election. But there has been fairly extensive reporting in the semi-free Indonesian press of intense security clamp-downs in the territory, especially at the time of the visit by the Secretary-General's representative, Dr. Wako. Dr. Wako's report to the Secretary-General on the circumstances of the massacre has been withheld from member states of the UN no doubt as a consequence of Indonesian pressure. That statement must be published if donors are to evaluate the atrocity and Jakarta's response to it properly. In any case, we paid for the report. The taxpayers in this country and in other member states of the United Nations finance the work of Dr. Wako as they finance all the other work of the Secretary-General. We are entitled to know the contents of that report.
Meanwhile, the Indonesian authorities have tried and sentenced many of the survivors of the massacre, meting out sentences of up to life imprisonment. At the same time some junior armed forces personnel have been brought before the courts and charged with minor offences such as disobeying orders. Their sentences have ranged up to 17 months. At a recent seminar organised by the School of Oriental and African Studies Mr. Arizal Effendi, the head of the political section at the Indonesian Embassy, appeared to defend the Indonesian authorities. When I asked him whether senior officers would be charged with murder and conspiracy to murder, he gave an unequivocal "yes". But as your Lordships know, the senior commanders were merely transferred to other posts. Therefore the demand in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office statement of 28th January that a clear commitment be given to punishing those responsible at all levels has not been met. I should like to know what the Foreign Office is going to do about that.
Today and tomorrow, as the noble Lord, Lord Rea, reminded us, the Consultative Group on Indonesia meets in Paris to decide how much aid should be offered by donors to Indonesia next year. The Council of Ministers of the EC stated in the declaration of 28th November 1991 that:
"The Community and its Member states will explicitly introduce the consideration of human rights as an element of their relations with developing countries; human rights clauses will be inserted in future cooperation agreements. Regular discussions on human rights and democracy will be held, within the framework of developing cooperation, with the aim of seeking improvements".
I should like to know how that declaration will be implemented at the discussions in Paris.
That statement followed the Foreign Secretary's initiative in which he urged the European Commission to cut aid to countries violating human rights. The noble Baroness, Lady Chalker (then Mrs. Chalker) spelled out that policy in detail in an article in the Sunday Times of 18th August 1991, and, as the noble Lord, Lord Rea, reminded us, it was reiterated in the Queen's Speech. One could hardly imagine circumstances more demanding of action under the policy

395
than the situation in East Timor today. I sincerely hope that Britain will take the lead in calling for suspension of aid to Indonesia at the Paris meeting.
On the question of arms sales, the Government have so far declined appeals to suspend sales of arms and other military hardware pending an improvement in the human rights situation. They say that they will not sell weapons which could be used against the civilian population. But every sale of equipment for use by the Indonesian armed forces constitutes tacit exoneration of the crimes that they commit.
The report in a daily newspaper of 25th June that a deal is likely to be signed for the sale of 40 British Aerospace Hawks to Indonesia came five days before the news that Mr. Gregorio da Cunha Saldanha, a 29 year-old paramedic, had been given a life sentence for so-called "subversion". What that consisted of was issuing leaflets calling for the withdrawal of the Indonesian occupation forces and organising the demonstration, mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Rea, that took place on the occasion of the visit by the US Ambassador to Jakarta. We certainly should suspend our own shipments of equipment intended for use by Indonesia's armed forces and work for an EC arms embargo.
Similarly, the training of Indonesian armed forces personnel in Britain, whether in Ministry of Defence establishments or by private companies such as British Aerospace in particular, is morally and politically wrong. Those officers are not in front-line posts where they are likely to be directly involved in human rights violations themselves, but their presence here at the expense of the British taxpayer means that we are turning a blind eye to the war crimes committed by their colleagues. We are encouraging other military regimes to believe that whatever they may do in the territories that they occupy in defiance of the United Nations Charter will be overlooked and forgotten by the rest of the world. We are also actively encouraging the process of military involvement in politics, as the remarks by the British embassy on the candidates who are now coming here for military training demonstrate:
"It has previously been agreed with CRD"—
and I should like to know who CRD is; perhaps the noble Baroness can give us that information—
"that the position of Armed Forces in Indonesian society is such that its members are important decision makers and opinion formers and do, therefore, fall within the scope of
FCO SAS"—
which, I think, are scholarships and aid schemes—
"Up to 40% of the participants in Indonesia's political fora are drawn from the armed forces and they are a target for support under the FCO schemes in Indonesia".
That is our policy.
Perhaps I may draw the noble Baroness's attention to the provision of the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Article 147 of the convention prohibits wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, unlawful deportation or transfer, wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of a fair and regular trial and extensive destruction and appropriation of property. Article 146 requires us, as a party to the convention, to,
396
"search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches",
and to bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before our own courts. What checks do we make of the backgrounds of personnel from the Indonesian armed forces seeking entry to the United Kingdom, including those invited to undergo training here, to see whether they should be brought before our courts and tried?
The tragedy of Santa Cruz happened because the armed forces of Indonesia continue to occupy East Timor in defiance of many resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, all of which Britain supported. Legally, there is no difference between the cases of East Timor and Kuwait. Both are violations of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter which provides that,
"states should … refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or national independence of any state or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations".
In a letter the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, candidly explained that,
"the United Nations at that time was not in a position with respect to east Timor to take the resolute action that it took over Kuwait 15 years later";
and in a further letter of 9th March 1992, he pointed out that action was taken over Kuwait under Chapter VII of the charter which deals with specific breaches of international peace and security which had been determined as such by the council. The two resolutions of the Security Council on East Timor (384 and 389) omit any reference to Chapter VII. as indeed they might, considering the United States, Australia and Britain had secretly given the green light to the invasion and thus made it unlikely that the conflict would spread.
The noble Earl added that Resolutions 384 and 389,
"constitute powerful points of reference for the Secretary-General as he continues his efforts to promote a solution".
Those resolutions called for the withdrawal of the Indonesian armed forces, and that is indeed the only way of enabling the people of East Timor to express their views freely, in accordance with the Charter, with the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and with the two covenants, of which unfortunately Indonesia is not a signatory. We have seen a letter jointly addressed to the Secretary-General by members of the US Congress and the Japanese Diet in which they reiterate the demand for concrete steps to enable the people of East Timor to exercise the right of self-determination by means of a referendum held under the auspices of the United Nations, and the Minister should know that Parliamentarians for East Timor, an organisation comprising several hundred Members of Parliament in some 15 countries, is working for the same objective.
Portugal has now proposed that talks be resumed, this time with participation by the East Timorese themselves. Resolution 37/30 of November 1982 required the Secretary-General to consult with,
"all the parties directly concerned",
and Parliamentarians for East Timor has argued that the people themselves are the most directly concerned of all. Yet they have been excluded without a murmur

397
of protest from governments, including our own, who insist on the virtues of democracy elsewhere. We know that the Foreign Office is scathing about "megaphone diplomacy", as it calls it, but total silence over the past nine years led to the tragedy of Santa Cruz. It may also have contributed to the occupation of Kuwait by Iraq; Saddam Hussein referred to East Timor when he claimed that in six months' time the international community would have forgotten about his invasion. If the EC would support Portugal and work towards a resolution of the General Assembly this autumn demanding the participation of the East Timorese at any future talks, the way might be opened towards a solution in accordance with the principles of self-determination and the unlawfulness of acquisition of territory by force. That way the martyrs of Santa Cruz will not have died in vain.
4.19 p.m.
The Lord Bishop of Worcester: My Lords, perhaps I, who have had little or no experience of foreign affairs, may nevertheless congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg, on his maiden speech in this House and thank him for deciding to make it on the occasion of an Unstarred Question.
It is well known in the House that bishops of the Church of England are in no way political animals. Despite that, throughout my ministry I have always believed, when people ask me to speak or do something on behalf of those who do not enjoy the host of freedoms under the law that we enjoy and do not have the freedom to go to and fro as we do, that I should respond in some way.
Although, having attended the General Synod last week and the House of Lords this week, I feel the green fields of the diocese of Worcester pulling me towards them, I could not go home without expressing my view on the Unstarred Question of the noble Lord, Lord Rea, for which we are grateful.
The massacre at Santa Cruz was the latest in a series of human rights atrocities committed by Indonesia in East Timor. I shall not repeat facts and figures already given by noble Lords. I know that since 1975 at least 150,000 people have died as a result of military campaigns and starvation induced by forced resettlement, extensive imprisonment without trial, extra-judicial killings, disappearances and widespread torture.
Bishop Carlos Belo, a most courageous bishop, must surely command our admiration. He has constantly said that the Indonesian army regards civilians as enemies. There is no confidence whatever in the new commander-in-chief of the army; indeed, he is a ruthless hardliner. Bishop Belo has said over and over again that self-determination for East Timor is a matter for the East Timorese. That goes without saying in the United Kingdom. The bishop says—I support him and put it to the noble Baroness that Her Majesty's Government should also do so—that what is required is determined intervention by the international community, fairly obviously through the United Nations, to ensure a well conducted referendum of the people. It must ensure that democratic and human rights are affirmed, for dissent
398
is treated as treasonable. Those who took part in the demonstrations last November, as we have seen and know, have been picked off and imprisoned for up to 15 years and, in one case, for life. No army officer has been tried for ordering the massacre.
In the face of this, it is to be hoped that the words of the Foreign Secretary to the European Commission that we should cut aid to countries which violate human rights will be heeded in the matter of Indonesia, always considering that humanitarian aid comes into a different category. Can we not have a statement on that? Let us hope that one will be made at the Paris aid consortium.
I also wish to ask Her Majesty's Government for an embargo on all arms sales to Indonesia, although I know that that is difficult at a time of recession. Can we justify the sale of 40 Hawk aircraft at this time and the invitation to three Indonesian army officers to study in the United Kingdom? Can we cancel the sale of the Green Rover to the Indonesian navy?
Those would be clear signals that we cannot condone the present ugly regime in East Timor. It would be the best way to indicate and communicate to Indonesia that it cannot claim—as has already been said in this House—a place in a civilised world community if it continues to behave in its present fashion.
4.25 p.m.
Lord Hatch of Lusby: My Lords, I shall not detain the House many minutes for the good reason that the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg, in an outstanding maiden speech, said everything that I should like to say about the situation in East Timor. However, as is known in this House, I have pursued this matter for some years now.
I shall therefore confine myself to asking the Government to tell us clearly where they stand not just on the issue of East Timor itself, but also as regards any other similar issues which may arise. I am glad to know that the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg, sees a double standard being used by the Government as regards their attitude towards East Timor and as regards their attitude towards Iraq. Ministers have been angry—I have made this comparison before—about this situation.
Will the Minister say how she can justify the attitude taken by the Government to the invasion of East Timor by Indonesia, particularly in view of the condemnation by the United Nations of the aggression shown by Indonesia during that invasion in 1975? If the Government believe that as a member of the United Nations they must accept the leadership of that organisation when it states categorically that aggression has been perpetrated, surely it is not for them to pick and choose as to which aggression they will act on according to some somewhat suspicious forms of so-called national interest. I hope the noble Baroness will tell the House quite clearly—this matter has been debated before and it is not a new issue—whether the British Government consider the invasion of East Timor by Indonesia to be an act of aggression as stated by the United Nations, and if so what action

399
the British Government intend to take to back up that declaration of aggression. That is the first issue that I wish the Government to comment upon.
Secondly, will the noble Baroness tell us the actual amount of armaments that have been sold to Indonesia by Britain? According to one estimate by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (with which I have been connected for many years) between 1986 and 1990 the United Kingdom provided major weapons systems to Indonesia to the value of 522 million dollars. Can the noble Baroness tell the House whether that is accurate, or is it inaccurate? If it is inaccurate, what was the amount of arms provided by Britain to that regime which has been condemned by the United Nations as an aggressor? Is it the case that the British Government are still providing facilities for the training of Indonesian army officers in this country?
This all comes down to the original question which I asked and which this House, this Parliament and this Government have to face. Twelve months ago we saw what happens when aggression is allowed to take place, and indeed encouraged to take place, before the actual movement of troops. We saw what tragedy it brings. In Indonesia there is a more long term tragedy. It has been condemned by the United Nations. Where do the British Government, as a member of the United Nations, stand when the United Nations condemns another state for aggression? How do the British Government act?
It is no good saying that every country has a right to self defence. That is not the point here. The point is how the British Government acts when the United Nations has declared another state to be an aggressor. Do the British Government continue to supply that country with arms and training facilities? Do they continue to supply that country with aid, despite the fact that the British Government have laid down, as they did in the gracious Speech, that in future aid will depend on good governance? Do the British Government consider that the Indonesian Government is an example of good governance?
Let them come clean now and let us hear from the Government where they stand now on the issue of aggression and good governance so that we know what we can expect in terms of the actions of the British Government in the future.
4.32 p.m.
Lord Haden-Guest: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Rea, for bringing this urgent Question so compellingly to the attention of your Lordships' House. He covered a wide spectrum, as did the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg, in his most impressive maiden speech, and other noble Lords who for years have been active on this question. I shall therefore be brief.
The gross and continuing violation of human rights in East Timor by the Government of Indonesia, in particular by its military and security forces, blatantly contravening as it does the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and numerous United Nations resolutions, is not a new development. It began in
400
1975 with the illegal annexation of East Timor by Indonesia following a brutal invasion in which it has been estimated at least 60,000 East Timorese died while hundreds of thousands of others were uprooted from their homes and forced to flee to other far distant places. Much worse was to follow in succeeding years.
The situation in East Timor has now been on the agenda of the United Nations and considered independently by numerous governments and by a number of political bodies for some 17 years. I have to say that throughout that time there has been a striking and indeed a shameful lack of political will to act decisively and with one voice on the matter. In fact, a number of the most influential members of the United Nations, among them the United States and the United Kingdom, have supported the status quo while continuing to develop their substantial economic interests in Indonesia, no small part of which involves the provision of large quantities of arms to the military forces of that country. It is precisely because of this constant and increasing flow of arms that united action by the international community must be taken without delay.
Nevertheless, there are at long last heartening signs of change in international opinion and political direction. In this country a growing public awareness of what is going on in East Timor has come with the recent publication of well-informed articles in the serious press, notably the Guardian and the Daily Telegraph. In addition, active political entities such as the Parliamentary Human Rights Group, which is well known to your Lordships, the British Coalition for East Timor, the Indonesian Human Rights Campaign and others have made a significant contribution to the knowledge of the public. In many countries, including Australia and Japan, citizens have banded together to oppose the Indonesian repression, and publicised statements by respected organisations such as Amnesty International have been extremely helpful in informing the public of what is really going on.
There have been significant developments on the political front. In the United States the House of Representatives has voted to stop funding the Indonesian military and a bill has been sponsored to suspend military and economic aid and trade preferences for Indonesia until that country with-draws from East Timor and allows a United Nations—supervised plebiscite to take place. On 25th June this year the House of Representatives adopted that bill by a large majority and an amended appropriation bill has been sent to the Senate where it will be taken up later in the year. The powerful Conference of United States Mayors has urged the President of the United States and Congress to support the immediate introduction of a resolution in the General Assembly instructing the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to appoint a special rapporteur for East Timor to assist in the resolution of the conflict, providing for self-determination of the East Timorese people. It says that the President should request the Government of Indonesia to permit an investigation

401
by the United Nations special rapporteur on summary and arbitrary executions in East Timor and elsewhere in Indonesia.
Given the circumstances described, is it not time for all governments involved in the area, including that of the United Kingdom, to join ranks and, by withholding arms to Indonesia, bring to an end the appalling state of affairs in East Timor and prepare the ground under international auspices for a dialogue between Indonesia and East Timor which in the course of time could lead to a just and peaceful political solution acceptable to both parties in the area?
4.38 p.m.
Lord Judd: My Lords, I am sure we are all deeply grateful to my noble friend Lord Rea for having introduced this debate this afternoon. It seems to me that one of the characteristics of this House at its best is a deep commitment to humanitarian concerns and justice. This debate is about that. I think it is very telling and appropriate that we should be having a debate of this kind just before the Long Recess. It shows that we are not prepared to go away leaving God knows how many hundreds or thousands suffering uncared for in a country about which we know more than we sometimes like to admit.
I should also like to join with those who have congratulated the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg, on an outstanding maiden speech. He has characterised his individual commitment to those principles about which I have just been speaking. I am sure all of us look forward to a powerful future in this House as a guardian of everything that British democracy likes to say it is about.
As we have been reminded in this debate, Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975, after the East Timorese, taking advantage of the collapse of the Portuguese dictatorship, had declared their independence. We must remember that the United Nations still recognises Portugal as the legitimate authority in East Timor, which it categorises as the world's last non-autonomous region. Following the invasion, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolutions 384 and 389, which confirm East Timor's right to self-determination and call on the Indonesians to end their illegal occupation, an occupation every bit as serious a violation of the international rule of law as the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
The United Nations also acknowledges the Revolutionary Front for the Independence of East Timor as the legitimate representatives of the East Timorese. The front has conducted guerrilla operations against the Indonesian forces of occupation, but those forces, sustained by sophisticated equipment, much of which is British, have exacted heavy casualties on the East Timorese. As my noble friend Lord Rea reminded us, in over 17 years of fighting, exacerbated by famine, an estimated 100,000 to 200,000 people have been killed out of a total population of 600,000.
The Indonesian Army has conducted a cruel and brutal occupation. Its most recent outrage, as we heard in this debate, was on 12th December last. That
402
was the Santa Cruz massacre in which between 100 and 200 people who had been attending a funeral were killed by the Indonesian Army. That massacre, which took place despite the presence of the United Nations special rapporteur on torture and human rights, Professor Kooijman, was condemned by the United Nations and the European Community. In the report of his visit to East Timor, Professor Kooijman concluded that the torture of detainees in East Timor by the Indonesian occupying forces was routine. That is apparently the first time that the United Nations in an official document has unequivocally confirmed that torture occurs in Indonesia.
The Indonesian Government have attempted to dismiss the massacre as an isolated incident. But, as we have just heard, organisations such as Amnesty International have documented gross and systematic human rights violations not only in East Timor but throughout Indonesia for the past 20 years. In the aftermath of the Santa Cruz massacre, the international outcry forced the Indonesian Government to take the unprecedented step of launching an inquiry. By June 1992 a number of officers had been dismissed or transferred from their posts, and 10 officers were convicted by military courts. However. none of the accused officers was charged with murder or even with unlawful killing. Indeed, only one was charged with ill treatment and all were sentenced to only short terms of imprisonment. By contrast, a number of the surviving massacre victims were sentenced to long gaol sentences.
The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, referred to an interview published recently in Editor, an Indonesian magazine. In the same periodical, Major-General Mantiri, Commander of the IXth Udayana Regional Military Command, which covers East Timor, has been reported as describing the army's shooting of peaceful demonstrators as "proper" saying that the army had no regrets. Perhaps I may crave the indulgence of the House to quote from the article concerned, because it reveals what we are up against. The question was asked:
"As Commander of the Dili Incident, it's your responsibility to eliminate the bad image which resulted from that incident. Does this make things heavier for you?"
The answer was:
"If you say heavier, it's relative. A good image as seen from where? As seen from abroad, that's true. People from abroad indeed said: 'My goodness! ' But from our vantage-point that is not the case. We don't regret anything. What happened was quite proper … As military, this is so. They were opposing us, demonstrating, even yelling things against the government. To me that is identical with rebellion, so that is why we took firm action. From our perspective there is no question of a bad image. People abroad are yapping away, magnifying things. But things were not as bad as they claim"
The question was asked:
"Proper?"
—to which the answer was—
"If people demonstrate around the idea of opposing the government, we take action. For me that is proper".
The Indonesian Government have consistently attempted to obstruct the outside world's access to East Timor and the news blackout has intensified since the massacre. In effect, East Timor has been closed to human rights investigators despite a February 1992

403
appeal by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to allow human rights and humanitarian organisations access.
Despite the Indonesian occupying forces' long history of repression and human rights abuse, the British Government have undertaken extensive arms sales to Indonesia. Indeed, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, between 1986 and 1990 the UK was second only to the United States in the supply of weapons systems to Indonesia my noble friend Lord Hatch has referred to that, and certainly the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute suggests that during this period UK exports were worth 522 million US dollars compared with 538 million US dollars-worth by the United States,455 million US dollars-worth by the Netherlands and 112 million US dollars-worth by the Federal German Republic.
Significantly, over the same period Indonesia seems to have been the third largest recipient of UK weapons systems. The most recent sales took place in June 1991, when British Aerospace announced a major collaborative deal with the Indonesian Government for the production of Hawk aircraft. Since September 1991, following the visit of the then Secretary of State for Defence to Jakarta, the deal was confirmed.
The Government have also sold a naval support ship, the "Green Rover", to the Indonesians and extended training to the Indonesian armed forces. I understand that since 1979 British arms sales to Indonesia have included three Tribal Class frigates, three contracts for the Rapier Air Defence system, Sea Wolf missile launchers, advanced computers for military use and an unknown number of armoured personnel carriers refurbished by a British company for anti-guerrilla operations in mountainous terrain. The Government have also provided extensive training, as we have heard in the debate, and information transfer facilities to the Indonesian armed forces.
The Government themselves have consistently refused to reveal the value of British arms sales to Indonesia, a position which I suggest is totally at odds with their support for a United Nations arms register, so much favoured in theory by the Prime Minister. The British Government justify those sales on the ground that every country has a legitimate right under the United Nations Charter to secure its defence, a point made by the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, in answer to a Starred Question on 25th November of last year. However, disingenuously, that Answer overlooked the fact that Indonesia has an appalling human rights record, is illegally occupying East Timor and is using for offensive rather than defensive purposes the weapons supplied to it.
The Government also justify the sales on the ground that there is no evidence to suggest that the equipment sold has been used in East Timor to prolong Indonesia's illegal occupation of that country. The House is entitled to know whether that is still the Government's view in the light of the recent massacre and the admission by the noble Lord, Lord Cavendish of Furness, in answer to a Starred Question
404
on the Santa Cruz massacre, that British Land Rovers were indeed used by troops responsible for the outrage.
Subsequently, also in answer to a Starred Question on the Santa Cruz massacre, the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, said that Land Rovers were used, but added:
"I believe that the House will agree with me that these are not arms".-[Official Report,30/1/92; col.1417.]
Arms or not, they obviously played a crucial part in the atrocity.
Frankly, the Government's policy appears to have been one of selling huge quantities of arms to Indonesia while making the odd protest when the Indonesians used those and other weapons to butcher the people of East Timor. Reflecting that, giving a recent oral Answer in the other place, Mr. Douglas Hogg said that the Government would continue to make their concern about human rights abuses in East Timor crystal clear to the Indonesian Government. Selling the latter large quantities of arms regardless of the use made of such weapons is hardly a convincing way to express that concern, however.
To make matters worse, the Government's willingness to sell arms to Indonesia despite that country's illegal and repressive occupation of East Timor has been translated into a consistent series of abstentions in the United Nations on resolutions condemning the Indonesian Government. Perhaps even more sinister is the fact that that is almost certainly what lay behind the repeated, cynical manoeuvres by the British Government to frustrate humanitarian initiatives on Indonesia by the EC under the leadership of the Portuguese during their presidency of the Community.
Indonesia is the biggest recipient of UK aid in the Far East. The annual average of the UK's bilateral aid to Indonesia between 1988 and 1990 was £20.27 million. In 1990 Indonesia received substantially more aid than Malaysia, a comparable country which is a loyal member of the Commonwealth, and much more aid than the countries in the region which are in most need of aid. Reflecting that issue, it is interesting to note that in the same year Britain gave Indonesia 206 times as much aid as it gave to Cambodia.
The expansion of UK aid to Indonesia contradicts certain key factors which normally determine the allocation of aid. For example, Indonesia is neither one of' the poorest countries in the region nor is it a member of the Commonwealth. Moreover, its poor human rights record and illegal occupation of East Timor raise fundamental questions about its suitability for such aid.
In the light of those factors, we on these Benches fear that the United Kingdom's allocation to aid to Indonesia can now be attributed only to the identification of Indonesia as a key market where British exporters can compete well against foreign competitors. However, I recognise that in the past another factor was probably the perception by the US and UK Governments of Indonesia as a bulwark against communism.
In support of the points made in this brief but vital debate I want to conclude by putting several specific

405
questions to the noble Baroness. They are questions of which I thought it wise to give her office prior notice. First, given that the Indonesians have been illegally occupying East Timor since 1975, and that the Santa Cruz massacre in November was just the latest in a long line of outrages committed by the Indonesian forces of occupation, does the Minister not agree that the time for a negotiated settlement on the basis of UN Resolutions 384 and 389 is long overdue? Can the Minister confirm whether the British Government will use the presidency of the European Community actively to promote such a settlement?
Secondly, can the noble Baroness advise the House of the size of the British aid programme to Indonesia in 1991–92, and what it is to be in 1992–93? Thirdly, can the noble Baroness advise the House of the number of East Timorese arrested after the Santa Cruz massacre who are still being held by the Indonesian forces of occupation? Of those, can she indicate the number charged with offences and the number sentenced? What do the Government know of their treatment in detention? Have the Government any firm information on the blood-chilling numbers of those who disappeared altogether at the time of the massacre?
Given the Government's frequent assertion that, despite Britain being one of Indonesia's main arms suppliers, British arms sales play no part in sustaining Indonesia's illegal occupation of East Timor, can the Minister advise the House as to who is supplying the weapons being used against the East Timorese? Can the noble Baroness confirm whether or not the Indonesian Government are still ignoring the appeal of the United Nations Commission for Human Rights to allow humanitarian and human rights organisa-tions access to East Timor in order to monitor human rights violations? Can she confirm whether the British Government have yet obtained copies of the United Nations report on the massacre and whether they will place them in the Libraries of both Houses?
In view of both the Prime Minister's and the Foreign Secretary's repeated commitment to upholding human rights—including their determination to ensure that British aid is tied to the human rights record of recipients—and in the light of the European Community declaration on 28th November last on human rights and relations with developing countries, can the noble Baroness explain to the House why Britain continues to sell arms to Indonesia despite its illegal occupation of East Timor and the brutality of its forces of occupation within East Timor?
Can the noble Baroness advise the House of the specific action-orientated recommendations that, in the light of the recent Santa Cruz massacre and Indonesia's continuing abuse of human rights in East Timor, the Government will be making at the meeting of the World Bank's consultative group on Indonesia taking place in Paris this very day and tomorrow regarding aid to the country?
Finally, above all, will the Government as a whole stop the smooth diplomatic double talk and hypocrisy of their approach on Indonesia? It consists of protesting decent intentions but doing virtually nothing when it matters to take the action to secure
406
the ends that they proclaim. It must be an acute embarrassment to the Minister. It is high time for the Government to emulate their determination on Kuwait and vigorously to use their presidency of the European Community to ensure that in the Community and at the United Nations effective pressure is at last brought to bear upon the cruel tyrants of Jakarta.
4.58 p.m.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, the Question of the noble Lord, Lord Rea, has exposed the deep feelings held by the House on this matter. It also enables me to set out the Government's case on the question of human rights in East Timor.
The debate has produced an authoritative and moving maiden speech from my noble friend Lord Finsberg. As an ex-constituent of his I expected no less. At the same time it gives me special pleasure to congratulate someone who was so helpful to me when I was a junior Minister. I know that his contributions to this House will always be worthwhile and I wish him great happiness at this end of the Palace of Westminster.
We were all horrified by what happened in Dili last November. It intensified our concerns about human rights abuses in Indonesia and East Timor. But this time the Indonesians responded in an unprecedented way, taking real action themselves rather than simply in response to international criticism, to find out what went wrong. The Indonesian president insisted on follow-up action against those responsible, including courts martial. Importantly, the Indonesians also allowed a visit by the UN Secretary General's special representative, Mr. Amos Wako.
I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Judd, for the advance warning he gave of his questions. He asked whether I could confirm that HMG have the UN report on the Santa Cruz massacre. The answer is that Her Majesty's Government do not have that report because the United Nations Secretary General has decided not to release it. The next question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Judd, was whether I could—
Lord Avebury: My Lords, before the noble Baroness leaves the question of Mr. Amos Wako's report—
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, order! I am very conscious that noble Lords may have many questions to ask. I am sorry, but this is not the time to get me off my feet. I will write letters to anyone, but I am going to proceed with my speech.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, I simply wanted to ask about the report—
Noble Lords: Order!
Baroness Trumpington: The noble Lord, Lord Judd, asked me to clarify whether the Indonesians are still ignoring the plea of the UN Commission for Human Rights to allow human rights' observers into East Timor. We continue to look to the Indonesians to pursue follow-up action in accordance with the UNCHR chairman's statement of 4th March. The

407
ICRC is at present in the territory. We have made it very clear to the Indonesians, in statements by the Government and the European Community, and in direct bilateral representations to the Indonesians, the serious view which we took of the killings of civilians in Dili. We made direct representations to the Indonesians on 30th June on behalf of the Community and acting for the Portuguese presidency about the trials and the discrepancies in sentences of those charged in connection with the events in Dili. We continue to monitor developments on the issue very closely.
My noble friend Lord Finsberg asked about the response to the Council of Europe. The British Government support the declaration of the Committee of Ministers of 26th November last which followed the parliamentary assembly's resolution of 28th June on East Timor. Another question from the noble Lord, Lord Judd, concerned the number of East Timorese arrested after the incident; the number of those still detained by the Indonesians; and those charged and sentenced. The numbers, as known to the FCO on 15th July are: arrested after the incident,56; still detained,20; charged,21; and sentenced,19.
I am sure that your Lordships can agree that our aim should be to influence the Indonesians in whatever ways are most appropriate and effective. That brings me to the two specific elements in the Motion of the noble Lord, Lord Rea. Indonesia is a poor country with a GNP per capita of 570 US dollars that is regarded by the donor community as having managed its economy very effectively over the past decade.
Our development assistance to Indonesia is focused on programmes and projects which promote economic and social development. It includes help for primary education, training in management research and conservation of tropical forests, English language teaching, public administration and the promotion of energy efficiency. We also provide concessional finance for major development projects involving the provision of UK goods and services which exist. This helps British firms to establish themselves in the expanding Indonesian market.
The noble Lord, Lord Rea, asked about the link between aid and human rights. It is the policy of Her Majesty's Government to take full account of human rights issues in determining their aid policy to individual countries. The form that takes reflects the circumstances of each country and the nature of the human rights problem. As regards Indonesia, we believe that its poverty and its record of sound economic policy justify a continuation of aid. But that needs to be combined with a continuing dialogue on our human rights anxieties in association with other donors.
The noble Lord, Lord Judd, asked a further question about the size of the United Kingdom's aid programme for Indonesia in 1991–92 and what is proposed for 1992–93. For 1991–92, it was £21.4 million, plus debt relief of £2.27 million. We expect spending in 1992–93 to be at about the same level. In making decisions about aid policy, your Lordships
408
will be aware that we and other major aid donors take human rights very much into account. Where improvements are needed, we have made this very clear to the countries involved. But the nature of human rights problems differs from country to country, and our response must be graduated accordingly.
The noble Lord, Lord Judd, referred to the meeting of donors which is taking place today in Paris, at which an Indonesian minister is present. In preparing for this meeting, we have, as EC President, consulted closely with our European partners. The noble Lord also asked whether I could advise the House as to the recommendations that Her Majesty's Government will make to the consultative group on Indonesia in Paris this week in respect of aid in the light of the Santa Cruz massacre and human rights abuses. Our representative conveyed our views and those of our Community partners to the Indonesian minister in Paris this morning, making clear our continued anxiety over human rights. I understand that the World Bank will be issuing a statement.
As I said earlier, in the follow-up to the Dili incident, the Indonesians have already taken some unprecedented steps. We believe that the kind of exchanges that are taking place in Paris today have an effect. The steps that have been taken are unprecedented, but they are not enough. We want to see further progress. The point is that we do not believe that the suspension of aid would improve the human rights situation in East Timor, and to deny Indonesia the assistance that I have previously mentioned would be a retrogressive step.
My farmer friends would laugh about the part in the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Judd, about Land-Rovers and to think that they were driving around in offensive weapons. I cannot agree either with the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, or with the noble Lord, Lord Judd, with regard to the export of defence equipment. The Government's policy is based on respect for the right of other countries, as sovereign states, to protect their independence. This is a right that we claim for ourselves. It would be inconsistent and discriminatory to deny it to others. Proposed defence sales from Britain, including those to Indonesia, are nevertheless subject to strict export controls.
The noble Lords, Lord Hatch, and Lord Avebury, and, I think, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester, asked me about military students and their training. Educating and training Indonesians in all fields is a positive way of bringing about improvements in their performance. A number of Indonesians attend further education courses in the United Kingdom, funded under our development assistance and technical co-operation programmes and other schemes, such as the FCO scholarship and award scheme and the UK military training assistance scheme. Training for members of the Indonesian armed forces is intended to improve their competence and discipline; and by introducing them also to our principles, methods and values, it increases their awareness of the importance of good government, democracy and respect for human rights.

409
The noble Lord, Lord Judd, asked why, in view of the strong stance on human rights taken by the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State and the need to take into account the human rights record when allocating aid, Britain is still selling arms to Indonesia despite its occupation of and brutality in East Timor. We very carefully scrutinise all applications for exports of military equipment to Indonesia, as we do with other countries. We reject those for equipment likely to be used for repression of the population. To cease to supply the equipment which Indonesia legitimately needs for defence purposes would not in our view be an appropriate or effective way of influencing the Indonesians. We do not believe that British military equipment sold in the past to Indonesia has been used against the East Timorese.
In view of the Government's continued arms sales to Indonesia but their insistence that they are not being used to suppress the East Timorese, who is supplying the arms? In answer to the noble Lord, Lord Judd, other countries' arms sales policies are entirely a matter for them. The noble Lord, Lord Hatch, asked what amount of arms had been sold to Indonesia. I am sorry that I cannot give the noble Lord the figures he seeks today. We are taking every opportunity to promote restraint and responsibility in the arms trade That is why the Prime Minister proposed a UN register of arms transfers to increase transparency in this field and to alert the international community to excessive and destabilising accumulations of arms. That is why we are participating in international discussions in the UN, the conference on disarmament and the EC aimed at curbing irresponsible arms transfers.
Our position on defence sales to Indonesia is consistent with this broad international approach. Human rights are already a criterion. The Government have made it clear that they will not authorise the sale of arms for repressive use against the civilian population. In answer to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Worcester, we see no reason to cancel the sale of the former Royal Fleet Auxiliary support ship "Green Rover". It is unlikely to be used for repressive purposes. Recent sales to Indonesia and prospective sales, such as the Hawk aircraft deal which is currently being negotiated, are subject to such government scrutiny and approval.
The noble Lord, Lord Rea, and my noble friend Lord Finsberg were concerned about the status of East Timor. The United Kingdom voted in favour of UN resolutions condemning the Indonesian killings in East Timor. The United Kingdom has not recognised annexation of East Timor; nor has the Community. The United States, Canada and Australia have recognised it. We firmly believe that East Timor's future is best addressed through bilateral contacts between those directly involved—Portugal and Indonesia. The UN Secretary General's efforts to bring them together with a view to reaching a settlement deserve and receive our support. The Government support the UN Secretary General in those ways in a process of reconciliation and a search for a diplomatic solution.
410
In all our dealings with Indonesia, we shall continue to make clear the importance we attach to full respect for human rights. But we believe that the improvements we hope to see will be best achieved by continuing to put our views to the Indonesians in a frank and substantive dialogue.
Perhaps I may finish by answering the question of my noble friend Lord Finsberg. It was a point which underlay the speeches of the noble Lords, Lord Avebury and Lord Haden-Guest, and all noble Lords who have spoken. My noble friend asked me what Her Majesty's Government can practically do. I believe that the answer lies in a continuing dialogue among the European Community, other concerned countries and the Indonesian authorities. I do not believe that facile gestures, such as a cutting off of aid, are the answer.

Adjournment
5.15 p.m.
Lord Hesketh: My Lords, in moving that the House do now adjourn, I think that it would be appropriate for me to thank all those who make the business of your Lordships' House possible—that is, both those seen and, more important, those who are unseen. Although in recent months your Lordships have not perhaps had to endure the long hours to which we are normally accustomed at this time of year, it remains the case that the work of your Lordships' House is facilitated and enabled by the unfailing efficiency, courtesy and assistance that we receive from those who work in all quarters of the House. All of us are considerably in their debt.
Noble Lords: Hear, hear!
Lord Hesketh: My Lords, at the same time I should like to take the opportunity to wish all noble Lords a restful and enjoyable Recess. When we return in October, I hope that it will be with renewed enthusiasm and vigour after the restorative process of the idyllic summer months that lie ahead.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Cledwyn and all my colleagues on the Labour Benches I should like warmly to endorse the remarks of the Government Chief Whip. It is trite to say,"There is nothing more to be said; but I intend to take 20 minutes to say it". I admire and appreciate that, rather than go through a long list of worthy people and groups and always fail to mention one or two and then get into trouble for it, he has done the right thing. I say that because we are indebted to so many people, both seen and unseen.
The great thing is that the service that such people give is, without exception, uniform and generous to all Members of the House on all sides of the House, especially some of our colleagues who may be infirm and in need of special assistance. Already today, as some people will know, there has been an incident where a Member of your Lordships' House had to be taken to hospital. I can say that my noble friend

411
Lady Jeger is being well looked after at Westminster Hospital and that I shall be visiting her after the House has adjourned.
Of course this is the time for buckets and spades. When the noble Lord, Lord Hesketh, goes home, I hope that his children do not ask his wife who the strange man is. I know that he has the special privilege and joy of not only going on holiday and having a wife to enjoy it with but that he also has children. That is a joy that many of us do not have at this time.
We are all ready for our holiday. It has been a strange and difficult Session, represented in part by the noble Lord, Lord Finsberg. That is not to say that he is strange and difficult, but that he represents one of 35 new Members of your Lordships' House. Of course that presents not only pleasure but also a number of problems as regards accommodation and in many other ways.
The usual channels work very well together, especially on matters which are non-political but which are purely House matters. On behalf of my colleagues I should like to say to the Government Chief Whip how grateful we are for his tolerance and understanding in many ways. We on this side of the House certainly endorse what he said. We look forward to coming back with renewed vigour and we hope to continue, as we last left off, with the occasional defeat of the Government.
Lord Tordoff: My Lords, from these Benches, perhaps I may start by endorsing what the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, said about the usual channels. It has been a year during which things have not always been easy, but where the usual channels have worked well together. I know that the noble Lord may face an election in the autumn, and so it would be wrong for me to praise him too much or suggest that we want to see him back, because that might destroy his street credibility. Nevertheless, the usual channels work well together, and I am grateful to him for what he said.
We face changes in the coming Session. For instance, we might have clocks that work. That brings us to the people who work in this place unseen. Until the clocks broke down we were not aware of the special job that has been done by those people who for so many years have faithfully looked after the clocks in the building. It is only when things go wrong we
412
realise that there are people working on our behalf whom we do not normally see during the course of the day.
So, as the noble Lord, Lord Graham, said, off we go to our children or grandchildren or to dig in our gardens while people in another place go back to count their new research assistants. We hope that when we return there may be at least some news about accommodation. We shall not all suddenly have brand new offices but there is some hope on the horizon that there will be a little more elbow room for your Lordships in the Palace in the foreseeable future, or soon, or one of these days, or whatever the phrase is that is normally used on the Government Front Bench.
Baroness Seear: My Lords, when the time is right!
Lord Tordoff: My Lords, my noble friend reminds me that the proper phrase is "When the time is right". Like the noble Lord the Chief Whip, I commend to your Lordships all those people who work so hard for us who are due for a rest much more than we are. Nevertheless, we shall enjoy that rest, and I look forward to seeing everyone again in the autumn.
Baroness Hylton-Foster: My Lords, the Cross Bench Peers are always happy to join in expressing thanks and good wishes to the staff of the House of Lords. In the words of the lift-man today, I should like to include what he calls "the permanent fixture here". We should like to draw special attention to the excellence of the Library department and thank those who work there for the wonderful, quick service they give us. We also congratulate the refreshment department on coping so well with all the parties for the new Peers, while at the same time looking after us so well in all the dining rooms and bars. To staff and Peers we give our good wishes for a restful and happy Recess.
Lord Hesketh: My Lords, on the assumption that the Whips' Office can never believe in the land of milk and honey but can, nonetheless, concede that the Chief Whip of the Liberal Democrat Party may have a point and that there may be further space available to your Lordships' House, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.
House adjourned for the Summer Recess at twenty two minutes past five o'clock until Monday,19th October next.

  JUDICIAL SITTINGS OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS
  JUDICIAL SITTINGS OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS
  MAASTRICHT TREATY: PROTOCOL AND AGREEMENT ON SOCIAL POLICY
  MAASTRICHT TREATY: PROTOCOL AND AGREEMENT ON SOCIAL POLICY
  CHARITY COMMISSION 1988 REPORT
  CHARITY COMMISSION 1988 REPORT
  PAROLE: DIRECTIONS TO BOARD
  PAROLE: DIRECTIONS TO BOARD
  DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: ACCESS TO EUROPEAN MARKET
  DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: ACCESS TO EUROPEAN MARKET
  GATT NEGOTIATIONS and DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
  GATT NEGOTIATIONS and DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
  EC SINGLE MARKET and DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
  EC SINGLE MARKET and DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
  PLUTONIUM REPROCESSING
  PLUTONIUM REPROCESSING
  PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION AND EXPORT BY UK
  PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION AND EXPORT BY UK
  BNFL: FUTURE OF THORP
  BNFL: FUTURE OF THORP
  SCOTLAND: RESPONSIBILITIES OF SECRETARY OF STATE FOR NATIONAL HERITAGE
  SCOTLAND: RESPONSIBILITIES OF SECRETARY OF STATE FOR NATIONAL HERITAGE
  ROYAL PARKS: EMPLOYEES
  ROYAL PARKS: EMPLOYEES
  ADISHAM, KENT, RAILWAY STATION
  ADISHAM, KENT, RAILWAY STATION
  ASSISTED AREAS: EXPENDITURE OF GRANTS ON TRANSPORT FACILITIES
  ASSISTED AREAS: EXPENDITURE OF GRANTS ON TRANSPORT FACILITIES
  "MARCHIONESS"/"BOWBELLE" COLLISION REPORT: ACTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS
  "MARCHIONESS"/"BOWBELLE" COLLISION REPORT: ACTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS
  BANANAS: SINGLE MARKET
  BANANAS: SINGLE MARKET
  AGRICULTURE COUNCIL,13th AND 14th JULY
  AGRICULTURE COUNCIL,13th AND 14th JULY
  TOBACCO: REFORM OF EC REGIME
  TOBACCO: REFORM OF EC REGIME
  CAP REFORM: REDUCTION OF AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT
  CAP REFORM: REDUCTION OF AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT
  FAMILY PLANNING ADVICE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE
  FAMILY PLANNING ADVICE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE
  SALARIED DENTISTS
  SALARIED DENTISTS
  DEEP SLEEP TREATMENT
  DEEP SLEEP TREATMENT
  HOSPITAL AT HOME SCHEMES
  HOSPITAL AT HOME SCHEMES
  EC BILATERAL AID PROGRAMMES
  EC BILATERAL AID PROGRAMMES
  EC DEVELOPMENT POLICY: OBJECTIVES
  EC DEVELOPMENT POLICY: OBJECTIVES
  INDONESIA: EDUCATION ASSISTANCE
  INDONESIA: EDUCATION ASSISTANCE
  EAST TIMOR: UN ACTION
  EAST TIMOR: UN ACTION
  RUSSIAN NUCLEAR MISSILES
  RUSSIAN NUCLEAR MISSILES
  NORTHERN IRELAND: GRANTS TO VOLUNTARY BODIES
  NORTHERN IRELAND: GRANTS TO VOLUNTARY BODIES
  NORTHERN IRELAND: STATUTORY RULES
  NORTHERN IRELAND: STATUTORY RULES